You know, I grew up in country like this.
My dad and I were riding horses ...
... after these amazing high mountain lakes.
We rode back to some pretty remote wilderness areas.
With incredible streams, and meadows, and wildlife.
I love it here. "B"
look at this canyon.
It reminds me of the Grand Canyon.
It is this small stream,
and these steep canyon walls.
How long do you suppose it would take ...
... for as stream as this small to remove this much material ...
... and cut the canyon this deep ?
This rock has a story, as you and I have.
it came from somewhere.
Many of these rocks have been dated to the
That is very old.
But it might surprise you to know ...
... that all geological formations we see here,
cannons, layers, and even plants,
They are younger than me.
When I was born, none of this was here,
but there was a large forest hundreds of feet deep ...
... of where we stand now.
In fact, before 1980, most people ...
... had never even heard of Mount St. Helena.
It was on May 18 that year ...
... molten rock that created a steam expl*si*n ...
... with the force of 20 million tons of dynamite.
Avalanche debris and other flows of the eruption were deposited ...
... and all those layers quickly reached 600 feet thick.
A couple of years later there were more volcanic activity ...
... which created a mudflow that separated this entire canyon.
step also opened through the bedrock, all in a couple of days.
Is not it amazing what a little information about the past ...
... you can do to help change the way you watch this ...
... and present world around you?
Many people assume a lot about ...
... in the history of the Earth around us.
The question is, how these assumptions affect ...
... the way we see the story?
But more importantly, what role they play in ...
... the way we view science and the Bible?
Did God create the world in a few days or thousands of millions of years?
Is humanity descended from primates ...
... or God created us instantly, his image?
Was there a global flood that destroyed the Earth ...
... or is that a myth?
In other words, is Genesis story?
When we think about the history of Earth,
There are many things to consider.
But one of the most fascinating is the story of the Flood.
¿It came over the whole Earth covered in water?
Genesis says that the waters prevailed ...
... on Earth to such an extent that the mountains ...
... under the whole heaven they were covered.
So if the Flood was truly global,
Was not there much evidence?
I had heard from a scientist that happened ...
... more than 40 years studying this question.
When I spoke with him, he said there was an excellent place ...
... where we could see evidence of global Flood.
Steve, I have to admit, I've been here several times ...
... but every time I come it's amazing.
In addition to my home,
the Grand Canyon is my favorite place on Earth.
So, Steve, tell me, what do you see here?
When we see the Grand Canyon, we ...
... the inside story of the earth beneath our feet.
And we have a kind of layered cake, right? Strata ...
... that they have been eroded to our advantage to see ...
... the inner structure of the Earth.
These same layers are in Colorado,
Also in Illinois, and Pennsylvania.
So when you say sedimentary strata,
Are you talking about the layers we see?
Yes. The lower layers are formed first.
These are grains of sediment were mixed, separated,
and flowed here from different directions ...
... and they piled one on another.
And then, of course, become naturally in rock.
So you're saying that the solid Earth ...
... on which we stand right now ...
... if we went in its history, would it be liquid?
Yes.
The ocean is doing amazing things ...
... and water with incredible power is deposited ...
... the layers we see in the canyon.
And there are fossils in all those layers?
There are marine fossils at all layers.
But the standard explanation is that there were 17 advances and retreats ...
... different ocean on American continental crust,
and that spread over hundreds of millions of years.
And what is the evidence you see here ...
... you'd say that does not seem to make sense?
... in the canyon they are flat and one relative to another,
we see between the layers of strata ...
... and we see the passage of time between the layers.
You mean to erosion?
Erosion, especially and channeling ...
... not visible on a large scale.
And then we see strata as such ...
... and they provide evidence of rapid sedimentation, very fast.
Just minutes or hours is what it takes to make the layers.
Well, tell me about the history of these layers.
How did they get here?
"The six hundredth year of Noah's life, in the second month ...
... on the seventeenth day of the month,
the same day were all the fountains of the great deep,
and the windows of heaven were opened ... "
My understanding is that the rupture occurred ocean floor,
some kind of magma or earthquake prompted ...
... the oceans on continental crust.
So that's the reason why ...
... we have these marine fossils in these layers?
Yes. And we have six months ...
... where the waters prevailed upon the earth.
Approximately seven months for the water to subside.
... early and middle stage of global Flood ...
... right there in the Grand Canyon.
We have other local strata in this region of the Grand Canyon.
It is called the Grand Staircase.
We have about 10,000 feet, strata two miles thick ...
... above the Grand Canyon.
Higher than where we are.
Higher than where we are,
and that represents the later stages of the Flood ...
... and the return of the flood water.
This surface was chamfered by the withdrawal of flood waters ...
... and while the flood retreated to the newly formed ocean basins ...
... then probably they emerged continental crust ...
... and the Ark, of course, he was perched on the high ground in the Middle East.
Well, there are some people who say ...
... that record is a local flood.
I think it's a global flood and high mountains all ...
