Hey everybody, tonight we're debating whether or not the flood of Noah happened and we are starting right now with Erica Gutsick Gibbons opening statement. Erica, thanks for being with us. The floor is all yours. Hey, that's me. All right, let me let me do the whole screen share deal and get my get my thing up here. Um, okay, can you guys see this? Yes, now we yes. Okay, cool. All right, let me get my timer ready here so I can keep track of things while I'm going here. Okay, hello everyone. I'm Erica Gutsick Gibbons here on YouTube. And today, of course, we're talking about Noah's Ark and the global flood. It's topical for me. I'm doing a video right now, editing your video right now on my recent trip to the Ark Encounter and the Creation Museum out in the Midwest where I had the utmost pleasure to meet Noah himself, Ken Ham down there in the corner. He's actually a very nice guy. So I want to be very clear about what I'm going to be arguing here today. I'm arguing that the the bodies of science, the various bodies of science due to definitively preclude a global flood. And the global flood is precluded thus by every field of science. That's that's my thesis statement for the evening. So how do we know this? Well, we know this because the flood model and of course there are many, but I'm using this as a singular because I do feel it's applicable to all of them, makes clear predictions that consistently fail. So creationists suppose that the following occurred during Noah's flood, which lasted approximately one year. They think all the rock layers in the geologic column barring the basement granite, which is pre-Cambrian in nature were laid down. All the tectonic plates were moved from their supercontinent position to the current arrangement and all impact events occurred among other geologic phenomena. All the fossils in these layers were also deposited there during the flood and all human non human and non human animals today descend from the pairs and eight humans taken on to the ark itself. So I'm going to go with my kind of greatest hits of why I think and hold to the conventional opinion that there was no global flood. The first of course is my favorite. It's the heat problem. So in order to explain why radiometric dates universally indicate that the earth is older than 6,000 years old, young earth creationists need to invoke something called accelerated nuclear decay during the year of the flood. Young earth creationists must cram 4.5 billion years of nuclear decay into 6,000 years. And this is a problem because decay releases heat and they have 0.0001% of the time to disperse it. Naturally, this leads to quite a few problems. The heat amount depends on the model, but if we're going with answers in Genesis's catastrophic plate tectonics model, it's going to end up vaporizing the crust of the earth and boiling off the oceans approximately 28 times over. And at worst, using Walt Brown's hydro plate hypothesis, we're seeing a thermal energy that's equivalent to 5,000 trillion one megaton H bombs, which of course, plasma flies to the planet. Now both of these numbers are gleaned from those organizations or individuals themselves. I did not calculate this. So you might be thinking, okay, well, what if they can manage or mitigate the heat? Every effort at heat mitigation has failed, which again is recognized by these professional creationists themselves. Cooling by the flood itself, space is a heat sink, space expansion, cooling, hypercains, mantle absorption, and many, many other bonkers ideas have been investigated and to their credit rejected by the professional creationists who are attempting to solve this problem. I detail a lot of this over on my own channel with panels of geologists and physicists who are professionals and I'm actually doing it again this Sunday. So number two is going to be accelerated nuclear decay is currently impossible and creationists know this. This means that ancient dates of the earth do indeed preclude a global flood because it's this global flood that is responsible for all the rock layers. As we all know, there is a law in physics called the radioactive decay law. It covers the nature of half-lifes and what it states is that decay rates don't change in meaningful ways in nature on the planet. So you can't do accelerated nuclear decay. Now the rate scientists who are all young earth creationists at the end of their multi-year study admitted that a young earth creation position cannot be reconciled with the scientific data without assuming that exotic solutions will be discovered in the future. No known thermodynamic process could account for the required rate of heat removal nor is there any known way to protect organisms from radiation damage. This is important because this isn't me saying this, this is them. It's an appeal to a miracle. And of course we know radiometric dating works because a $257 billion a year annual industry depends on it, our fossil fuel industries. Limestone, this is another favorite one of mine for the flood because there's a lot of problems with limestone. Limestone, among other minerals, is made from the skeletons and shells rather of trillions upon trillions of marine microorganisms. 10% of all sedimentary rock is limestone, of which most is marine. Marine is indicating force that this is coming from billions upon billions of itty-bitty teeny-tiny microscopic organisms. Now limestone requires warm, calm waters with low pressure and acidity in order to accumulate. This is not going to be the kind of conditions that you're going to see in the greatest catastrophe of all time. Now approximately this is today's numbers, 1.5 times 10 raised 15 grams of calcium carbon get deposited on the ocean floor. So it depends a deposition rate approximately 10 times as high as this for 5,000 years prior to the flood would still only account for less than 0.02% of all limestone deposits. So it's not going to get you there. So creationists respond to limestone usually in two ways. They say first actually limestone can form very quickly thanks to these papers and little references to what I have here on the side. These papers aren't about limestone, they're about mudstone and shale, so it's not applicable. And number two, limestone can actually form very quickly chemically. That is true, but limestone that's formed chemically is diagnostically different from biogenic limestone, which is what we see in things like the cliffs of Dover, not the cliffs of Dover, other like red wall limestone, things like that. 100 meter stick of limestone that is composed of microorganisms that you can see under a microscope. So then they say well maybe you know when we perform that first one of those experiments that are mudstone and shale, maybe when we do it on limestone we'll work that. No, because limestone can't be deposited by current as far as we know, but when minerals are deposited by currents we always see a formation called a floccule. Floccules are found in all of the experiments that I just listed and thus sedimentary rock including limestone should be just completely littered by floccules if they were formed in a global flood, but they aren't. And then also why are we finding these enormous limestone layers which require warm water to deposit incredibly slowly with no known sort of in between like they're found constantly layered in between multiple other core types of layers. In a global flood situation you're going to see what we have in this cartoon that I made here down to the bottom left. All the limestone should be on the top or it should all be on the bottom depending on the temperature of these global flood waters. That's a specific example but we could also talk about chalk layers which are problematic because objects this small settle of a rate of about 0.0000154 millimeters per second near of the flood they would have settled to about half a meter. We obviously see a lot more chalk than that in places like the Cleats of Dover. Angular on conformities are no mechanism in the global flood for a quick deposition of a quick formation or deposition of things like this. Granite batholiths which are chutes of granite that have been injected into higher strata with heat pressure and time and much much more. Moreover the heat problem for accelerated decay and plate tectonics during the year period makes impossible for most even the most rather robust microorganisms to survive let alone a wooden boat full of other life. So speaking of plankton plankton are number five. There are microorganisms that can be seen evolving through the geologic column. There are 45 billion tons of planktonic biomass every year today just from phytoplankton that's not even including zooplankton and since phytoplankton or plankton in general rather evolved around 500 million years ago and the flood is supposedly responsible for all of these rock layers that's a lot of biomass. That's going to result in a sludge of microscopic life during the year of the flood if this single year is to account for all of the geologic strata that we see has to account for all the plankton within that strata. That means they all lived within a year of each other and that's going to get you a sludge. So we could talk too about the fossil record. There is no rabbit in the Cambrian fossil specimens are sorted in order of basal to complex emergence. This is an evolutionary order and I've never seen a creationist explain this. They tend to try with rescuing devices. One is going to be your density or your hydrologic sorting which is essentially like well you know the flood sorted things by weight in which case we shouldn't see basalosaurs in you know hundreds of millions of years or millions of years separated from mosasores or birds separated in a similar way to to pterodons and the like. We could also do sorting the flood by habitat which is called ecologic sorting. In this case we should find geological columns that are spanning the flood layers in locations of the world with only dinosaurs or only mammals. What we find is overlap. This doesn't make any sense if these organisms are living in separate habitats because what we find when we find these organisms is habitats are intact within those geologic strata. We find representatives from the entire habitat to suggest that the flood washed an entire habitat along with organisms just in a perfect way as to mimic evolutionary theory I think is a bit silly. Then we could talk about primate diversity and human evolution because I am a primatologist. My MRes was in primate biology, behavior and conservation. These are Japanese macaques. I think they're very cute and this is something I drummed up because human evolution is incredibly problematic for the global flood. All of the layers if all the layers of the geologic column were deposited by a global flood it cannot account for the human evolution that we see occurring in supposed post flood layers because most creationists are going to take a position that the global flood stops at the end of the cretaceous. Yet here's what we see, slow morphological change over geologic time occurring. I composed this myself because I thought we needed a really nice more up to date than the ones we find at Talk Origin's picture kind of displaying this. Here's a nice side view that you can see of these same exact specimens. Many of these are found again in strata that are in the same locations separated by a couple million years from one another. Then of course there's the question of primate kinds. As someone who studies primates I think it's just not acceptable at all that we don't have a clear definition for kinds. Hybridizability seems to be applied just in a very cherry picked manner. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. For instance all the cats are members of the same kind and all the dogs are members of the same kind but a fox and a dog can't interbreed. Why are they the same kind? We don't know the kind criteria and I'd love to know it in the case of primates because for all intents and purposes when we look at the genetics it's looking like a chimpanzee is going to be more likely to hybridize with a human or another hominin than it would be with say a gorilla given their genetic similarity. Then of course there are other assorted issues that preclude the global flood that I just don't have time to talk about. This would be things like the number of impact events that would have to occurred a single year. There's gonna be a whole lot more heat. The lethal radiations impact on sea life and the passengers of the ark resulting from accelerating the nuclear decay. The trillions, that's trillions with a T 15 to 150 based on on recent papers on the subject of stone tools found all across the African continent. There's just not enough post-flood time for people and or other apes to make them. There's gastroliths. These are very problematic. They're radiometric dates of these gastroliths and simply don't mesh even with the relative dating that creationists do accept because gastroliths contain fossils from earlier flood rock. That gastroliths for those who may be wondering are stones that are consumed by dinosaurs. They're found in the bellies of dinosaurs. So it doesn't really make much sense that rock from the beginning of the flood from earlier in the year hardened, it formed, it lithified, it was reworked and then it was consumed by a dinosaur. That's not really going to mess geologically speaking. Then there's specific geologic structures, DNAs and natural natural monument that can steal formation, the Grand Canyon. All of these have enormous problems for global flood as well as coral reformations and many, many more. So what Mr. Batman needs to do in order to make the global flood possible, that's not even probable to make it possible. What he needs to do is he needs to solve the heat problems for the professional creationists. I think that would be nice. We've got to provide an experimental or observational basis for quickly depositing limestone chalk and new mechanisms for angular unconformities and granite batholiths. We've got to provide a mechanism for sorting to explain the lack of large-scale mixing of mammals and the paleozoic and mesozoic animals. We have to solve issues related to planktonic life and we have to provide a dispersal pattern and population growth rate that can account for animals in their current locations and human populations in close flood locations. If the answer to any of this is miraculous, that's fine. But then it's no longer a scientific question and thus it's no longer science. So that's all I have to say.  