quote:

ORIGINAL: bluestone

Please provide some documentation for your statements.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Carico

Louis Agassiz, the one responsible for inventing the myth of an ice age, did so because he found some rocks in the upper Midwest that were not indigenous to the upper Midwest. So he correctly surmised that they had to be carried there by water...but wait, that would prove the bible right and that God exists, so he couldn't say that. So the way to get around that is to "decide" that it was frozen water. Now how he can decide all by himself what happened in history, is anybody's guess, particularly since no one in history has passed along accounts of a global ice age & over 200 ancient cultures (including native Americans who never read the bible) have passed along accounts of a global flood nevertheless, since this is the age of science fiction, then the imagination is considered evidence in today's world.

But what he neglects to understand is that ice doesn't just "appear'. Ice comes from water. All glaciers exist where water is the abundant element. Therefore if the world was once covered in ice, then the world had to be first covered in water.

But why should Louis Agassiz have to be logical or explain anything he says since he considered himself a scientist? He will automatically be believed so he doesn't have to be logical or offer historical proof since scientists are worshiped as gods in the secular world. But it doesn't take advanced thinking to see through ridiculous claims such as a global ice age. All it takes is common sense, a minimal knowledge of history and good contact with reality to see that a global ice age is as much a myth as the notion that our ancestors once looked like the apes of the jungle.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Carico

Louis Agassiz, the one responsible for inventing the myth of an ice age, did so because he found some rocks in the upper Midwest that were not indigenous to the upper Midwest. So he correctly surmised that they had to be carried there by water...but wait, that would prove the bible right and that God exists, so he couldn't say that. So the way to get around that is to "decide" that it was frozen water. Now how he can decide all by himself what happened in history, is anybody's guess, particularly since no one in history has passed along accounts of a global ice age & over 200 ancient cultures (including native Americans who never read the bible) have passed along accounts of a global flood nevertheless, since this is the age of science fiction, then the imagination is considered evidence in today's world.

But what he neglects to understand is that ice doesn't just "appear'. Ice comes from water. All glaciers exist where water is the abundant element. Therefore if the world was once covered in ice, then the world had to be first covered in water.

But why should Louis Agassiz have to be logical or explain anything he says since he considered himself a scientist? He will automatically be believed so he doesn't have to be logical or offer historical proof since scientists are worshiped as gods in the secular world. But it doesn't take advanced thinking to see through ridiculous claims such as a global ice age. All it takes is common sense, a minimal knowledge of history and good contact with reality to see that a global ice age is as much a myth as the notion that our ancestors once looked like the apes of the jungle.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Carico

Louis Agassiz, the one responsible for inventing the myth of an ice age, did so because he found some rocks in the upper Midwest that were not indigenous to the upper Midwest. So he correctly surmised that they had to be carried there by water...but wait, that would prove the bible right and that God exists, so he couldn't say that. So the way to get around that is to "decide" that it was frozen water. Now how he can decide all by himself what happened in history, is anybody's guess, particularly since no one in history has passed along accounts of a global ice age & over 200 ancient cultures (including native Americans who never read the bible) have passed along accounts of a global flood nevertheless, since this is the age of science fiction, then the imagination is considered evidence in today's world.

But what he neglects to understand is that ice doesn't just "appear'. Ice comes from water. All glaciers exist where water is the abundant element. Therefore if the world was once covered in ice, then the world had to be first covered in water.

But why should Louis Agassiz have to be logical or explain anything he says since he considered himself a scientist? He will automatically be believed so he doesn't have to be logical or offer historical proof since scientists are worshiped as gods in the secular world. But it doesn't take advanced thinking to see through ridiculous claims such as a global ice age. All it takes is common sense, a minimal knowledge of history and good contact with reality to see that a global ice age is as much a myth as the notion that our ancestors once looked like the apes of the jungle.

quote:

ORIGINAL: gluadys

quote:

ORIGINAL: Carico

Louis Agassiz, the one responsible for inventing the myth of an ice age, did so because he found some rocks in the upper Midwest that were not indigenous to the upper Midwest. So he correctly surmised that they had to be carried there by water...but wait, that would prove the bible right and that God exists, so he couldn't say that. So the way to get around that is to "decide" that it was frozen water. Now how he can decide all by himself what happened in history, is anybody's guess, particularly since no one in history has passed along accounts of a global ice age & over 200 ancient cultures (including native Americans who never read the bible) have passed along accounts of a global flood nevertheless, since this is the age of science fiction, then the imagination is considered evidence in today's world.

But what he neglects to understand is that ice doesn't just "appear'. Ice comes from water. All glaciers exist where water is the abundant element. Therefore if the world was once covered in ice, then the world had to be first covered in water.

But why should Louis Agassiz have to be logical or explain anything he says since he considered himself a scientist? He will automatically be believed so he doesn't have to be logical or offer historical proof since scientists are worshiped as gods in the secular world. But it doesn't take advanced thinking to see through ridiculous claims such as a global ice age. All it takes is common sense, a minimal knowledge of history and good contact with reality to see that a global ice age is as much a myth as the notion that our ancestors once looked like the apes of the jungle.

You err on at least three counts.