... or the whole sky was covered, a universal declaration,
but mountains have risen since.
And we should not measure the depth of the floodwaters ...
... by the mountains that are present on Earth,
which they were largely created during and after the Flood.
Well, the fact that we have all these layers would be ...
... unknown to us if we were ...
... standing on them somewhere else ...
but we know that they have been separated.
How did that happen?
Well, it's the story that we all learned ...
... at school, yes?
The Colorado River separated the Grand Canyon ...
... for tens of millions of years.
Most geologists have scrapped that idea.
It's hard to keep a g*n like this ...
... for tens of millions of years.
You can not imagine a cannon remain so long with erosion.
Is it because eventually the sides ...
... they had collapsed and collapsed?
Yes.
So how is that carved all this?
Well, there are many theories, and personally ...
... I like the idea of catastrophic erosion drainage lakes.
So after the flood we have these large bodies of water,
some lakes that are trapped.
There is evidence of the great lake ...
... in the Painted Desert, a place called Hope Buttes,
about 500 cubic miles of water in this huge lake.
And then the dam breaks ...
... and that massive amount of water ...
... he is now pouring and carving it.
Yes.
And how long would erode the Grand Canyon?
Maybe weeks, but not millions of years.
Time is not a magic wand that solves ...
... all geological problems in the world.
Rejects that thinking about the millions of years ...
... and then start thinking about catastrophic processes ...
... as you see in the Mount St. Helens ...
... and that will help you understand the Grand Canyon ...
Every place we looked, Steve showed me evidence ...
... the incredible power of moving water.
They quickly settled those huge layers,
and then quickly they eroded.
Steve wanted to show ...
... where in the floodwaters struck first continental crust,
so he took me to a deeper place in the canyon.
Steve, when you said to me ...
... would you take to the bottom, you were kidding, right?
We are in the bottom, right?
We are in a great side canyon of the Grand Canyon main ...
... and we are seeing the granite base,
which is the core of the continental crust, so to speak,
and then we see the above flat layers.
The boundary between granite rock below ...
... and Tapeats sandstone above is ...
... this area we call the Great nonconformity.
Why does it seem to be such a definite line?
I mean, it is very clear.
I think it is an erosional limit colossal scale.
We are seeing something that shows the magnitude ...
... flood flow over a surface.
And you're just here?
Great Dissatisfaction extends continentally.
I've seen, I think, in the Middle East.
It is in Europe.
It is in Africa.
And it is here under the North American continental crust.
So we have this layer.
How thick is this layer?
What follows from this?
Well, here we have the megasequence Sauk ...
... thousand feet of sandstone, shale,
limestone covering the entire continental crust.
There are four other large packages sequences ...
... strata that are on it.
These are also continuous as this.
What we are seeing here is fairly representative ...
... the rest of the world.
Makes one really question the notion ...
... that all this happened for a small local flooding.
We're talking about something huge.
The power of moving water was beveling ...
... and pulverizing rock, depositing a thick layer ...
... and leading us to think in a global flood.
However, the conventional story is completely different.
He says there is a long time ...
... between each of the layers.
Some people have said that the limit of the Great Dissatisfaction ...
... it represents five hundred million years.
You mean between the granite we see ...
... and that first layer of sedimentary rock?
Yes. They say there could be five hundred million years,
and that's what his explanation ...
... in the history of the Earth I would ask them to consider,
and yet, when you come here and look at this ...
... it is almost a regular flat surface.
Not exactly a flat surface,
but it is a surface that undulates gently.
Would that be the product of thousands of millions of years ...
... or the product of the power of water ...
... brushing a surface?
Here time is alien for a good explanation,
so we want to explain what we see.
A wherever we look we see the power of water.
And it's water on a colossal scale.
And that's the story here at the Grand Canyon.
Not a bit of water for a long time.
It's a lot of water for a short time.
Time is really the central problem ...
... when we talk about the history of Earth.
How long did form what we see around us?
To me it seemed clear that the global Flood would ...
... transformed the Earth quickly,
and yet I know that many people think ...
... that the world is slowly formed over thousands of millions of years.
What was the real difference between these two ways of seeing the time?
I needed to talk to someone who could tell me ...
... more about science and history and time.
Since my background is in computer science,
we are in a place where I ...
... he had personally experienced something in this story.
As we watched the exhibition,
I was reminded of how small ...
... and that they have become powerful computers ...
... since I used them for the first time.
Paul said that changing our assumptions about computers ...
... really it was a series of paradigm shifts.
When I was 19 I read Thomas Kuhn's classic,
"The Structure of Scientific Revolutions",
He is describing the notion of paradigms.
A paradigm is a framework in which you interpret the evidence.
So science not only is the evidence;
This is how you interpret the evidence.
So, this room for example,
we have here called "minicomputers"
but really they are not mini at all ...
... in terms of our current paradigm.
Today, right?
Yes this.
So to really understand this question of origins ...
... you really need to start watching ...
... the ruling paradigms,
both views we have now main ...
... about the history of the life and history of the Universe.