Thank you very much Erika for that opening statement and what we will do now is kick it over to Mr. Batman for his opening statement. Also want to let you know folks if it's your first time here at Modern Day Debate we are a neutral platform hosting debates on science, religion and politics. We hope you feel welcome no matter what walk of life you were from and folks got to tell you this, it's a juicy one. You can see just right where I'm pointing this coming Tuesday Aran Ra will be returning to Modern Day Debate as he'll be debating Dr. Andrew Jackson. It's going to be epic and you don't want to miss it so hit that subscribe button right now so that you don't miss it and with that we'll kick it over to Mr. Batman. Thanks for being with us. The floor is all yours. Thank you very much Mr. James. I do appreciate that and Ms. Erika I think you ought to lay off the red bull because golly you talk fast. That's how I am sorry. That's okay I appreciate all the information it's obvious you've actually dove into this according to your particular worldview but again I'm going to talk to you about my particular worldview and how I view things because the evidence that we have all around us and a lot of the evidence that you raised as evidence for your position actually when you look at it in the light of well wait a minute where did this come from how did it form actually would be refuting your position. I'm going to start off by quoting the scripture Genesis chapter 6 verse 1. When man began to multiply on the face of the land you know man's began to multiply and God said my spirit shall not abide with man forever for he is flesh and his day shall be 120 years so as we go on man is being wicked there's no laws there's no conformity of any type of righteousness at all but then there's Noah these are the generations of Noah Noah was a righteous man blameless in his generation Noah walked with God some translations actually call that perfect well that's Tameen in the original Hebrew which means he had integrity and Noah had three sons Shem, Ham and Japheth now the earth was corrupt in God's sight and the earth was filled with violence and God saw that the earth and behold it was corrupt for all flesh had corrupted their way on the earth and God said to Noah I have determined to make an end to all flesh for the earth is filled with violence through them behold I will destroy them with the earth make yourself an ark of gopher wood make rooms in the ark and cover it inside and out with pitch this is how you are to make it and then God goes into great detail about how he is going to tell Noah to make the ark now I've never done this before Mr. James so I'm going to give it my best shot I'm going to try and share my screen at this point let's see if it'll work okay you got it so there we go look at that I'm actually doing it once again we have to start off with creation because that's where God started God started with creation he created everything in six literal 24-hour periods and he rested on the seventh literal 24-hour period he created the light he created the light in the earth he separated the waters from above from the waters below matter of fact that if you look at the word Elohim it literally states that day three he creates the land and the plants four sun moon planets and stars five flying and creatures and sea creatures and then day six is the land animals including dinosaurs and including man so the the age of the earth see we know the age of the earth is approximately six thousand years from Adam to Abraham it's about two thousand years from Abraham to Jesus about two thousand years Jesus to the present about two thousand years for we are a total of two thousand years this is important to remember because there's other evidences besides radiometric dating and carbon excuse me radio carbon dating things of that nature that require long periods of time that actually give us much shorter periods of time I love carbon 14 dating not that it can give us millions of years because it can't but the most we can ever give us is about 80 000 years but we find carbon 14 in samples that should not contain carbon 14 carbon 14 decays at a known rate into nitrogen 14 now if we have a sample such as oh I don't know a t-rex femur bone and that t-rex femur bone is tested and we have measurable carbon 14 in it you know what that tells us it tells us that femur bone cannot be 65 million years old because there would be zero carbon 14 none so once again we have to understand why God judged the world with a global flood it was because of man's actions his disobedience and and people don't seem to realize it wasn't about the knowledge of good and evil because that's what they acquired after they sinned it was about what they did they ate something they were not supposed to eat you know um when we go outside of God's parameters for our lives we suffered the consequences thereof now the three big issues are the ark itself how was it made what was it made of what was its size did it have enough room then the animals themselves how did the animals get there how did they have the right genetic material available to them in order to have all the different kinds uh descend from those first two kinds because he didn't have to have every animal on the ark he didn't have to have every type of dog on the ark he just had to have the first pair of dogs that had all the genetic material necessary for all the different types of dogs we see to descend from that first pair and then the flood itself how did all these things occur well the first thing we have to understand this is not the ark okay this is what i call a bathtub ark this is what we teach our children oh isn't that lovely isn't that cute this is what you see on the the walls of most uh churches in their little children's area but you know what this is telling children that the ark is a fairytale the ark did not look like this the ark had plenty of room for all of the animals that that Noah took on board two of every unclean and seven of every clean animals uh he had plenty of room if for the hundred years while he was creating the ark uh while he was preaching to those people who were helping build this ark if any of them had decided to repent he had plenty of room for people to come on board yet none of them did so this is not the ark of which we're talking the ark size itself is extremely large a cubit is about uh 20.4 inches so the length of the ark would have been about 300 cubits or 510 feet the width would have been 50 cubits about 85 feet the height would have been 30 cubits about 51 feet again if you want to look at that in stories uh the height of the ark would have been about 10 stories so here's get you a little idea of the size of the ark itself it's over a football field long it has three different decks on the inside of it it is of the perfect structure the perfect structure lengthwise uh widthwise this is the perfect structure for being on the ocean and not tipping over keeping the animals uh at a much level pace even in rough seas so they don't get sick and possibly die as well so once again the the ark is about a football field and a half long two school buses wide and three drafts stacked head on head tall again that's about three stories tall now the volume of the ark itself well this is the truck trailer 18-wheel truck trailer so the volume of the ark would have been about 483 semi trailers it could have held now what kind of animals were on the ark we have not only all land-breathing animals and man of course we had Noah and his family but we had um I didn't possibly creeping things we had birds we have all different kinds of animals on the ark plus food fresh water all these different things that they would have needed they would have had plenty of room for all of these things that they brought along with them here is also another example of the size of the ark the ark itself would have been a little over 500 feet long it shows the the Santa Maria the Wyoming both of those were wooden ships then you get to the Titanic and in the Queen Mary all of these show the different size differences in the ark the ark itself was taller longer or wider if it was any taller longer or wider then it would not have functioned the way God had designed it to do it had it was designed for maximum comfort for both the humans and the animals it was maximum balance maximum stability and maximum strength withstand the stresses of being out there on the open ocean during this time you see satan has done the same thing right from the very beginning and his uh he the serpent came and whispered into Eve's ear did God really say that did God really say this did this God really say that there was a flood did God really say that he was going to judge the world with the flood here's the problem if satan can convince you that the flood was not real then he's going to be able to convince you that heaven and hell are not real as well and once again we've got to get back to creation because the creation is the start of the entire uh thing everything that we observe here in the physical world you have creation then you have the corruption that's man sin then you have the catastrophe that's the global flood of Noah then you have the confusion that's the tower of Babylon God confusing the languages then you have the Christ Christ being delivered to this planet living a perfect life and then going to that cross to pay the price for our sins and then you'll have consummation when he comes back for his bride at the end of time so once again there was plenty of room on the ark for dinosaurs the average dinosaur would have been about the size of a buffalo um the juvenile dinosaurs would have been the one that they would have taken because they would have had the longest reproductive period dried meat for carnivores uh carnivorous animals could have been provided me personally i believe that they were still eating fruit vegetables so i do not believe that there were carnivorous animals this is where can ham and i differ just a little bit and the estimated 60 to 80 dinosaur kinds mean there would have been a total of less than 200 total dinosaurs on the ark so once again plenty of room on the ark so let me go ahead and stop sharing there so once you talk about all the different scientific problems you mentioned evolution and a number of different scientific arenas unfortunately from your position you're not going to be able to justify any of those positions because if you're going to be able to do science you're going to have to have the god of the bible of which i just quoted the one who said in the beginning he created the heavens and the earth because everything you just pointed to all the different forms of science require natural laws as a matter of fact if i remember correctly you actually mentioned a natural law and a natural i happen to be a science teacher a natural law as a pattern observed in the physical world repeatedly and exclusively without contradiction that means number one you have to justify where these laws come from number two you have to justify why they don't change over time in an ever-changing world and number three you have to justify why they're going to be here tomorrow so you and i can discuss the evidence that we have in front of us again today now we can both look at the the lovely skulls that you have behind us and you're going to look at those skulls through your evolutionary glasses and by the way your glasses are quite lovely but i'm going to look at my the evidence through my creation glasses because i used to be an atheist i used to be like you man and so i used to look at these things and say there's no how no way no god created none of this but then as i begin to look at the evidence of these skulls the skulls have a specific design that houses the cranium is designed to house and protect the brain the eye sockets are designed for the muscles to hook to so your eyes can focus and also protect the eyes your jaws are designed to be able to open and close so you can take in food and chew up that food the beginning of the digestive system once again every single system in the body is designed to function the way god designed it to work just like he designed that arc to work just like he protected Adam to me Noah and his family on the arc and just as he provided every animal to come to the arc so Noah didn't have to go after them these animals had all the genetic material necessary for all the different kinds to descend from them and there's another thing you have to be able to justify is information because that information inside each and every one of these kinds of animals again is specified complex arrangement of symbols that performs a function or conveys a message utilizing a transmitter a receiver and an agreed upon language so once again we have three billion and i like how you said that earlier with a b three billion with a b base pairs in our genome that's specified complex information that's definitely using a template that's why we can tell normal from abnormal 20 seconds because thank you so once again that's where i'm going to just leave it right there we have all this just information that points to a loving creator god who designed us to function this way who actually shows us the evidence of the sedimentary layers of the grand canyon all these different things that fossils themselves point to a loving god who judged the world and he will come and judge it again but not this time with the flood the next time he's going to judge it with fervent heat fire thank you very much for listening we are going to jump into open conversation folks so want to let you know if you have a question feel free to fire it into the old live chat if you tag me with that modern day debate that makes it easier for me to see your questions and then we read super chats first so thanks so much for all of your questions folks as we get to the q and a in about an hour from now so with that we will kick it into that open dialogue mode as i mentioned and why by the way folks our guests are linked in the description if you haven't clicked on their links yet what are you waiting for they're waiting for you right now all right erica and mr batman thanks so much yeah cool perfect um okay so here's something that i kind of want to start some start off here with with a very uh a specification if you will in science as as you know there's a difference between support for or against something as in evidence that would preclude something from happening right and an open question right so there's a difference between me saying the the law of gravity on earth precludes when i drop my pen the pen from falling up and there's a difference between saying that and like okay well we may not understand the nature of dark matter yet that doesn't mean dark matter doesn't exist right it just means we don't understand it and i tend that tends to be what where i end up beginning things when i'm discussing something like young earth creationism because when it comes to something like the origin of life i'm i'm more than happy to say that's an open question abeo genesis is is um explicitly a different field though from from evolution and it's for this reason and the age of the earth that matter it's for this reason that the majority of christians here in the united states majority of religious people here in the united states and in europe uh except both an ancient age of the earth and evolution so the the kind of wrap up for that to ask you a question is that first problem that i presented that heat problem that's that's a preclusion you can't accelerate the decay in order to get the dates that we see today unless you're you're appealing to a miracle or you've got a very large heat problem because that's going to be released in quite a bit of heat so as you said earlier as you said just a moment ago with natural laws they act without contradiction and i wanted to add that they also act they tend to act in physics without exception so how do you solve that problem oh that's not a problem at all um when you're talking about this heat issue this decay of the radioactive material to a certain degree um that's not an issue because again we're not millions of years old and again these dating methods are based on huge assumptions when you're talking about radiometric dating radiocarbon dating anything that's going to use a half life of more than let's say 75 to 100 000 years some of them use half lives of a million years um you're basing this on many assumptions there's at least three sometimes as many as eight different assumptions when you're talking about using these types of dating methods um so once again if you start off any equation with question mark you have no valid answer you can have an inference you can have an inferred date but that's why i like carbon 14 dating once again it still starts off with assumptions but we know that it has a half life and it can never give you a date over 80 000 years so if you find something that has carbon 14 in it you know that that thing cannot be over 80 000 years old or there would be no carbon 14 i would love to talk