1. Agassiz was a Deist, so he had no reason to try and prove the non-existence of God. He was also a staunch anti-Darwinist.
2. Agassiz' research on ice ages began in Europe, not America. It was only after he had shown decisively that much of the topical landscape of Europe was better explained by glaciation than by flooding that he ever visited America and found much the same sort of evidence here.
3. Agassiz did believe that the ice age was Noah's flood or occurred shortly after Noah's flood--a position also taken by some YECs.

Agassiz is an interesting character. And his mixture of beliefs seems a bit bizarre today. Not related to this topic, is his belief in polygenism i.e. that humans of different races were separate creations unrelated to each other.


btw, for bluestone: some of this info comes from a book called Darwin's Forgotten Defenders which is mostly about 19th century evangelical Christian reaction to Darwin especially positive appreciations of his work. Definitely a must-read.

And for a quick review on the flood: http://www.bringyou.to/apologetics/p82.htm

quote:

ORIGINAL: bluestone

plenty of people believe God, trust Jesus as their savior, and still believe evolution was part of the creation process.

you posted erroneous information, the burden of proof is one you.

quote:

ORIGINAL: bluestone

So are you saying that I am not saved?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Carico

quote:

ORIGINAL: gluadys
1.. Agassiz was a Deist, so he had no reason to try and prove the non-existence of God. He was also a staunch anti-Darwinist.

So if Agassiz was a Darwinist,

quote:

And thirdly, ancient cultures talked about a Flood where one family survived. If there was an ice age after Noah survived, that would mean that it would have been recounted somewhere in history,since Noah had more brains than an ape. But unfortunately, it is conspicuously absent which makes it made up history.

quote:

ORIGINAL: bluestone

So your interpretation is right, and those that disagree with you are hell bound, huh?

"No one is disagreeing with Jesus" by believing the creation process could have included evolutionary processes.

quote:

Secondly, ice comes from water. So if he explained the European terrain by ice, he has to first acknowledge that the land was once covered in water.

quote:

ORIGINAL: bluestone

good grief.
you are interpreting the Bible...with your own fundie slant

quote:

ORIGINAL: bluestone

So you are saying that Jesus wrote Genesis?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Carico

Louis Agassiz, the one responsible for inventing the myth of an ice age, did so because he found some rocks in the upper Midwest that were not indigenous to the upper Midwest.

quote:

So he correctly surmised that they had to be carried there by water...but wait, that would prove the bible right and that God exists, so he couldn't say that. So the way to get around that is to "decide" that it was frozen water.

quote:

Now how he can decide all by himself what happened in history, is anybody's guess,

quote:

particularly since no one in history has passed along accounts of a global ice age & over 200 ancient cultures (including native Americans who never read the bible) have passed along accounts of a global flood nevertheless, since this is the age of science fiction, then the imagination is considered evidence in today's world.

quote:

But what he neglects to understand is that ice doesn't just "appear'. Ice comes from water. All glaciers exist where water is the abundant element. Therefore if the world was once covered in ice, then the world had to be first covered in water.

quote:

But why should Louis Agassiz have to be logical or explain anything he says since he considered himself a scientist? He will automatically be believed so he doesn't have to be logical or offer historical proof since scientists are worshiped as gods in the secular world.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Carico

quote:

ORIGINAL: bluestone

So you are saying that Jesus wrote Genesis?

That's what John 1:1-2 and John 1:14 says. But even if you don't believe those verses, then claiming that Jesus disagreed with God would mean that he neither is God nor represents God, but instead, Satan because Satan is the only one who disagrees with God. So your question shows that you really don't know who Jesus is at all.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Method

quote:

ORIGINAL: Carico

Louis Agassiz, the one responsible for inventing the myth of an ice age, did so because he found some rocks in the upper Midwest that were not indigenous to the upper Midwest.

He also found a lot of evidence for glaciers moving across landscapes and creating specific features that liquid water could not form.

quote:

So he correctly surmised that they had to be carried there by water...but wait, that would prove the bible right and that God exists, so he couldn't say that. So the way to get around that is to "decide" that it was frozen water.

Liquid water does not move small rocks slowly against other rocks and produce striations like those seen here:

http://www.sciencelearn.org.nz/contexts/icy_ecosystems/sci_media/images/glacier_striations

Also, Agassiz used modern glaciers as his models showing that the features that known glaciers are producing can be found elsewhere.

quote:

Now how he can decide all by himself what happened in history, is anybody's guess,

It's not a guess if you follow the evidence.

quote:

particularly since no one in history has passed along accounts of a global ice age & over 200 ancient cultures (including native Americans who never read the bible) have passed along accounts of a global flood nevertheless, since this is the age of science fiction, then the imagination is considered evidence in today's world.

Why do none of the flood accounts match? That seems to be a serious blow for your argument.

quote:

But what he neglects to understand is that ice doesn't just "appear'. Ice comes from water. All glaciers exist where water is the abundant element. Therefore if the world was once covered in ice, then the world had to be first covered in water.

I guess you never heard of snow?

quote:

But why should Louis Agassiz have to be logical or explain anything he says since he considered himself a scientist? He will automatically be believed so he doesn't have to be logical or offer historical proof since scientists are worshiped as gods in the secular world.

Agassiz is right because the evidence backs him up.