And which are they?
On the one hand, we have the conventional paradigm.
In the conventional paradigm you have a profound time,
... starting with the primitive simplicity ...
... and ending with what we see today.
All the complexity of life has to be built from below ...
... for purely physical processes where no mind,
no creator, no design is present.
The second point of view we can call, say,
the paradigm of historical Genesis.
Everything starts with a divine mind, a creator,
an intelligence that plans and directs ...
... and it brings reality into existence.
Events are happening at a much more recent time scale.
The universe, the solar system, our planet, life itself,
all starts fully formed as a functional system.
It is not difficult to see that there is a radical difference ...
... between these two in terms of time.
When we see the history of life ...
... on this planet, we have a body of data ...
... but depending on the paradigm one adopts,
the data will be interpreted in very different ways.
It seems that a paradigm is ...
... drawing on a story that was given to us ...
... and the other paradigm is building this story.
Is that how you see it?
We have a witness to these events and that witness is us ...
... I am saying this is what happened ...
... and we have to take that into consideration ...
... and then evaluate the data.
Well, Paul, why this becomes something serious is ...
... we're not talking about a story about boiling water ...
... a certain temperature.
We're talking about a story that is ...
... with the origin of the universe.
Deals with the origin of life; The origin of humanity;
The origin of sin and why there is evil in the world;
The origin of geological formations ...
... we have around us; The origin of language.
I mean, this is not just any story.
He's dealing with very, very large elements of humanity ...
... and where we are today.
Yes.
You're talking about the origins of literally everything.
And I think if we turn away from all this and say, well,
What it is really the difference between these two paradigms ?,
It is not a question of science on one hand ...
... against religion on the other because both are scientific in the sense ...
... they are observing a common set of data.
The most profound difference is really ...
... Two historical views competing ...
What is the true history of our cosmos?
This seems to be the real question.
What is our true story?
What really happened?
The conflict is not between two views of science,
but between two views of history.
Since Genesis was written in Hebrew,
I wanted to talk to an expert in Hebrew.
What really was the original text?
The first word in Genesis is Braichit ...
Genesis 1: 1 is Braichit.
This is the beginning of Toledot Noah.
That word Toledot, is a very interesting word.
Sometimes it translated as "pedigrees".
Sometimes it translated as "history".
And what follows is the record of the Flood.
Steve, it seems that there is much history in the Bible.
Is that how you see it?
Oh, absolutely.
In fact, the first thing is that it is an accurate historical account.
The presentation is such in the perspective of writers ...
... they thought they were talking about real events.
It is very obvious from the way they insisted ...
... that the next generation learn its history.
When you see those early chapters in Genesis,
What do you see?
Can you give us show?
In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth ...
No Hebrew word for the Universe.
This means that He created everything.
And the next thing we find in Genesis 1: 2 ...
... it is a water ball in space.
In the coming days, God will fill the universe.
Well, here you are talking about days.
Do you see this as literal days?
Is this what the text is telling us?
Or, you know, what other people think,
this is just a poetic way of a different point of view?
Well, first of all, is not poetry.
All major Hebraists the world say ...
... this is fiction.
And they say that one of the unique features ...
... the Genesis account of creation ...
... and the Deluge is that they are narratives,
because in the ancient East that was done in epic poetry,
which is very different.
And here we have a narrative to indicate that this is historic.
What this means is that you understand the words ...
... in the normal way these Hebrew words were understood.
The word "yom" means day.
The rationale for their use is what we refer to as day.
It is a 24-hour day.
The only way you'd want ...
... means a longer period of time is ...
... if you impose an alien concept to the text and say,
Well, I think these are ages ...
... so yom, it must mean ages.
What you have to do is start with the text.
If we start with the text, yom, it means day.
So when we got to the passage ...
... talking about the creation of Adam and Eve,
You're seeing is a clear historical event ...
... that would stand in direct opposition ...
... the conventional paradigm that man evolved ...
... from a long, long process.
The biblical text does not support ...
... with the conventional standard paradigm.
The Bible teaches that the Lord God formed man,
artfully blowing in the breath of life;
created in His image.
And then of course the woman is created.
We marriage.
We fall.
And then in the genealogy of Noah we have the complete account of the Flood.
And the Deluge, is a global flood?
Well, I do not know how many times,
It appears in the narrative of the Deluge.
If this is a judgment on humanity, then it must be global.
And as we go through these first eleven chapters of Genesis ...
... we come to chapter ten, which is called the table of nations,
who are the sons of Noah.
It is mentioned in that chapter that people ...
... they are in different nations and languages.
So Moses returned in Genesis 11: 1-9 ...
... and explains how languages develop.
So we arrived at Toledot of Terah ...
... y el Toledot of Terah no va a ser acerca of Terah.
It will be about his famous son, Abraham.
It just seems so apparent that no ...
... disconnect between all of these things ...
... and everything we see in the beginning.
It's just a long historical narrative.
¿No?