about the carbon 14 i have a lot to say about that i made a video very very recently that was as you will come as a shock to you very long winded uh but where i was going into quite a bit of that and a lot of the technical literature surrounding it because there's there's a lot that's interesting with with carbon 14 dating particularly as to its uses when compared to something like argon argon dating um but i want to back it up there for a second because those assumptions that you're talking about that that's like analogous to saying that there's assumptions in assuming that that a law of gravity works right because the law of radioactive decay is a law of physics the assumptions are simply that physics has always acted in the same way throughout time um in order to get it to not act in the same way again that's going to be an appeal to a miracle because as as humans we've thrown absolutely everything we can at radioactive elements in order to increase this decay rate because it would be huge for us economically if we could induce accelerated radioactive decay but we've been unable to do it we can't no matter how hard we try it's for this reason that the geologists that work for answers in genesis as i mentioned in my presentation they know that there isn't a solution to this currently that's why they started the rate team that it began i believe in the early or in the late 90s but it ended in 2005 and their conclusion is that we have to appeal to a miracle or just discover some kind of exotic solution in the future because currently there isn't one currently to explain the dates that exist as they are this is from Andrew Snowing i'm sure you know he works for agi um snow it's snowing himself is in on this not in on it and like a conspiratorial way he is um on board with it i suppose would be a better way of putting as in he's saying yeah this this is a this is a huge issue um so the assumptions i don't think are going to help you here it's it's just a law of physics i mean are you are you suggesting maybe that the law of physics used to be different are you appealing to a miracle no man what i'm saying is i do not believe this is an issue since we are a young earth these things are not going to be a problem the god who created the laws of physics he designed these things to work in a certain way your position is presupposing a particular situation where you're going to have this heat problem i don't look at it that way i don't believe that's an issue now and this this is another area where i do not agree with answers and genesis um again i don't think that's an issue if you're going to appeal to a decay rate if you're going to appeal to a scientific method if you're going to appeal to laws of cause and effect the first thing i'm going to ask you is do those laws ever change over time no they don't why we live in an ever-changing world that's the second law of thermodynamics that's the laws of entropy everything decays over time but wait a minute these laws don't decay over time what causes these laws these cosmological constants to be in place what causes them not to change over time and why are they going to be here tomorrow so we can have this conversation one more time see god has taken that all into consideration when he created when he actually performed the catastrophe to judge the earth with a flood all of these things the creator of the universe when he said in the beginning god created the heavens and earth if he can do that he's in control of every other aspect of the physical world i don't think that this heat issue is actually an issue at all but in order for it to not be an issue you have to find some way to to effectively break physics as we understand it because as you just mentioned it this is this is falling directly in line with the the other kinds of constants in physics that we understand but this is just a law of radioactive decay so either there are only two options right it's like either god intervened and protected everything from the heat in in this miraculous way because there has to be accelerated decay or god caused there not to be accelerated decay thereby again breaking another law of physics is that you know there's there's a heat as a byproduct here so either way in order to not get the heat there's got to be something miraculous yes there could be that or that could be a false dichotomy and god could have set it up this way right from the very beginning so the heat was not an issue he could have set it up to where the decay rates were not an issue in the very beginning just like time itself was different in the very beginning because us being on the event horizon the decay rates could have been different see we weren't there and we could make all kinds of assumptions all day long because we don't we don't observe that but what we do observe are these laws of logic these laws of physics these laws of nature now we do observe them every single day once again i would rather stick with things we do observe and how do those things work that we can observe today god could have performed a miracle to do what you're saying he could have done absolutely that's definitely possible or it could have been created originally so this is not an issue to begin with so once again that's a false dichotomy when you said it has to be this or that but then it has to change because currently it is an issue like the the current observation that we make right of of nuclear decay whether we're doing it in in some kind of nuclear power plant or or we're observing it in like a chemistry lab at a very small scale and we observe nuclear decay what we see is a release of heat right so all all i've done with this and and you know again like it's not just me that says this it's the professional creationists who are at work on this are trying to find a solution because it's a problem when you wind it back to to like because obviously the way that for those of you who may be wondering the audience just in case i because i didn't explain this and i usually do the way that nuclear decay works with relation to radioactive decay or radiometric dating it's like an hourglass so the way that it kind of works is you've got parent and daughter material parent material will spontaneously decay into daughter material and it does so at a constant rate this is that's the radioactive decay one it does so at a constant rate as far as we can tell no matter what kind of chemicals or electromagnetic fields or you know also the gravitational pull whatever whatever we throw at it we can't seem to get it to alter um and we look at that ratio knowing the rate and knowing the current state of certain elements we can wind that clock backwards using the known rate to find out when this rock was formed if it's an if it's an igneous rock that's usually what we do and it has to be an igneous to radiometric data so those that's there aren't any assumptions that are being made it's just has the radioactive decay or radioactive decay radioactive decay always worked the same way and as you said these laws of i mean this is what you said the laws of physics are constant so it's not it's not an assumption to say i mean it is but it's in the same way that we would say gravity is always worked the same way so to me the only option is that god if god made it so that it wasn't a problem the only way that i can see that working is that he made it so it wasn't a problem until he changed it to look like it was and that to me seems like it violates god's character now once again i don't think he changed it to make it look like it was a problem you see once again you're basing your assumption on these dating methods being uh valid and provable which they are not we've just discussed a moment ago that you don't know how much of the parent material was in there uh to start off with you don't know how much of the daughter material was in there to start with so you've got two assumptions right there you're not sure even though we see the decay rate being constant over time now you don't know for sure that it's always been constant over time so there's another factor right there plus there's many there's many other factors that can come into play so when it comes to the aging factor again that's fine if you want to call it a miracle i'm good but again i'm really not concerned with that mainly because these dating methods cannot be validated using the methods that you're stating because of the assumptions but that's the interesting thing though and i wrote it down because i didn't want to forget it you said it's an assumption that how much parent and how much daughter was at the beginning so if you're assuming the assumption if you're assuming one is the same if you're doing the other because they're obviously in an inverse relationship with one another but the way that we know this is because we observe igneous rock forming today now yeah now so without a doubt without exception we see it forming with all parent no daughter if there there's one tiny exception there's a specific type of magma chamber that can mix things up but then you're not really looking at a newly formed igneous rock because there was altering actually in the mantle but we can also tell when that happens because we do things like seismic scans so the point is is that to me that's again saying that it changed because if you're saying that we don't know the amount of parent well isn't that just an assumption that it had to have been different than it is now in order to explain it under your specific worldview because what we observe now contradicts what you just said it's always all parent at the beginning so if we find stuff like uranium right or other radioactive elements that appear to be billions of years old according to everything we currently observe they have to be actually no they don't because once again when you look at how God created the heavens and the earth when he created the heavens and the earth was the earth billions of years old when he created it no it might have it might have had an appearance of age just like adam and eve when they were created they were created with a appearance of age if you were to see adam and eve right after they were created day one they would have looked like they were about 30 years old once again this is not an issue for the creator of the universe so I just think it's a non issue the main thing that we still have to deal with is if you're going to look at these decay rates now yes we do see things like this going on today does that mean it's always been like that in the past that's uniformitarianism you can't justify that you can't say it's always been like that in the past now what we can do though is we can actually look at natural laws like laws of gravity magnetism thermodynamics these cosmological constants that have to be there for us to function now once again if we're talking about life and we're talking about our realm where we live and we're talking about the flood of Noah god judged the entire world with the flood and he killed a bunch of people millions of them to be exact so wait a minute let's go ahead and get back on the topic here the topic is god judging the entire world with a global flood now wait a minute where does the life come from to begin with for it to be judged where does morality come from see you're focusing on one issue which I don't think is an issue at all personally I think it's a red herring because again I've already said hey if it was a miracle it was a miracle if you want to classify that as a miracle that's fine by me but I'm I've also pointed out that god created Adam Eve with an appearance of age he could have also created the world with the particular decay rate at a certain level now it's not it's not an issue for me what I'm talking about is now we have to determine creation where did the first life come from how did that life because you're a believer in evolution how did that life go from a single-celled organism to two people who know what right and wrong are so the thing about that though is that physics the laws of physics aren't uniformitarianism like the laws of physics are like laws are separate from a uniformitarianist human or formatarianist perspective within geology those two things are separate I don't think it's fair to call like oh gravity has always been the same oh that's a uniformitarian perspective not really it's a law of physics which is why I keep bringing it up and the problem is I understand the appearance of age thing I have two issues with that the appearance of age doesn't work from in my opinion one because I used to be a theistic evolutionist I used to be an agnostic and I'm an agnostic currently but used to be TE but the problem with the appearance of age is in my opinion I think it violates God's character it feels inherently deceptive but from a more scientific perspective the issue with the appearance of age is that it cannot explain why we see the gradient moving upwards with the lower basement rocks being older and getting procedently younger as we move up the geologic column why would they be ordered in the way that they are if there was a if they were created with disappearance of age it would have to be a massive coincidence that that the rocks were all created to look you know all sorts of different ages and then the flood washes them all up and lays them down just to make them look old and it's that for that reason why in the first place Andrew Snelling said we've got to have accelerated nuclear decay to explain why it is that we're seeing this gradient obviously these elements being exposed to something that was going on on the flood was aging them very rapidly giving them the appearance of this age and that's where we reached the crux of the problem which is the heat that's expressed in order to reach those ages but I understand that we you know because we've kind of been beating this topic for a while if you want to move with the it's a miracle or we don't know it yet I'm cool with that um let's talk about carbon dating I think that would be a good one because I have a lot to say about that so carbon dating in dinosaur bones it's not just dinosaur bones Christians tend to bring it up with dinosaur bones diamonds coal all sorts of stuff like that there's carbon where it shouldn't be according to the to the evolutionary perspective I suppose you would say the the conventional perspective and there's something very interesting to me about that because of all the different you know two dozen or so dating methods it's only carbon dating that seems to have these exceptions to them so that's kind of what got me going on well why is this what's going on um and why aren't the other scientists bothered by it and the answer is actually very simple with carbon dating carbon is so easy to reintroduce into another organic sample this can occur via cosmic radiation and then I wrote down my other notes because I always forget them and I had them at the tip of my tongue while you're speaking it can occur by recrystallization parameneralization and crustacean bacterial contamination and uranium contamination and so I thought to myself okay if all of these six odd things are potential ways to reintroduce carbon let me look at the samples that the creationists are presenting and let's find out if any of them could possibly right could possibly be subject to any of these so one I went with was Andrew Snelling and his finding a piece of of tree wood a piece of a piece of wood uh encased in basalt and the tree would dated millions of years younger than obviously because the rid of carbon dating rate only gets up to like 80 000 years and the basalt that surrounded it and so I'm reading the paper and I'm like this is really weird and then I go down to the sampling section and this wood was in a seam that was constantly exposed to water percolating down from the