Is Genesis History? Page #2

Is it because eventually the sides ...

... they had collapsed and collapsed?

Yes.

So how is that carved all this?

Well, there are many theories, and personally ...

... I like the idea of catastrophic erosion drainage lakes.

So after the flood we have these large bodies of water,

some lakes that are trapped.

There is evidence of the great lake ...

... in the Painted Desert, a place called Hope Buttes,

about 500 cubic miles of water in this huge lake.

And then the dam breaks ...

... and that massive amount of water ...

... he is now pouring and carving it.

Yes.

And how long would erode the Grand Canyon?

Maybe weeks, but not millions of years.

Time is not a magic wand that solves ...

... all geological problems in the world.

Rejects that thinking about the millions of years ...

... and then start thinking about catastrophic processes ...

... as you see in the Mount St. Helens ...

... and that will help you understand the Grand Canyon ...

Every place we looked, Steve showed me evidence ...

... the incredible power of moving water.

They quickly settled those huge layers,

and then quickly they eroded.

Steve wanted to show ...

... where in the floodwaters struck first continental crust,

so he took me to a deeper place in the canyon.

Steve, when you said to me ...

... would you take to the bottom, you were kidding, right?

We are in the bottom, right?

We are in a great side canyon of the Grand Canyon main ...

... and we are seeing the granite base,

which is the core of the continental crust, so to speak,

and then we see the above flat layers.

The boundary between granite rock below ...

... and Tapeats sandstone above is ...

... this area we call the Great nonconformity.

Why does it seem to be such a definite line?

I mean, it is very clear.

I think it is an erosional limit colossal scale.

We are seeing something that shows the magnitude ...

... flood flow over a surface.

And you're just here?

Great Dissatisfaction extends continentally.

I've seen, I think, in the Middle East.

It is in Europe.

It is in Africa.

And it is here under the North American continental crust.

So we have this layer.

How thick is this layer?

What follows from this?

Well, here we have the megasequence Sauk ...

... thousand feet of sandstone, shale,

limestone covering the entire continental crust.

There are four other large packages sequences ...

... strata that are on it.

These are also continuous as this.

What we are seeing here is fairly representative ...

... the rest of the world.

Makes one really question the notion ...

... that all this happened for a small local flooding.

We're talking about something huge.

The power of moving water was beveling ...

... and pulverizing rock, depositing a thick layer ...

... and leading us to think in a global flood.

However, the conventional story is completely different.

He says there is a long time ...

... between each of the layers.

Some people have said that the limit of the Great Dissatisfaction ...

... it represents five hundred million years.

You mean between the granite we see ...

... and that first layer of sedimentary rock?

Yes. They say there could be five hundred million years,

and that's what his explanation ...

... in the history of the Earth I would ask them to consider,

and yet, when you come here and look at this ...

... it is almost a regular flat surface.

Not exactly a flat surface,

but it is a surface that undulates gently.

Would that be the product of thousands of millions of years ...

... or the product of the power of water ...

... brushing a surface?

Here time is alien for a good explanation,

so we want to explain what we see.

A wherever we look we see the power of water.

And it's water on a colossal scale.

And that's the story here at the Grand Canyon.

Not a bit of water for a long time.

It's a lot of water for a short time.

Time is really the central problem ...

... when we talk about the history of Earth.

How long did form what we see around us?

To me it seemed clear that the global Flood would ...

... transformed the Earth quickly,

and yet I know that many people think ...

... that the world is slowly formed over thousands of millions of years.

What was the real difference between these two ways of seeing the time?

I needed to talk to someone who could tell me ...

... more about science and history and time.

Since my background is in computer science,

we are in a place where I ...

... he had personally experienced something in this story.

As we watched the exhibition,

I was reminded of how small ...

... and that they have become powerful computers ...

... since I used them for the first time.

Paul said that changing our assumptions about computers ...

... really it was a series of paradigm shifts.

When I was 19 I read Thomas Kuhn's classic,

"The Structure of Scientific Revolutions",

He is describing the notion of paradigms.

A paradigm is a framework in which you interpret the evidence.

So science not only is the evidence;

This is how you interpret the evidence.

So, this room for example,

we have here called "minicomputers"

but really they are not mini at all ...

... in terms of our current paradigm.

Today, right?

Yes this.

So to really understand this question of origins ...

... you really need to start watching ...

... the ruling paradigms,

both views we have now main ...

... about the history of the life and history of the Universe.

And which are they?

On the one hand, we have the conventional paradigm.

In the conventional paradigm you have a profound time,

13.7 billion years together with this gradual ...

... starting with the primitive simplicity ...

... and ending with what we see today.

All the complexity of life has to be built from below ...

... for purely physical processes where no mind,

no creator, no design is present.

The second point of view we can call, say,

the paradigm of historical Genesis.

Everything starts with a divine mind, a creator,

an intelligence that plans and directs ...

... and it brings reality into existence.

Events are happening at a much more recent time scale.

The universe, the solar system, our planet, life itself,

all starts fully formed as a functional system.

It is not difficult to see that there is a radical difference ...

... between these two in terms of time.

When we see the history of life ...

... on this planet, we have a body of data ...

... but depending on the paradigm one adopts,

the data will be interpreted in very different ways.

It seems that a paradigm is ...

... drawing on a story that was given to us ...

... and the other paradigm is building this story.

Is that how you see it?

We have a witness to these events and that witness is us ...

... I am saying this is what happened ...

... and we have to take that into consideration ...

... and then evaluate the data.

Well, Paul, why this becomes something serious is ...

Rate this script:0.0 / 0 votes