So is. In fact,
pedigrees form the structure,
not only for Genesis, but the narratives are ...
... embedded in the genealogies.
Genealogies are taken and calls the Toledot ...
... in the book of Ruth to establish that David is ...
... a descendant of Judah, something required by the prophecy of Jacob.
And then we come to the New Testament.
How the pedigree of Jesus set?
With two genealogies, one that crosses the line of Mary ...
... until Adam.
Steve, in the light of all this we have seen,
how important is the historical narrative ...
... we found through Genesis,
including all generations shown,
How important is it for Christianity?
This shows that Christianity ...
... it has a historical basis.
It is what the Scriptures say ...
... and the scriptures represent actual historical data.
So Christianity is not a leap in the dark.
It is an understanding that has very strong historical bases,
and that our Savior is our Creator.
These genealogies are incredibly important.
If Jesus is descended from Adam,
and if Adam was created on the sixth day of creation,
then the Earth can not be very old.
So where do the millions of years?
I met a geologist in a place where he said ...
... we could understand this better.
You see the stillness,
the plain, nothing to bother.
And yet you have the reminder that in the past was expl*sive.
There was a volcano here behind a cinder cone volcano ...
... and the volcano spewed lava flow ...
... that spilled through the field.
A lot of basaltic lava.
Yes, but it is actually small compared ...
... with lava flows we see in many places.
And there are a thousand volcanoes around here ...
... and the little that is behind us ...
... we call cinder cone volcano.
You call that small.
Yeah, well, it is.
These volcanoes are small.
Mount St. Helens in 1980 when it erupted, well,
but that was small compared with historical eruptions.
We can go a little further back ...
... to the great eruption of Yellowstone ...
... and a part of the volcanic ash ended up in Texas.
It reached that distance.
Think lava flows in India ...
... where you have an accumulation of up to one thousand feet ...
... over an area measuring one third of the subcontinent of India.
What we see in this is really just tiny ...
... compared to what we have seen in the past ...
... and that is saying something about the historical past.
We can not use the present rhythms of these processes to understand ...
... how fast and how majestically in terms of scale ...
... the accumulated geological record.
Well, that's the point that brought me to you ...
... because how we determine the age of these rocks?
Well, the important thing is to first recognize ...
... This lava flow is in a sense a moment in time.
It is an event.
And when it is melted, you have all the different elements ...
... leaving the volcano all mixed ...
... and the rock begins to crystallize.
Any of the atoms are radioactive ...
... begin to accumulate in what we call ...
... products son, the decay products.
Now, the point is that the decay rate is so slow ...
... where we measure in this ...
... it takes millions of years ...
... so that the atoms decay into atoms father son.
And it is that where are the millions of years,
that the decay rate at present is slow.
But we would say that this is not ...
... really the key to the past ...
... because obviously the past contains some events ...
... catastrophic mass that are not happening today.
In fact, the Bible would say ...
... the past is the key to the present.
If you want to understand why the world is as it is today ...
... you have to understand what happened in the past.
So we have many clues that geological processes ...
... they have not been in constant rates over time ...
... and now we have other clues that decay rates ...
... it could not have been constant.
So we've taken rock samples from a variety of places.
Many signs in the Grand Canyon ...
... each of those layers of rock.
I have done in New Zealand.
We have done elsewhere in the world.
And what we have done is to submit the same samples ...
... more than one of these dating methods.
And what we found is that in the same samples ...
... with more than one method, we are getting dates ...
... which they differ by hundreds of millions of years ...
... and even billions of dollars in some cases.
We are seeing big differences using different methods.
Well, if there is that kind of difference ...
... among all dating methods ...
... then that it seems to confirm that in fact we ...
... an open system here, no one closed.
Right.
And if we have an open system, then we can not trust him ...
... to give us reliable dates for these rocks.
And that changes the whole way of thinking ...
... about the history of the Earth because suddenly ...
... now these radioactive clocks are unreliable.
We have evidence that the rate was faster in the past.
Of suddenly we could not be thinking in terms of millions of years.
We might be thinking in terms of a story that is much shorter.
You were saying that this kind of evidence is ...
... in the literature now.
Yes Yes.
Why you are not making an impact?
Well, I've been wondering that ...
... when I've spoken in geology departments of the universities ...
... and the answer is that there is a commitment ...
... with the millions of years.
And so when people clung to that approach ...
... anything outside his field of vision that conflicts ...
... with that approach it is marginalized.
And the reason why ...
... the millions of years are important,
If we go back in history of scientific thought,
Charles Lyell in England proposed the millions of years ...
... and they multiplied ages for rocks.
And that was the foundation on which Charles Darwin built.
In fact, he read Charles Lyell's book and became convinced ...
... of millions of years of geological evolution ...
... so now he could say that given enough time ...
... what we see not happen in the present.
Could see only small changes in the present.
But if we have millions of years, small changes ...
... they can accumulate to become big changes.
So if you want to have a new way of looking at history ...
... that says we arrived here by chance,
random processes over millions of years,
then you have to have rocks that are millions of years old.