surface this introduced pretty much everything from the surface down to this to this individual or an individual wood sample which is why when it was perreviewed by other individuals and they said hey can't we get a better sample something that wasn't that that was better encased right um Snelling didn't do it despite the fact that there was more to do in this scene so it was in my opinion this was very clearly contaminated you can do this with the dinosaur bones you can do this with the diamonds the diamonds are often found near um uranium patches which again introduce reintroduce this carbon there are just a lot of different ways to do it so I don't really find that compelling if you're going to you know dunk on radiometric dating the real thing to contend with if you if you're a creationist is the fossil fuel industry right that shouldn't exist if radiometric dating doesn't work I don't understand that what the that the fossil fuel industry why would the radiometric dating have a an issue with the fossil fuel industry because geologists like um I don't know if you know this my my um why would you my uh fiance's brother worked out on an oil field out in the it was a Permian deposit out in west Texas and um the interesting thing about he's actually lying but he knew some of the oilman that worked out there and if you look into any of these large fossil fuel companies from Exxon you know to Shell all of these guys they hire a lot of geologists and the reason they hire these geologists these specific petroleum geologists is because these geologists have to be trained on something called basin modeling basin modeling involves radiometric dating out the wazoo because it is extremely cost ineffective to just shoot lasers down into the ground to say okay well maybe there's oil here maybe there's coal here it's a lot smarter to go out and survey the rock and say this is a Permian deposit or this is a carboniferous deposit because you know what the carboniferous always has coal so they hire geologists who are all and you can see this on on any kind of undergraduate or postdoc or phd geology um uh education pathway effectively they all take classes on basin modeling if they're going to be petroleum geologists so the question would be I think is why then has someone not stepped up and said I'm going to find oil using flood geology and the funny thing is someone did Zion oil stepped up and said we're going to use flood geology exclusively to find oil and they effectively went bankrupt and had to switch to reutilizing basin modeling and geology so the point is radiometric dating shouldn't work the way that it does if the earth isn't very isn't is not very ancient accelerated and nuclear k just doesn't work because it creates a heat problem so there's got to be some kind of relationship here within the creationist flood model that fixes both those problems once again I don't see an issue with that because the issue is if we have a creation if we have uh earth and we have radioactivity and we have a decay rate and this decay rate is steady and it can be measured then you're using science which means you're using the uniformity of nature which means you are appealing to the christian god who gives you the uniformity of nature genesis chapter 8 verse 12 Hebrews chapter 1 see you're using all these different scientific methods to disagree with what the bible says and I'm fine with that if you want to try and say this is a heat problem I don't think so I don't believe it's a heat problem at all because what you're doing is you're appealing to laws of nature without justifying those laws of nature now if you're going to appeal these laws of nature where did they come from why don't they change over time because again you're you're needing these things to be consistent over time for you to do any type of science whatsoever now I love science I teach elementary science although I do high school science and I'm going to tell you right now you cannot do science without laws of cause and effect without laws of chemistry without laws of biology these things are absolutely necessary now these were in the creation that's why I started with creation god created now god's not going to have a problem he's not going to be set off oh my goodness I didn't think of the heat problem no god's not going to have a problem with that now because I cannot explain this thoroughly not a problem whatsoever the god of creation has it's under control so the problem you have to have on your side is again fossils fossils are proof that something was once alive and now it's dead where do living things come from living things that have multiple systems inside them irreducibly complex systems that have to be all together simultaneously they have information they use information in order for the cells to function these information systems are used complicated systems such as a transmitter receiver and agreed upon language when you when I'm talking about irreducibly complex systems I hate to interrupt but just because it's been a lengthy one and also just that in terms of the topic though induction I understand what you're saying in terms of being kind of a bedrock foundation of science I understand that although at the same time without drifting too much into philosophy bringing it back toward the flood is one thing I want to mention and then as well as yeah I oh sorry go ahead James sorry well I jump ahead go ahead if you have a response I we didn't give you no no all all I was going to say is I just I I think all of that is a is a conversation that's worth having I just don't think it's it's the one it's not the one that I'm trying to have now I mean I realize that it seems it can seem I guess if you're jumping into the conversation from chat or whatever that it's not relevant but I'm trying to draw together this this what I think is the big problem because the title debate's like okay did the flood of Noah happen I don't think it did because I think that there are two there are large problems that are I believe insurmountable for it that involve the relationship between a radioactive decay of elements and accelerated nuclear decay that's typical for the creation model and the flood but I can understand why why that feels a little bit like it it might be starting to veer off topic I do like fossils I like talking about fossils quite a bit I think the fossils are in and of themselves problematic I think that they preclude the flood as well mostly because of their order I don't think that I've ever seen a compelling model if you will or mechanism by which we can see the ordering of the fossils that we see from the Cambrian to the Cretaceous or I believe some creationists will go up to like like the Maya scene or something like that however far you want to go I don't think that basal to complexity thing checks out with regard to a global flood and I kind of talked about like hydrologic sorting versus ecological donation why I don't think those things work do you have like a different mechanism for that maybe sure billions of dead things laid down by sedimentary layers of water all over our planet this would have been a global flood in a tsunami type formation this is why we can find animal tracks that are trying to flee the rising waters once again when we're talking about these fossils fossils are formed in a very unique way when something dies it just doesn't fossilize it there are decomposers in our environment that actually decompose the organism there's also animals that go ahead and eat the carcass the carrion so once again you have all these different systems that take the animal carcass and dissolve it back into the environment but wait a minute what causes a fossil and what causes fossils to happen so quickly it has to be a catastrophic event along the mountain range of Mount Everest we have millions with an M millions of fossilized clams along that mountain range and what's interesting is they're all in the closed position why is that important well because they all were catastrophically buried very quickly they didn't have time to die and open up so that's one one second one second and also we have other fossils that show that this has happened very quickly we have a fossilized ichthyrus i believe it is that's fossilized in the process of giving birth so that takes it's fossilized very quickly catastrophically we have examples of fossils that are fossilized in the process of eating other animals we have i saw one of a group of fossils there was a whole school of fish fossilized all at the same time trying to escape the flood dynamic as well so once again these fossils are proof that something was once alive and now it's dead and fossilization is a unique event it has to be catastrophic it has to be quick it has to take the air out and once again we only see that in a flood dynamic so i'm going to push back quite a bit on that one fossils don't just flood or don't just form in flood conditions they form when they're separated like you said from things that are scavenging right scavenging bacteria classic decomposing the processes classic processes of decomposition but um falling into a a tar pit can do that slipping into a utrophic lake can do that mudslides can do that bogs can do that amber can enclose certain kinds of organisms and preserve them now the majority of fossils don't tend to be preserved that way water tends to be evolved involved a lot because it's so good at carrying sediment and protecting a dead organism from actually being consumed or or broken down by other environments or but there by other factors within the environment with regard to the clams there's actually brachypods those those organisms on top they're not the same as they're actually like fundamentally different than the clams the types of bivalves that we see today and these brachypods actually don't they're not they don't have the same physiology as the clam where they close up when they're rapidly buried so i've heard kenthoven used that one before i don't think it's a very good one the ichthyosaur is a better one but the thing with that and with the school of fish as well and i know this for sure with the school of fish and if memory serves it's the same with the ichthyosaur and with some of the other uh within like in media res in the middle of things type of burials is all of them that i've seen have traces of subterranean landslide movement so there are diagnostic characteristics of a subterranean landslide we know this or subterranean submarine landslide and the way that we know this is because they happen today we see submarine landslides happen and we see what kind of traces they leave and so we know what they look like almost always expected but that's to be expected in a global flood sure it just becomes indistinguishable at that point and the last thing i wanted to say oh sheet what was it it was um oh yes this is a big one a whole lot of these fossils that are buried in things like big dinosaur graveyards where the oh all the bones are jumbled up in these big like logs in a jam right um these are caused by by seasonal flooding events and you might be saying well that's very convenient and i thought it sounded very convenient too so i looked into it and the reason why we know that these are seasonal flooding events rather than a massive global flood is because some of these bones cross strata so like you'll have a strata here and a bone will be laying like this and the bone at the bottom half is completely pristine the top half of the bone has nibbling it has back to signs of ancient bacterial invasion roots grow into it all sorts of stuff like that um and then the very next layer is also from the same like you know we can trace these ancient rivers up and down the bed it's from the same source so it doesn't make any sense if these if these organisms are being buried by a global flood why so often do we see differences in the same specimen and pretend my pen is a bone and like the distal end versus the proximal end of clear scavenging because as you just said that scavenging shouldn't happen if these things are being wholly buried right off the bat but it's a marbian holy berry it's true what what you do have is when you have a this global flood scenario these are tsunami like actions that come in they bury the initial part like you're talking about they might leave pieces of the animals sticking up the other animals that are still trying to escape the flood they come by they a lot of their food sources are gone they're going to scavenge on this and then the next wave of the tsunami comes in see people have a misconception uh that when god flooded the earth it just filled up like a bathtub all of a sudden that's not the way it occurred as a matter of fact answers in genesis does have a great video that talks about the global tsunami effect and why we see this in the dinosaur graveyards so i think an issue with that though is that and i i saw that at the creation museum and the first thing or it might have been the ark encounter the problem that i have with it is that you shouldn't be able to make out these ancient environments and re-peace them together so like the way like i said the the conventional explanation is that these are seasonal floodings along river sides so if the conventional science is correct on this the further you go from the sides of the river you shouldn't see any flood damage in that strata right because if it's a flood up from a river it's only going to reach so far up outside of the banks and we see this in flash floods now i used to live in a house that was very close to a river and every time it would rain a lot we'd all get really nervous that it was going to flood the basement but it never really did reach up that far so if an ancient if a future paleontologist were to discover my house and and the seasonal flooding that occurred with this river they would be able to look at where my house was and say yeah that the river never reached this house because we don't find signs of um we don't find like proper isotopic ratios or things of that nature that shows that it was being inundated um and that's when they when they find your house you know what they're gonna find they're gonna find somebody who built that house and that's the whole point of these fossils to begin with these fossils are living creatures that have irreducibly complex systems that were designed by a creator and he saved a select few of them on the ark now this is the entire argument right here this is why there are fossils because god judged the entire world with a flood now we can we can argue these points back and forth we weren't there and we can come to all kinds of different conclusions based on the same evidence just just like i was talking about earlier you're going to look at it through your evolutionary glasses i'm going to look at it through my creationist classes but the thing is you're just like in your example with your house anybody that looks at that house is going to say somebody built that house it's complicated it's pragmatic it has a purpose it has a specific design and somebody had to have built it it didn't happen by itself now wait a second now wait a minute i want you to tell me how you explain life where do these complicated systems come from that could be buried in this global flood because that's what we're getting at these fossils are billions of dead things that were alive at one point that have a multiplicity of systems that are irreducibly complex in their own right but interdependent upon other irreducibly complex systems so they couldn't have happened by themselves how do you explain the living thing that is now dead and fossilized like the evolution of specific organisms or like how they look the way that they do i mean that's that's a very hefty topic to cover i would need quite a bit of time to really get into how in my opinion the types of literature that i find compelling with regard to the origin of life and how they got to the areas that they got to today again i have to emphasize that there's a huge difference again this is why there are so many christians that accept evolution because there's a difference between organisms that already exist changing over time uh or even having a common ancestor and about genesis these are two completely different topics and i'm okay with having that conversation i just think that that's going to be like if we were to get started to hit my mind if we were to start getting into that now we'd be here all night and the only point that i really came here to make is that i don't think any field of science supports a global flood at very best the the evidence that is proposed as support for a global flood can also be explained by conventional science but conventional science i love science but again that's another thing you can't justify you can't justify how you can do science where the scientific method comes from why you can have the uniformity of nature that's why i'm going back to the living organisms a biogenesis has never been observed it is a religious dogma by people who want to reject the god of the bible now if we're going to look at life life could not evolve from single-celled organism to get bigger better stronger faster smarter over time we never see that mutations especially in humans mutations we give 20 to 60 mutations per offspring so a mutation is a copying error of the existing working information so that doesn't give you new information but i know that still does that still doesn't explain where the life came from or the information came from so it could be buried in a flood as a side note i think that incorrectly characterizes what it is that conventional science thinks mutation and evolution does because mutation and how natural selection acts upon it it's completely context dependent there isn't any ideal form within nature at least not from the perspective of conventional science you see what i mean which is why evolutionary theory predicted that we would have innumerable convoluted mechanisms within things as small as the cell to entire organ systems and we do we have things that don't seem to make sense they appear to be tinkerings and i know the creationist explanation of this tends to involve genetic entropy and that is also another conversation i've talked that one to death as well but again like i would love to have this conversation with you mr batman it's just not the one i came here to have today i'm i'll all i came to do is present what i think the flood didn't not just didn't couldn't happen okay and i'm i'm here to present quite the opposite that the god of the bible is the one who created all time space and matter he created us to be living loving logical beings because we're created in his image he's eternal universal and changing he's timeless spaces and immaterial and he's a loving living logical lawgiver god see i can explain all of these things via science one one sec is we do to bring it back to the flood don't get me wrong but the debating about induction is like a fine debate but it's something that is like returning back to the flood topic i do have to ask if we can do that sure i'm happy to do that but again it comes back to where does that life come from in order to be buried evolution doesn't work we've never observed it okay you're using scientific i do have to i do have to kind of redirect you back to the agreed upon topic though so how i'm thinking flood let's as far as what i'm thinking okay here's here's a good one i want to see if you can solve i mean i guess it's it's a what i think is a problem and i'm curious as to how you would solve um so a while ago a buddy of my of mine and i got curious as to the the case with the proboscidian so for those of you who may not know proboscidians this is an order of animals and it contains modern elephants and their kin so it goes back to like beratherium or erythrium depending on on what you want to go to and i'm thinking to myself okay what do we know about elephants they're really really big so they require a lot of space they eat a ton they take forever to give birth so i'm thinking myself you got four four hundred years how are you going to get all of the all of the types all of the species of proboscidian that we have after the ark and how many proboscidians were on the ark so we decided to fool around and do some numbers and it turns out if you take two proboscidians on the ark so two kind of really basic primitive looking elephants um you can have once these two get off the ark every single proboscidian be a different species than its parent and you still don't have enough time to get all the species that we find in the fossil record on the contrary if you increase the number of kinds so let's say you've got 15 kinds of proboscidian on the ark you can't feed them all and what i mean when i say that is it's very specific we did some math and we said okay let's take the best case scenario for feeding elephants today right we'll use juvenile elephants we'll use their sleeping metabolic rate and we'll use the highest quality feed so it requires the least amount of space alfalfa and um the food that would be required to feed 15 pairs of proboscidians for an entire year would take up 60 of the space on the ark just the food alone and that's not even considering the much larger animals that existed that required their juveniles even for taking juveniles but once again that is a false dichotomy what if god put them into a state of hibernation you see this is another option that we don't know the bible doesn't tell us so again noa and his family are on that ark what happens if god simply puts all those animals into a state of hibernation you no longer have the food issue you no longer have the waste issue now this is also a possibility see once again you're setting up a straw man so you can set knock it down the problem is you're still having to deal with this type of elephant where did it come from if you're going to say that there is an elephant and it was on the ark great i'm i'm glad you say that let's go down that path where did the elephant come from where did the information inside the elephant come from the dna the systems so once again we're back to the creation the creation of the living forms themselves and once again i i could come up with alternatives to everything you're saying because again what you're trying to do is set up a false dichotomy that doesn't work when it comes to the scripture i i actually believe it or not i'm cool with the miracles i don't have a single problem when i when i debate folks who who are um proponents of the global fund they're like you know what yeah maybe there's a heat problem miracle or like yeah maybe god knocked all the animals out on the ark so that they wouldn't you know be awake or require as many nutrients or any nutrients for that matter but but when that happens i mean again it ceases to be science it ceases to be able to to be investigated by conventional means and therefore it's kind of outside my wheelhouse like but wait a minute hang on just a second hang on just a second science can only be done because of the god of the bible god set up the scientific laws set laws of physics since he created laws of physics he can set them aside at any time he so chooses that's why they're called miracles see the fact of the matter is we're still left trying to figure out where the initial life came from so god could call these animals to the ark so they could actually get off the ark and reproduce now you also mentioned the the differences in the fossils of these prosidians or types of elephants the fact of the matter is there was only two elephants that's all that god needed had all the genetic material necessary for those two elephants now once again the genetic information where does that come from where did the living organisms come from you you still have yet to justify where those things come from yeah i i just don't feel like i should because that's kind of not the conversation that that we kind of like agreed to have were they're not living organisms on the ark yeah no i listen i've i've had this conversation before even here on modern day debate i'm happy to discuss a biogenesis or very early evolution around the pre-cambrian or edacron i guess you would say into the cambrian and the salurian i'm happy to discuss all of that um but that's not the beat i can't do by doing that you're actually discussing your religion at that point because this this is not science you you can't go back and observe something that happened in the pre-cambrian you can't go back and observe something that happened last tuesday science happens in the here and now it's observable testable repeatable and we've never observed evolution we've never observed an increase of information or complexity natural selection doesn't give it to you mutation doesn't give it to you and you still left trying to figure out where life comes from and why it works the way it does so i want i want to touch on there briefly because i think i think there's a misunderstanding there as well and you you said you've done like science teaching and stuff like that so i'm sure you're aware of the scientific method and how that works um and one of the most important fields of science in our modern era especially for those of us who are you know living in cities or things of that nature is forensic science forensics is really important for things like solving crimes and finding out who done it and you know overall just just keeping us safe and solving mysteries and and giving people closure and all that kind of stuff forensics is it's a one-to-one analogy for paleontology and what we do in paleontology you're taking an event that you didn't witness and you're using the clues that you have at that crime scene or whatever let's say yes to formulate yeah to formulate a hypothesis and whether or not the person who's standing at the at the um you know at the table in the courtroom is guilty or not depends on whether or not the predictions have that have been made at that feet or at that uh crime scene pan out or not so if someone comes up and they find the bloody hammer and they say i think this was the murder weapon they test the blood they find the blood also at the the suspect's house and it also max matches the blood of the victim well that's a that's a if the blood doesn't fit you must acquit yeah you must know where you're going right i'm gonna i understand where you're going with that yeah so i'm saying we do science in the present day all the time that we weren't there for that we didn't but unfortunately you're looking at evidence in the here and now now when we're talking about the evidence you're talking about this bloody hammer or the bloody gloves the evidence that we're observing is the life the life was on that arc so now you've got um you've got a bit of evidence here that you've yet to justify how that evidence got there you're if you're going to use paleontology or forensics okay great let's go down that path how did that information get there how did that life get there how did those systems get there inside those organisms so they could be buried in the flood the thing about now we're using paleontology yeah the thing about that though mr batman is where that gets you to is it gets you to maybe like uh the archian period and it gets you to like um a god the tinkerer within evolution because there's been it does because every single year and this is within medicine paleontology agriculture evolutionary theory predicts and accurately comes to fruition in ways that help our society you can call it micro evolution but i included paleontology for a reason because paleontologists also make predictions using evolutionary theory then they find critters where they predicted that they would find them using specific evolutionary predictions actually that's basically just real quick on that what i want to say on them is that the reason why what you were just talking about gets you to gets you far back in time it doesn't take you to a biogenesis right that's first of all that's not really the realm of paleontology in the first place um but with the number of verifiable predictions that again have comes to fruition within paleontology and adjacent fields that's that's going to be evolution all the way flood geology doesn't make those predictions actually once again you're making an appeal to the scientific method that you cannot justify you've got the evidence of living organisms on the ark that were buried because god judged the world with the flood he actually did so because of the sin of mankind to actually preserve the the blood line of noa and his family so the messiah could come now all of these things you've yet to justify now when i talk about life and you begin to talk about evolution evolution has never been observed and when you're talking about this predictions well yeah we can make predictions based on the loss of information that happens during evolution evolution is always a loss of information it's never an increase of information you can have insertion you can have an insertion you can have a deletion or you can have a duplication but those are always a loss of functionality when when you have a mutation a mutation is a copying error of the existing working information so once you have a mutation now you have less information and less functionality that's why we have again you mentioned genetic entropy i i love genetic entropy because these things go downhill all the time but we still before we go even go downhill we have to decide how that life got there to begin with which you've not done how you can do the scientific method which you've not done how these things have multiple systems that are irreducibly complex how did they come about which you've not done these are designed to work in a specific way the every single system is pragmatic the circulatory system has three basic parts the heart the blood and the veins in the arteries now wait a minute that is an irreducibly complex system that is interdependent upon other irreducibly complex systems like the circulatory like the respiratory system like the muscular system like the skeletal system once again where do all those things come from so they could be on the arc and trying to redirect back to the flood i'm actually on the arc i'm back on the arc again so they could be on the arc and so they could be buried this is why i started with creation in order to have something to be buried it had to be created first well it's okay there are a lot of points but but honestly i think a lot of them can can be covered decently quickly again as far as the scientific method goes i mean i'm the one that to be a little bit sassy i guess i feel like i'm the one that's brought that to the table because i'm talking about validated predictions that have been done by evolutionary theory flood geology doesn't do that people take evolutionary theory as a framework and they say you know the classic example people use is nil shubin and finding a titalic he said okay if evolutionary theory is correct we should find an organism that looks like this approximately between an organism like eustenopteron and and something like um uh campostega um and we should find it in this strata because this strata would look like this at this time this marshland on the coast etc etc they find out where that is it was up in greenland they go and dig they find nothing they dig again they find nothing they dig a third time and they find titalic it's a validated prediction specifically tailored to evolution so that that's the scientific method in action baby that's that's as bold as it gets as clear cut as it gets and that's why i keep saying you know