Otherwise you've undermined the whole foundation ...
... that way of seeing the history of the Earth.
So time becomes the critical element ...
... for the conventional paradigm ...
... and that time has to be a deep time.
Andrew said that when studying the rock formations,
One shows evidence of a young earth transformed ...
... by a global catastrophe.
So he took me south of Sedona for him to see with my own eyes.
The important thing to note here is that ...
... This landscape is really very stable.
There was a lot of erosion in the past ...
... to till this whole field,
but those cliffs and valley floor are very stable,
why we vegetation.
Today everything is much, much quieter.
Current processes are extremely slow ...
... but they can not explain how we got this erosion,
how do we get these layers, how do we get these cliffs.
Okay, you wanted to come here because you saw the evidence ...
... of a young Earth by what we found here.
What do you see?
Yes. Well, the first thing we noticed ...
... it is the extension of these layers.
It's like a stack of pancakes.
For example, the red unit that crosses all ...
... our view, that is the formation Schnebly Hill.
And on it you can see it first white unit,
Coconino Sandstone.
And on the horizon you have the Kaibab limestone,
which it is the rock on the surface of the Grand Canyon.
And we are, 70 miles from the Grand Canyon here ...
... and these layers are still here.
It is hard to imagine the volume of material it represents.
Yes.
For instance, sandstone Coconino.
We can trace it from here right through New Mexico,
Colorado, up to Kansas ...
... and Oklahoma, or even in Texas.
We're talking about at least 200,000 square miles ...
... consisting of a rocky drive for miles and miles and miles.
That's not the scale we see today,
with localized sedimentation.
And to get this way is lying in such a large area,
it's like having to do a pancake ...
... at the same time very quickly.
So these layers show evidence of rapid sedimentation,
the extension of these layers.
Well, Andrew, you were talking about that red training ...
... but that does not sound familiar.
No, that's the Schnebly Hill formation.
Not in the Grand Canyon.
At the Grand Canyon we Coconino formation Hermit.
And that limit is sharp edge ...
... and there is no evidence of erosion here,
which means that the formation was deposited quickly Hermit ...
... and then immediately Coconino was deposited thereon.
But here we are 70 miles from the Grand Canyon ...
... and we have this training Schnebly Hill ...
... between Coconino and Hermit.
And this training Schnebly Hill,
... it must have been formed very quickly.
If that took millions of years,
we should see millions of years of evidence ...
... of millions of years of erosion in the Grand Canyon ...
... in that same limit.
We not see it.
So that means that this training Schnebly Hill ...
... in this area it had to be formed in a matter of hours.
So tells you it is not only lack of erosion ...
... but there is no time between these limits.
So the whole layer sequence was deposited very quickly.
So we have this large expanse of layers.
We have a lack of erosion between the layers.
What other evidence do you see?
Well, if we look at carefully, by example,
Coconino Sandstone to, we stratification ...
... there are bands in which they are inclined.
We call cross-stratification.
What they indicate is that you had ...
... waves of sand under the water moved.
The comparison is a desert.
It is important to recognize that there is a difference ...
... in the corner on a dune in the desert.
It is usually from 30 to 34 degrees these inclined layers.
Under water, it is usually 25 degrees or less.
And Dr. John Whitmore has combed the hills ...
... about their students ...
... hundreds and hundreds of measurements of these cross stratifications ...
... and all are in the range of 15-25 degrees.
So it was a t*nk underwater.
And so these layers are accumulating in hours, weeks ...
... and in a few months, you have this whole lot ...
... layers of pancakes on such broad areas.
So the difference is not ...
... it is to believe in these layers that exist.
Not at all.
The difference is in time, right?
Right.
It is not a matter of science against the Bible.
When we are talking about the paradigm of the Flood ...
... and the conventional paradigm, we are actually talking about ...
... two different ways to see the history of the Earth.
These views are very different.
Of course, I thought being taught the conventional view ...
... with their long periods and slow and uniform changes.
But what is the history of the world according to Genesis?
Kurt Wise took me a fascinating place to another ...
... fossil evidence showing me forests,
explaining the rapid formation of coal ...
... and speaking of the complex design of biological systems.
Wherever we looked, he taught me something new ...
... about the Earth and its history.
We ended up at the entrance of an old abandoned coal mine.
This is what is ...
... Company Dayton Coal and Iron, built ...
... about 100-110 years ago.
What is surprising is that if you did not know that story ...
... and you looked at these rocks ...
... you think they are very old.
In fact, if we were in Greece you might think ...
... that they are thousands of years old.
It's hard to tell just by looking at the structure as such.
Well, Kurt, then I need you to do something ...
... because I know the conventional paradigm ...
... look at the history of the Earth as a straight line.
Many uniforms and other processes.
But the story of Genesis tells us ...
... that is not so uniform.
Yes, that's a good point.
In 2 Peter chapter 3 talks about people in the last days ...
... they would say, "Where is the promise of his coming is?"