these evolutionary predictions you know originally they would take us back a couple of million years and then it was a couple of hundred million years and people are making predictions you know within the Cambrian within the Solerian they're making them within the Permian within the Cretaceous all throughout and they're using it using things like radiometric dating and evolutionary theory theory etc now if you want to say you don't have a biogenesis cracked i agree i don't think it's cracked but again that only gets you to a biogenesis that gets you to a tinkerer god who uses evolution to get organisms to where they are today as a last point on that just really quit because we're you mentioned quite a bit there with regard to making new information there's a classic example that i like to bring up with this everybody knows it it's it's the ice fish mutation i don't know maybe you've heard of it and while you're correct that usually copying errors are responsible even for beneficial mutations because mutations are context dependent right so what seems to be an error may in the end be something that's quite helpful in real life example of this is is Viagra right this is something that is used for a reptile dysfunction but the original medication was for blood pressure so it was a mistake that ended up doing something beneficial that's that's the bread and butter of evolution that's all it is and in the case of the ice fish they mutate they there was a mutation that occurred that gave a de novo out of nothing right protein that allows them to keep their blood flowing and moving despite basically swimming and freezing temperatures it came out of nowhere we know the population that these ice fish came from they don't have it but the ones that we see now swimming up in in more northerly waters they do have it we took the ice fish we looked at the genome we found the specific gene that was doing this and we saw that it came out of nowhere de novo that's why it's called de novo and all it was was like you said a copying error within some proteins but that copying error was a beneficial mutation because of the context and that's that's that's all evolution is that's all it's ever been yes but unfortunately evolution requires information you're still appealing to specified complex arrangement of symbols and these symbols this symbolic relationship of the gta and c especially in our genome that actually provide excuse me convey a message or provide a function in our genetic code you can't justify that once again these all these things are living organisms that are irreducibly complex you have a fish that actually had some type of mutation that was a copying error well where did the first self replicating system come from not so you can have okay i antagonize that i antagonize that one james i i was continuing on it sorry any last thoughts with regard to the ark in particular or i should say the flood in particular well i'll i'll go ahead and say the last thing i'll say about it is again when we when we see the flood when we see the evidence of the flood we see the grand canyon we see all this different erosion uh places like the grand canyon all over our planet uh we see fossils all over our planet billions of dead things laid down by sedimentary layers of rock water all over our planet again these things were once alive and now they're dead they have irreducibly complex systems that my opponent has not justified she's using the scientific method which she has not justified and and again she she has a faith she has a faith that i don't have i don't have the faith that she has that these things can happen this way because we've never observed it so that's my last statement thank you very much i'll kick it over to erica if you have anything to say erica before we go into qna folks yeah i i had a really good time i enjoyed the conversation it was cordial it it was fun i think that we but it was a respectful chat i in the same vein that mr batman was saying just now i feel like i didn't get any answers to my questions but i honestly don't fault them for that because the professional creationists can't answer those questions either that's why i ask them that's why i always ask them because it's like i'm very interested maybe someone's thought of something that they happen that would be really cool if if someone you know had had kind of sussed out this solution to heat problem or come up with a cool new way of of um of sorting the organisms um and and that's that's what i'm after i'm just after after truth and yes i'm really interested in evolutionary theory i think it's cool but it also and honestly just stems for for a love of the natural world i find it very fascinating and i think i always will and um yeah i had a really good time you got it well thank you very much and we're gonna jump into those questions folks want to say folks if you have not heard if you have been living on mars in a cave with your fingers in your ears you guys we are absolutely pumped r and r will be back this coming tuesday taking on dr andrew jackson in particular on the topic of what is the most recent common ancestor of monkeys and humans you don't want to miss it folks so hit that subscribe button as well as that notification bell as well it's going to be juicy folks believe me very juicy this one coming in from brut fax podcast thanks so much says i made mr batman rage quit in our discord when your buddy's mr batman next stuff no i have no idea who that is now a lot of times people get me into the discord channel and then they get all vulgar and then yes i do leave uh but i've never raged quit because i've lost a debate you got it and this one from big bang bruce wane says ken ham's arc is made with concrete and steel and has flood insurance where's the faith is it true it actually does it does have you been there i have yeah i've been there four times i've actually taken my bible study group and things like that yes the struts the struts down at the bottom are uh concrete they actually have big metal bolts that are holding it too but but again this is a part of our building codes for today as well uh so you have to take into consideration you just can't go out and build any structure you like any way you like you have to do it according to the state standards i i actually um i'm doing a long editing a long video about my trip there because there's there's a lot to talk about but i i had a great time at the arc encounter with my mom and we saw it it really is an impressive structure it's much cooler from the front from the back it's there as mr batman said it looks much more like a building um yeah i enjoyed it i i'm kind of trying not to spoil my video though there's a lot to talk about so juicy and remind your folks our guests are linked in the description this question from steven michael says erica do you sincerely believe in macro evolution uh yes i do um i i study primates so my specialty is of course in in primate evolution um how primates change from from one morphology to another how they do so through time that includes human evolution as well i i find that to be a very a very cool and personal field of study and that's i have some schools behind me i think schools are cool i think phones are cool um and so yeah i i really do i if you'd like to discuss more about it you can always shoot me an email uh or check out my videos i talk a lot about human evolution on my channel you got it thank you very much for this question coming in from bubblegum gone says what about the termites though also satan does not equal the devil i think they're saying wouldn't the arc have been destroyed by termites if you brought termites onto the arc i happen to know the lore on that ken ham has a the arc encounter tackles that the the lore covers it mr batman i believe the question was for you i'm taking your question go ahead sorry well and again not all creeping creatures had to be brought on some of them could have actually been left off the arc i wish that one would have been along with mosquitoes but the fact of the matter is we don't know exactly what gopher wood was and everything on the inside of the arc was covered in pitch as well plus these things would have again if they were in a hibernated state wouldn't have been an issue or if they've been contained in a particular container once they came on the arc again wouldn't have been an issue got it erica anything to add yeah i mean whether they brought them or didn't um whether the the creation model holds that they brought them or didn't i'm much more interested in what's going on outside the arc anyways so i'm thinking to myself okay well you know because there are so many different kinds of art for pods that you couldn't at least as far as i am aware um progen progenate i guess you would say from from two individuals just because of how their genetics works so like a lot of hymenopterans are organized like that where the the females are diploid and the males are haploid so you get into some interesting what i would perceive as problems with that and i know they propose like floating forests and stuff the floating forests are another huge thing that we could talk about um i don't think they work either but um it's an interesting question you got it juicy and this one coming in from the butcher says why would god not just poof the animals all back well uh because it was a judgment it was showing that god is going to judge everything in the world including the animals now it also shows us something very specific that there are two types of animals that god allowed on the arc see people just think well noah brought them on two by two nope he brought two of the unclean animals and seven of the clean animals so even before the the covenant was given in at mount sinai noah knew about clean and unclean animals and he sacrificed some of the clean animals when he got off the arc because see if you'd only brought two of every animal the many you got hungry and god said all this stuff you can eat now guess what you eat one of them you just killed them off you got it and thank you very much for this question tyler kates appreciate it said how did the polar bears stay warm enough in the cold and how did the lizards uh stay in the right temperature in the heat in the desert well that's also oh go ahead i think no i just i don't i if that's for you take it i just wasn't sure if it was for me or you okay basically depending on what original pair of bears would have been brought on would it have been a polar bear would it have been a combination of polar bear brown bear black bear whatever it might have been whatever bear it was that original bear kind would have had all the genetic material necessary for it to survive in every particular environment that they go in so once again that wouldn't have been an issue when it comes down to uh the reptiles the reptiles again probably depending on the temperature would have gone into a state of hibernation you got anything very much for this question coming in from andrew krull good to see you says mr batman seriously who or what fed the mosquitoes on the arc well i personally believe uh that the mosquitoes may not have been on the arc there might have been larvae someplace else i don't like mosquitoes so i'm just hoping they wouldn't be on the arc but if they were on the arc okay then again they probably would have also been in a state of hibernation because they would have been sucking on blood and we wouldn't have want that on the arc now would we robert paulock thanks for your questions said mr batman are you a licensed teacher in which state well i am a teacher and i'm in the state of indiana i teach bible i teach speech i also teach debate i'm also currently teaching social studies and world geography gotcha and this one coming in from ian chanzas did the arc have floodlights next up thanks for your question this one coming in from two seconds got a little glitch here bubblegum gun says batman admitted the laws of physics are social constructs did you admit that mr batman no sir i didn't because we didn't come up with the laws of physics the laws of physics were created by a law giver god who doesn't change over time because these laws don't change over time once god changes something like the law biology when he allowed jesus to be conceived inside mary's womb miraculously like when the nation of israel was wandering in the desert for 40 years and their clothes and didn't disintegrate and their shoes didn't fall apart these are again different laws that god can change or set aside miraculously so when jesus raised people from the dead or healed people from leprosy he has the ability to change those natural laws as he needs to be those are miraculous but there are certain natural laws that god cannot change god cannot violate the laws of logic because they are his very attributes the laws of identity non-contradiction excluded middle laws of mathematics these are how god's mind thinks they are eternal universal and changing and because they are his attributes he cannot change those god cannot create a one-ended stick a square circle a married bachelor military intelligence those things just don't exist you got it in thank you very much for this question coming in from ian chen says there's no ark because it's noa to be found well i'm gonna go ahead and answer that one real quick i know why it's noa to be found see people say oh we found the ark on mount errat no you wouldn't have found the ark on mount errat think about this when the ark landed there probably would have been a whole lot of greenery grasses some bushes the dove came back with an olive branch in its beak so but again there wouldn't have been any mature trees so what would you have built your shelter out of your pens for your animals what would you built those out of you would have had to cannibalize that ark every bit of wood would have been used for some purpose until you had mature trees grown up enough to where you had you can harvest those to build whatever you needed to build you got it and thank you very much for this question coming in from john makovac says so god can change the natural laws wherever he wants and hide all the all evidence of that how convenient mr batman well god is god and you know what the bible says i'm going to quote the scripture god can do anything he chooses in the heavens and on the earth there you go you got it and thank you very much for this one big thank Bruce Wayne says if the christian flood wiped out the world how did other civilizations exist before and after the flood also why did several civs record the civilizations record no flood well actually you have pretty much a flood narrative in nearly every civilization out there not all of them but quite a few the epic of gilgamesh happens to be one of them in i think it's in china i can't remember which one when you look at their particular pictographic language the actual pictograph for boat is literally a box looking thing with eight slashes on it the eight people on the ark so it's very interesting like that now there were no civilizations after or during that flood period as a matter of fact when we look at the the evidence of written language when did the written language start to occur about four thousand years ago about 500 years after the ark event the note the flood event can i add one thing to that is that okay so i'm not getting any questions no one ever asks me any questions i never get any questions and i'm so bitter about it so i'll poach mr batman's questions please i i want to i'm going to push back a little on the on the prevailing flood narrative just because i think or the flood narrative being so ubiquitous because it while it is true there are a lot of flood narratives especially in civilizations that live near water that frequently underwent things like inundations um i would like to point out that there are a lot of archetypes that are very common in in um and human uh sort of record keeping or mythos whichever one you want to go with shape shifter deities and um and trickster gods and uh you know angels and um i guess you would say it like a hybridized creatures you know where they've got animal body parts i mean that's like a classic from egyptian mythology to roman mythology as well yeah so so i mean i i don't know i don't necessarily know that that would stand on its own i think it's interesting um but i don't think it necessarily supports the global flag that's just my opinion well i would also point out that the greek mythology um like the minotaur the half bull half man this is what the nephilim were doing also referenced in the scripture they were actually engaging in genetic splicing uh this is called mixture god hates that mixture one more reason he judged the entire world with the flood you got it and thank you very much oliver catwell has a message we really want to share this really important we do appreciate it oliver says remembering the capital officers who took their own lives 1 800 suicide is a free anonymous helpline if you are contemplating suicide so folks we really do want you to i had pinned that at the top of the chat and we absolutely do encourage you if you are contemplating suicide please do call that number please do get help from a professional and our hearts go to you we're we're glad you're here folks as a as a side note no matter what walk of life you were from whether you be christian atheist black white republican democrat gay straight you name it we are really glad you were here we hope you feel welcome and so again that number is pinned at the top of the chat and so please do if uh if you are contemplating suicide call that number and we will jump into the next question from big thank ruse wane says if the christian flood wiped out the world mr batman and we got that one sorry about that experiments in prebiotic chemistry says awesome job debating erica huge fan you got here erica says thanks for being here to debate this i am always happy to come in and have a chat this i really do enjoy this topic that's the thing you know some people some of my colleagues are you going around talking about this stuff all the time i think it's interesting i think it's fun that really is the reason and you know i want to stress too that like supposing just because i've been burned before supposing that it's only a neutral platform i'm happy to debate anybody on this i really am i i love it that's why i usually come on modern day to date although there james i did i did cheat on the channel a little bit there's a there's a channel they're called theology unleashed and i had the pleasure of debating intelligent design advocate gunter beckley over there a couple months ago it was it was really fun that's sorry james i know i know it's couldn't mean to bring that's funny you know we're excited for if you feel free if you ever a debate call use our handle in the tweet and we are happy to retweet it because that sounds epic and we would love for people to mutual shilling i like it we'd love for people to decide wherever they want to watch debates we're happy for them to watch it wherever they do and mac the huffman human mac the human so sorry he says the real batman would have investigated this not just assert quote the joker did it unquote this batman isn't for real oh well i got news for him i'm the batman who laughs you know what what really gets me is i have investigated this i've been looking at this for 35 years almost 40 years now um i actually was an atheist and brought to this position of creationism because of a gentleman that i love very dearly my uncle who just barely had a sixth grade education but he asked me some very basic questions about life about how life works and you know what i said oh man i'm going to prove you wrong and that's why i am here today because i wanted to know the truth and i appreciate miss erica saying she's a truth seeker because i am too i want to know the truth and that truth will set you free jesus is the truth you got it and thank you very much for this question from ian chen says noah kept the bees in the ark hives man i was so many winners tonight miss you're cracking up mr batman mr batman loves these bubblegum god says nebula free wants to debate me ask him for a 1v1 oh maybe and then next time thank you very much for your question this one coming in from raw nakedness says if you compare meso hippus with the modern horse and consider that there are descriptions of modern horses from 1 000 years after the flood you would have to believe in a lot a super fast evolution not necessarily once again when you have all the different genetic material that you need for any particular animal again god designed that into the system if you're going to say that well wait a minute this didn't work this way then you're denying the truth of god's work psalm 119 verse 160 the sum of your word is truth and all of your righteous rulings endure forever god's word is true if we may not understand it completely that doesn't negate the truth factor of it you got it in thank you very much for this question coming in from experiments in prebiotic chemistry strikes again saying how do we know that the christian god gives us the uniformity of nature the bible says so um actually that would be one but unfortunately if you're going to look in a philosophy book the actual definition of a circular argument is the bible is true because the bible says it's true that's circular but wait a minute let's look at the evidence in order to have time space and matter by definition you must have a timeless faceless immaterial all powerful all knowing loving living logical lawgiver most high elohim that's the god of the bible and that's just looking at time space and matter you got it and thank you very much for this question coming in from raw nakedness says at one dino graveyard bones show signs of weathering after death they decomposed and the bones degraded by exposure to the elements probably for years in most cases that might be dnm or it might be the cleveland dinosaur quarry i i can't remember they're they're i don't know i that wasn't at me but i'm just i was trying to pick out rock and raw nakedness tell me in the chat which one you're talking about i'm curious i'm just i'm very curious talking to me well no i was talking to raw nakedness sorry james you know well and what with my issue is that's not a problem um yes there could be some bones that were left above the uh the last strata the last flood strata that was brought down that's not an issue the the issue is okay these things were once alive and now they're dead and we see them all over our planet billions of dead things laid down by sedimentary layers of rock all over our planet how did they get here uh miss erica had mentioned fallen into a well or into the tarp hits or these those are very rare occurrences but we see a common event all over the planet what happened it was a global catastrophic flood you got it and thank you very much for this question coming in from tyler kates appreciate it says mr batman please explain how the heart is irreducibly complex it's made of cells and can be broken into valves if a valve goes the heart still functions oh actually the heart itself is a four chamber pump made of meat it's part of an irreducibly complex system now if one of those valves start to malfunction your body's not going to function very well but the system itself i happen to know a little bit about this because i've had a couple of heart attacks i don't recommend those for anybody but once again um the the heart is irreducibly complex in its own right because it has a number of different parts that actually make it work make it pump to the tune of 700 000 gallons a year without stopping because if it ever stops you got a problem but in order for that to be there you have to have the blood the blood pulls in the oxygen takes out the carbon dioxide then in order for that to work you have to have the veins in the arteries now blood itself is irreducibly complex uh the veins in the arteries are all through your body and all this is interdependent upon the respiratory system and also this muscular system so the systems themselves are interdependent upon one another if you don't have all of them functioning simultaneously then you don't have a functioning human being you don't have a functioning system i think if i may add on that the irreducible complexity stuff is is really fun to talk about i think just because it always sends me down a rabbit hole of like okay well what do we really know about you know given organ system whether it's discussing something like the circulatory system um the the um the nervous system the complexity of the eye is another classic one that tends to be to be looked at and from from the sort of evolutionary perspective on this although this is like the the real fast and loose version um you tend to want to look at in order to find out if something is truly irreducibly complex to see if you can if you can map out this this trajectory from something from extants extant organisms so the classic is the eye right you've got eye spots and flatworms and procedingly more complex eyes and other extant species from pinhole camera eyes seen in the likes of like octopuses cup eyes and some kinds of fish uh to the to the complex side that's seen in mammals and so then the question is okay well genetically can you get from you know a to b b to c c to d d to e uh without like lethality and the quest the answer to that question is really fascinating for every organ system that's been looked at um there there tends to be a very logical pathway to take that isn't that that isn't lethal in and of itself and in fact can first fitness benefits at every step along the way so i would argue that when it comes to irreducible complexity if you if we were to ever have a conversation about that i think the name of the game would be like okay we're only going to talk about this system because there's so much to talk about with each one um but it sure is cool i would agree with that because when i had my debate with r and raw which lasted a grand total of 25 minutes because he couldn't answer the questions i was asking him i asked him very specifically okay this system is irreducibly complex the heart the blood and the veins in the arteries which one of them evolved first and you know what he said well the funny thing is is the heartbeat evolved first wait a minute how do you evolve a heartbeat without a physical transmitter something that's actually going to transmit that electric signal so once again we understand that all these systems had to be in place next up fat man thank you for your super chat no question i just see it says but mr morpheus thanks for your question mr batman you kept saying we haven't observed evolution happening tell me when have you observed a god creating anything oh um we haven't observed god creating anything because that would violate the first law of thermodynamics that matter and energy cannot be created nor destroyed but it can only change form over time the fact of the matter is this in tandem with the second law of thermodynamics entropy that all things go from a state of order to disorder from workable usable energy to no workable usable energy also known as thermal equilibrium this proves that an agent a personal loving agent chose to begin his active creation and then chose to stop his active creation because if all you ever have is an eternal cause the only thing you could have is an eternal effect now that god designed all the multiplicity of systems that we have you see in romans chapter one starting at verse 20 it says for what can be known about god is plain to them who's them everybody because god has shown it to them namely his eternal power his divine nature his invisible attributes have been clearly seen clearly perceived ever since the creation of the world in everything that has been made so that nobody has an excuse that's why i asked about natural laws that's why i ask about laws of logic that's why i asked what where the source of life comes from because you cannot justify them without a loving living logical lawgiver god tyler west thanks for your question says where is the flood boundary where does it begin and where does it end it should be the most obvious boundary of layered bedding in the rock layers it doesn't exist and mr batman has no explanation oh my goodness well actually if you look at the earth it has what uh it's called a seam all the way around it personally and again we don't know for sure because we weren't there and the bible doesn't tell us but part of that scene those fault lines start in jerusalem wow that's pretty cool so i i think that started right there now how you're going to have flood boundaries when the entire world is covered by the flood where you're gonna where your boundaries going to be at that point the highest mountain was covered by at least 20 feet so the question is kind of moved right there anyway got you and thank you very much for this question do appreciate it coming in from raw nakedness says you don't really need a heart for a circulatory system you just need directional flow you can get that from celia or muscle action great now who designed the muscle action to work that way wouldn't the heart be considered muscle action so right there you're saying you can have a circulatory system without a heart but now you're just calling the muscle action which does the same function as the heart you're just going to appeal to that you're still left asking the question what caused it to be there what caused the template to be there so the next generation could have that same functional system got john thank you very much for this question coming in from tasha tom says only local parentheses farm animals were taken into the arc we have the proof of the global flood get the evidence from the video quote one two three four five proof for god unquote uh so is that for me i think that was um a troll and then spring heal jack thanks for your question says but erica or erica so hungry for a question but don't worry i'm starving over here james throw me a ball we've got you one spring heal jack says erica is it possible that human population groups in isolation from one another evolved to have different cognitive abilities um i think given the level of admixture that we've seen in humans no i think that that as far as pinning certain certain groups like all that iq stuff with with different individual populations i don't think that pans out at all in the genetic work that we've seen humans are all remarkably similar to one another we we are not a species with very much genetic diversity when compared to uh other animals although many primates have low genetic diversity simply because they're prone to bottlenecks um but no i i don't think that there is any kind of uh could could that feasibly happen i think that species wise it did homo sapiens is just all one large group with with a cognition that's effectively the same um and that cognition was selected for over uh perhaps the more robust homo neanderthalensis uh homo naledi all these other contemporaneous hominins um homo fluericiensis same boat denisovan same boat uh brainbeat brawn out on that one juicy by the way as a side note erica in your experience in the education that you've received on these topics have you ever heard of this stigma against group evolution you could say kind of group level evolution via or i should say rather than individual level selection seems to be totally accepted but group level selection is considered like if you mean if you're meaning sort of like along the lines of like um like the evolution of of you sociality