"Ever since our fathers d*ed in ...
... all things continue as they were from the beginning of creation ".
This concept of what you see in the present,
what is happening now,
what is happening in the creek down there,
what is happening everywhere on Earth ...
... it is the way it has always been.
It has always been throughout the history of Earth.
The passage continues,
"But they deliberately ...".
They are not only ignorant of these truths,
they are rejecting these truths by the way,
and lists Creation and the Flood.
These are events that apparently, according to the Bible,
are not as in the present.
And how great is that's what we see here.
That cliff is not really in place.
That cliff is about 1,000 feet higher.
He slid to where he is now.
That's a big rock.
It is immense. Huge.
Now, what kind of process in this ...
... slides down blocks as big as this?
This thing still by a mile.
But within these rocks there is more evidence of an event ...
... before that it is even bigger, even more different than the present.
And then you play within those there are fossils of a period of time ...
... which is very different to the present.
So according to the statements of Scripture ...
... and according to my own experience ...
... you can not use this to judge the past,
to understand the past.
But if you return to the beginning,
you will realize that the Bible presents ...
... what I would call times in the history of the Earth.
Got big periods of time?
Just different things going on ...
... for each of those times.
But if you live in any of those times never ...
... would understand the previous time, because they are very different.
The first is the creation itself.
In six days God created the whole universe.
He created the planets and the stars ...
... and he unfolded the Universe ...
... with his arm extended.
That obviously is not happening today.
He is not creating planets.
In fact, at the end of that passage,
He says he has finished his creative work.
Then we move to what I call the Edenic period,
the period of time that Adam and Eve are ...
...in the garden of Eden.
And it's very different than in the present.
That passage, for example, gives us the impression ...
... that if Adam and Eve had not sinned ...
... they would have lived forever ...
It is difficult to even conceive of humans living forever.
So it's a different world.
Completely different.
But how long it did? We do not know.
He ended suddenly ...
... when Adam and Eve ate from the tree ...
... the knowledge of good and evil ...
... And God cursed creation.
He changed the rules of the universe.
The sun no longer be able to shine forever.
We would no longer be able to live forever.
So it's hard for us to even imagine what that would be ...
... because we only see the laws that are present.
And we would not have come to that conclusion ...
... if we had the Word of God.
That's true.
And I think that that's what the Word of God ...
... we have been given.
And then we slid into the third period in time,
what I call the antediluvian period,
the period before the flood and after the fall of man.
It is a world that is different than the present.
They work the same natural laws,
but it is a different set of creatures,
a different set of plants.
It's a little warmer Earth.
The continents are in different positions ...
... of which they are now.
It is significantly different.
And that's what we see in Peter, where he talks about ...
... the world being destroyed.
So the Flood not only wet everything.
This was a really radical change, right?
Yes, if we are right about what we have understood so far,
we continents moving,
bumping into each other, creating mountains.
Towering mountains to reach tens of thousands of feet high.
You have water rinsing entire continents.
We are tearing tens of thousands of feet of sediment ...
... of the old continent and then depositing ...
... hundreds of feet of sediment over again.
It's ... We're seeing earthquakes ...
... amazing power.
So that changed what you call ...
... At the time of antediluvian to after the flood.
Basically, the Earth has to ...
... recover from the global Flood.
The atmosphere has to recover.
Geology, rocks, have to be recovered.
Plants and animals have to spread around the Earth.
Have plenty of water, huge earthquakes,
huge volcanoes.
And about that period of recovery it is a slow decline ...
... in the intensity and frequency of these things.
So it would be in this period in which we would see ...
... the Ice Age, for example?
Yes. Ironically, the Ice Age ...
... turns out to be, in our model,
a consequence of the heating of water during the flood.
The water is evaporating from the oceans.
That cools the ocean.
The water then moves over the continental crust ...
... leaving huge volumes of water fall.
Now in some places the rain will fall like snow ...
... but down so quickly and relentlessly ...
... that can not melt and collects ...
... sequences in thick ice until they reach the miles thick.
And then when the oceans have cooled enough ...
... generation system that rain has stopped,
then these glaciers collapse on its own weight,
melt at its current position,
and they continue melting.
This global warming is recovery.
Earth is still recovering from the flood.
So that was a pretty tumultuous era ...
... but then you have a final time.
Then the modern era, you can study the current processes ...
... and understand things pretty easily ...
... until after a couple of centuries the Flood.
So that could make someone think that these processes,
if you wear them all the way back ...
Precisely.
If you take the current processes and extend it to the past,
and that's what 2 Peter says.
That's the mistake that people.
It is reasonable.
Take this and spread it to the past.
It is not unreasonable.
So you have to go to the Bible ...
... to find the information needed to reconstruct it.
And, looking at it from the other side, if you start from the Bible,
just the beginning of the story.
God has given us the ability to read the rocks ...
... and fill the rest of the story,
and we need to fully understand the Flood.
We start with the Bible, but then go to the rocks.
Talk to the rocks and they will tell ...
... what has happened in the past.
Kurt had a point.
The Bible records historical events ...
... but it does not tell us how these events happened.
That's what these scientists were doing.
They were trying to interpret the evidence ...
... in the light of biblical history.
But Kurt said there was evidence within the rocks.
What was that evidence?
I love coming to the museums of natural history.
For me as a paleontologist, it is like the opportunity to go to a zoo.
They are all animals that lived before the Flood.
It is an opportunity to travel in time.
It's like a zoo, but they are not alive.
They're all dead.
And not stink, so that's very good.
And the Museum of Natural History ...
... not only he is telling us what was in there.
It is also trying to give us a narrative line.
And we have two possibilities, we have two paradigms ...
... between a naturalistic vision and a biblical view.
And all natural history museums in the country,
most of which there are around the world,
you only get one of those views,
They only give you a naturalistic way of seeing the world, an old Earth.
But the same data, this dinosaur is capable ...
... to be understood in an alternative paradigm.
So when I'm thinking about this kind of creatures ...
... I'm thinking of a world just before the Flood.
I mean, this is a real image of a violent world.
Yes.
This is why God said, behold, the end of all.
It was not just humanity.
Man and all the animals on which they were judged govern ...
... at the time of the Flood.
Well, Marcus, could you give us an overall picture ...
... fossil and how all this fits in with the other?
Yes.
Fossils tend to be in different layers ...
... where numbers are very, very large ...
... that they have been destroyed, thousands of millions anonymous.
So every time we see a layer of rock ...
... it's so thick, we're thinking about ...
... an event that probably took minutes to complete,
not thousands of years.
Minutes only for this unique package of rock,
sometimes even seconds.
Now, where these pulses Flood water are ...
... moving on continental crust, taking ecosystems,
or dragging up marine ecosystems from deep ocean ...
... and pushing them toward Earth, and while one is deposited ...
... the waves again, and they begin to push ...
... and stack additional things about it.
And it's cemetery on Cemetery on cemetery.
It's one thing to talk about catastrophe,
not a kind of thing where the fossil record ...
... gradually builds bone by bone, shell by shell,
slowly through countless eons of time.
So you're saying we have ...
... these marine fossils everywhere, even in the mountains.
Yes.
Further back in the Museum, they have sections ...
... with things like mosasaurs, some large reptiles swimmers.
Mosasaurs are distributed globally ...
... and are distributed across continents.
So you are seeing those things, you're saying ...
... what has the power,
what has the ability to make the marine world ...
... and throw him on the continents of so violent and destructive way.
And the Deluge fits perfectly here.
When we were in the Grand Canyon,
Great Dissatisfaction saw ...
... and there were no fossils actually below that ...
... and suddenly we started having many.
What does that tell you as paleontologists?
Well, the Great Dissatisfaction tells me ...
... that there is some kind of massive erosion ...
... and a course change is happening across the continent.
And then when we started to get those beautiful sedimentary rocks ...
... they have all the wonderful fossils in them,
patterns begin to emerge.
The ecosystem has the first animals on it ...
... it comes very suddenly.
In conventional Paleontology,
they call the Cambrian expl*si*n.
It is the first appearance of a wide variety ...
... different marine animals.
Suddenly you have this complex and complete ecosystem ...
... that basically comes out of nowhere.
This makes perfect sense ...
... from a perspective of Creation and the Flood ...
... because the Flood is destroying ecosystems,
while in the evolutionary view, these ecosystems have to ...
... a little more gradually emerge ...
... as organizations evolve and diversify ...
... and they meet each other in their environment.
But that's not what you see.
Instead you see an expl*si*n of life that is complex, full,
the ecosystem is integrated with each other.
You can see where all the different bodies fit each other.
And that's only the first time that happens.
Each time you gain a level in the geologic column,
in the fossil record, you start to see screenshots ...
... more and more ecosystems.
You have an ecosystem is destroyed and then have another.
Has slightly different creatures, there are interactions.
And as the floodwaters rise and rise ...
... They are coming closer and closer to the coast ...
... destroying more and more organisms in the coastline ...
... and eventually on Earth.
I think I see what you're saying ...
And is that the paradigm that all teach us,
this conventional paradigm is trying to tell us ...
... that the fossil record is an evolutionary picture of life ...
... as is being developed in the opposite way to the paradigm of Genesis ...
... he is saying no, all that life,
the complexity of life was already there ...
... and we are now seeing the cemetery of all that life.
Exactly.
Well, what other data ...
... you can see that you are convinced this paradigm?
Well, very curious situation with the fossil record ...
... vertically thinking about these things ...
... are not the rigid parts of the animal, but the set of footprints.
They are the footprints.
There is a pattern we see in several different groups ...
... where the tracks are first and bodies are later.
For trilobites, amphibians, for dinosaurs,
the first time they encounter evidence in the fossil record ...
... it is of his footprints, not the rigid parts.
From the perspective of old Earth that's very strange ...