because that tends to be like that tends to be a real tricky subject like that evolving that level of cooperation it seems pretty unpopular right now if that is what they're talking about what i'm thinking of is when you say use sociality do you mean like groups that are pro social that cooperate more than other groups would be more likely to pass on their genes because they'll outcompete other groups that aren't cooperating with oh no no no no no yeah that as far as that goes like like sociality is a huge game changer the ability to cooperate is is one of our biggest strengths we see this constantly in other apes too in given populations of like chimpanzees for instance chimpanzees who are excellent at doing these these territorial raids with high levels of cooperation are capable of monopolizing resources in bonobos who are very closely related to chimps but they're matriarchal so they're led by an alpha female females who individually are weaker than males from coalitions with one another to bully males out of feeding rights so this idea of being able to cooperate to get what you want it's huge and the the thinking goes is that sociality goes hand in hand with cognition every big brain species on the planet is highly social from cetaceans to uh to our elephants to humans to to corvettes to other apes i mean that's just that's that's how it goes so i i would say that the evolving the ability to cooperate man that was one of the best moves in the history of moves humoring erica for just one more second mr batman because i know you're waiting but he's throwing me a bone here again you're just giving me what i want james you're humoring me well what i one thing that it was interesting that i ran into when i went this is a philosophy of science course that i took getting my masters in philosophy at texas tech one of the things that came up in that course was the extreme skepticism regarding group selection so in other words even though it seems intuitive like i think it seems intuitive that for example even today if you have uh let's say it's kind of like in the olympics almost like as an analogy if you have one team that cooperates better than another it'll probably be more likely to win or more likely to survive out there in the world however this is i'm reading this from i remember dawkins is actually a huge critic or skeptic he says uh so i'm reading this now it says richard dawkins and other advocates of the gene-centered view of evolution remain unconvinced about group selection so another have you heard but one thing i'm just asking him i want and i'm not saying this as a as a means of like trying to sow seeds of division among people who believe in evolution my the reason i'm bringing this up is like did you ever experience that or hear about the fact that for a lot of biologists group level selection is like they would say like oh that's like creationism like it's that much it's that stigmatized to where they would have you ever heard of that being that stigmatized i mean potentially i i think maybe i've been i've been thinking along a different line here as far as what it is that we're actually talking about i mean the the concept of cooperation is inherent to social animals i can't imagine that that any biologist in their right mind would would deny that i don't even think dawkins would do that and there are things that i disagree with with dawkins on for sure although he's a decent evolutionary biologist i think he's better with um with science communication in my opinion um but but that being said like the the idea that a gene that you can abide by the selfish gene theory and then also have group level selection at least if i'm imagining this correctly um i don't understand why that's not going to be coherent at least if i'm thinking of the same thing that you guys are thinking of like so that's again is the name of the game was with social species um and i again i can't think of i can't think of anybody who would be studying social mammals social you know birds anything of that nature who who would deny that in fact i would argue that prosociality is huge for promoting the selfish gene i mean those those two things can can exist in tandem and support one another as well as hypotheses that maybe that's me being controversial i don't know well we will talk more about it by patrick low injure am i pronouncing it right let me know patrick says check out Amy Newman's youtube recent episode flood mythologies of the ancient mediterranean and mesopotamia juicy thanks for that patrick and spring hill jack oh we got that one snake is snake was right past tense good to see you i didn't see your question though fair and salas thanks for your question said says wet-nosed primates can produce their own vitamin c dry-nosed primates can't so we so we're their primates with scurvy on board the ark mr batman no there wouldn't have been any uh animals that had any problems whatsoever because once again god would have only brought the animals with the perfect genetic structure to to actually perform uh the functions that they needed to do in order to have those descendants when they actually got off the ark you got it and thank you very much for this question tyler west says erica can you explain why the dover cliffs made of chalk limestone cannot form in a flood or in 6000 years um yes so in the case of the cliffs of dover that's that's mostly going to be chalk and the the conditions that are conducive for limestone formation and chalk formation at that they're warm waters that are calm in order to turbulence and turbidity and things like that will remix the the um the minerals and and um and substances and such like that back into the water so you and then you also have to have low acidity because if the acidity is too high again it breaks down the mineral and you have to have low pressure all four of these things aren't going to be at least as far as i am aware um the types the types of conditions that you're going to see in a global flood to make matters worse i would propose chalk and limestone are composed of marine chalk and limestone i should be very clear chemical is different chemical limestone is a different thing but they are readily distinguishable from one another so close to dover it's a marine kind of kind of deposition or cumulation deposition etc um marine structure and you know this because you can take little pieces off look at it underneath the microscope and you see little microorganism shells things of that nature so you also another reason why i would propose that the that the flood couldn't do it is because maintaining a community of of uh planktonic life to create something like the cliffs of dover it couldn't happen in in a year if you had all those organisms living contemporaneously in one spot at the same time it's a sludge of microorganisms which is why a vast amount of time is in my opinion required for something like this because these organisms are living and dying and depositing they're living they're dying depositing they're living they're dying depositing doing it all at once and i mean it's we're looking at like the the um the amoebic sea from uh uh alien planet that discovery channel documentary from a couple decades ago you got it and this one from bubblegum gun i can't tell if they're serious says laws given by a god is no different in social construct from a law given by a communist government laws above god must come from a higher being i actually know that doesn't work because you have to have laws that come from an eternal universal and unchanging law giver if you're going to have laws of physics laws of chemistry laws of biology laws of logic laws of mathematics now when you're talking about laws that man makes you're talking about conventions conventional laws man can change those laws anytime he wants that's like a speed limit um my dog is about to go crazy so i got a letter out i'll be right back we've got a question for now you've got an opportunity to ask a question to miss erika finally sun flower thanks for your questions as for erika do you consider scientific truth with a capital t to be the most important thing to pursue and spread um i think it's important that some people do take that position i think that having very uh science focused minds in our society is a lot of times what leads to innovation that makes society better i don't think it's necessarily that every necessary rather that everyone has that kind of perspective i would like it just because i like to think that i have that perspective at least to a degree uh but i don't think that that is necessarily the most important thing like tm period full stop gosh yeah and the next one mr morpheus says mr batman you didn't you don't get to assert a god did this or that you have to prove it the bible's the claim not the proof well actually the bible is the foundation for truth jesus said he is the way the truth in the life and then i just quoted song 119 verse 160 earlier that the sum of his word is truth but i also validated that with the evidence of creation since we know that whatever created time space and matter did not need time space and matter in order to create time space a matter that being or thing for everyone to look at it that way had to be timeless basis and immaterial all powerful all knowing loving living a personal agent and a logical lawgiver so that is only the god of the bible that's the only one that exists you got it and thank you very much this one coming in from endo xd says thanks guys fun debate love listening to erica and also i have a question for mr batman if that's how fossils form shouldn't there be tons and tons of fossils due to the flood thanks and then they also asked if erica could respond absolutely there are tons and tons of fossils because of the flood we find of them all over our planet like i said before a couple three times billions of dead things laid down by sedimentary layers of water all over our planet you're up miss erica okay cool um yes the thing about the flood is that the flood requires a ubiquitous type of fossil burial in my opinion i haven't seen a model that can allow uh that has been fleshed out i should say because mr batman offered offered some some thoughts on this as well but i think that you have to have as a model that's going to really flesh out how you're going to get all of these different types of fossilization that fossilization that we see and more importantly in the order that we see them right so yes water rapid burial is going to be a great way to get a fossil that's true this planet is also 75 water so it's not surprising that we see a lot of fossils that are buried under those conditions again the prediction from the flood perspective i would propose would be that there is this this universal set of criteria that can be applied to all fossils and identify them as having been flood fossils because if the flood boundary is where most creationists say it is or a lot of christians say it is uh that being at the at the cretaceous um from the the boundary between the mesozoic and the senozoic then there should be very clear differences in the fossils that we find in the flood layers versus the non-flood layers because everyone knows we find fossils that are from like fossils of mammoths and things of that nature sorry i got a dog barking and and other ancient critters from the senozoic but i don't think we find a huge difference in them so how is it that we're getting senozoic fossils of things like purgatorious or aphropithecus or indruchetherium organisms that were i don't think many creationists would identify them as flood buried organisms um and why are their fossils so indistinguishable in many cases from the ones that are that are flood fossils sorry long winded like i said always long winded thank you boho gum gun as well says speed limits quote unquote are from god are a social construct well again speed limits are laws of man and and here's the problem with laws of man if there is no god then why is there any particular thing that's absolutely morally wrong you see conventional laws are laws of man change by man and you can change the speed limit the speed limit outside of my house right now is 35 miles an hour they could change it to 55 tomorrow because they just choose to do so but we can't change laws of logic we can't change laws of physics you can't change laws of biology this these are established by a loving living logical lawgiver god who is unchanging in the book of malachi says i am yahuva i am god and i change not you got it and thank you very much for this question coming in from fat man strikes again given that this is basically pure smack talk we'll give you a chance to respond mr batman they say erica your was right you was right when you said you were the only one using the scientific method in this debate mr batman used a lot of probabilities and maybes batman coming after mr batman like that thank you for the compliment i appreciate it but mr batman you got it you can't just let him treat you that way oh i'm used to it um the fact of the matter is uh again i i don't think i said probably or maybe other than when we were talking about the possibilities of things that we're not sure about that happened in the past that are not designated in the scripture god's word is truth now where i never said possibly or could be is laws of nature i know for a fact where those come from those have to come from a loving living logical lawgiver god without an eternal universal and changing law giver then you don't have eternal universal and changing laws these are called metaphysical laws because they have to come from outside of the physical realm that means that god is exerting his will on the physical world at all times by by maintaining these laws if he ever took his hands off creation we wouldn't be here to complain about it you got it and this one from sunflower didn't see a question attached oh wait i think you just submitted one though you said i don't know looking for sunflower might just be in generous thank you sunflower let me know if you have a question and then mr morpheus thank you sunflower erika can you tell us what role do pre zygotic and post zygotic barriers play in speciation yeah that's a really interesting question uh pre and post zygotic barriers your post zygotic barriers too are going to be a lot fleshed out quite a bit by things that are occurring again in the environment around organisms pre zygotic barriers they they tend to be they tend to be less selected for by the big e environment as in like the literal habitat that the organism is living in but they can they can aid in in speciation those pre zygotic barriers too they they're not always foolproof right i mean things like a classic example is and thank goodness this is the eretical work and not like not like actual work that's been done but the main barrier tend to refer for the hybridizability of a human and chimpanzee is actually the zona pollucidates like it's it's the outer layer the gate keeps sperm and it's what decides whether or not insemination is actually going to occur that that's a pre zygotic barrier that's important but theoretically something like artificial artificial insemination can bypass that barrier i mean that's what's been done in a lot of our artificial organisms that we have today gmo's and things of that new gmo animals and things of that nature in order to to ensure that insemination does occur whether it's a mechanical barrier or something more more simplistic like that both of those are really important and do aid in speciation but because biology is messy it's always a gradient it's never a sure thing and it's also not necessarily going to be passed down the right way um mules can sometimes be fertile right so you know messy always messy gosh and thank you very much for your question this one coming in fr