... and difficult to sustain because you have millions of years ...
... between production set of footprints and animal he made them.
But that obviously does not make much sense ...
... because if there are footprints, there are animals,
and these animals have bones and teeth, and shells on them.
Why they are not fossilized?
Instead, the pattern is telling us something different.
No time between when someone leaves a trail ...
... and when someone is buried.
But the fact that these sets of footprints are still there,
That should tell us something too, right?
First, it tells us that the deposit ...
... or the positioning of the next layer above ...
... it must have happened very, very quickly because, again, you go to a beach,
and you walk in the sand, your fingerprints are destroyed very, very fast.
But the fossil record is showing us ...
... something very different from the present.
This is death at a time.
This is death in an instant.
And we're talking about a world that was ...
... complex, comprehensive, integrated ...
... and the Flood is destroying the world sequentially ...
... and burying vertically.
So I think looking at the fossil record ...
... as a record of life is partially correct ...
... but not about the development of life.
It is about the attempt of life to survive an event ...
... that ultimately he consumed completely.
Well, that would make sense then ...
... because when God spoke ...
... to destroy the Earth with the flood,
was not only the destruction of human life,
It was the destruction of all life.
And now the world in which we live is, as you said,
radically different than it was before.
Yes.
When we look at the T-Rex, when we look at Mosasaur,
When we look at all these animals like wild carnivores,
and they really are ... I mean, they are terrifying ...
... but that's not what we were created to be.
So those sharp teeth, claws such devastating ...
... and behaviors that accompany them,
everything seems to be part of the curse, and part of that is genetic.
Part of it could also be some modifications.
But these agencies, by the time we see them,
and it is important to remember this ...
... when you come to a Museum of Natural History,
you're not seeing the world in the creation week.
You're seeing the world as it existed in the Flood,
and that was a world full of v*olence,
and it was a really terrible place to live.
I realized that the thousands of millions of creatures ...
... buried in these layers are silent testimony ...
... the overall judgment of God.
I decided I wanted to see ...
... one of those layers of fossils with my own eyes.
If dinosaurs d*ed suddenly in the Flood,
Would not it be obvious?
What we are dealing with here,
This is the Lance Formation,
is an Upper Cretaceous sedimentary deposit.
And what we have here is what is called a deposit of bones.
A bone accumulation having about one meter thick,
less than a meter,
and in this meter bones are present,
as a stratum graduate with small up bones ...
... and the larger bones in the background.
And here you can see that Erline is ...
... working with other vertebrate.
This is a cervical vertebra of a duckbill dinosaur.
This is where the spinal cord is.
When I see these bones in the quarry,
often I imagine being inside the live animal ...
... and I imagine what it would be ...
... seeing these bones for the first time.
So this is full of bones, and it's not like ...
... we have to go find where the bones are.
We just have to sit down and start digging.
What is the main difference between sites ...
... you're digging here and, say,
general dinosaur excavation somewhere?
Well, the dinosaurs are found throughout the world,
but this particular site is unique because it probably ...
... it is one of the largest collections of bones worldwide.
And here are the remains ...
... of, I would say, between 5,000 and 10,000 animals ...
... every 20-40 feet in this t*nk.
These are large animals, and there are many of them.
Let's stop for a second.
Okay, then we have a duckbill dinosaur wandering ...
... the Earth, and suddenly dies.
Would he become a fossil?
Fossilization requires very special circumstances.
Normally we know that, for example, if a coyote dies in the desert,
your body quickly disappears.
And yet these bones are perfectly preserved.
They have never been exposed to the weather.
They are all there.
Today it would be hard to imagine how you could get this.
To some extent we could really say ...
... to find a fossil is rare.
Although we have many, many fossils ...
... in terms of things that die,
It is uncommon to become fossils.
It's not Common.
It requires special circumstances,
one of which is the rapid burial.
These animals had to be k*lled and then their bodies ...
... needed time to decompose.
So we're talking about days or weeks or months ...
... where the bones and tissues ...
... or were eaten or decomposed ...
... and then the bones were deposited instantly ...
... in this environment because they are in a graded layer ...
... down with big bones and small bones up.
And you can see this here.
Large bones are way down ...
... and when they start to dig here,
They begin to find small bones.
So those conditions require a classification process ...
... which can only take place during a catastrophic replacement.
So when we see dinosaur fossils,
instead of seeing them from the perspective ...
... that we have early dinosaurs,
then dinosaurs means, then later dinosaurs,
you watch them from the perspective ...
... that all these dinosaurs existed,
all were living, and then there was a huge catastrophe ...
... that led to an end.
Dinosaurs dinosaurs were already ...
... when they first appeared.
They look like you'd think a dinosaur looks.
And this is a conundrum for those ...
... who they believe in the evolution of dinosaurs.
But we hear a lot about transitional forms.
What is the real story here?
Scientists have been able to expose some ways ...
... they think they are transitional, and some of them are ...
... very interesting and some even challenging,
but they are the exception to the rule.
The rule is that no transitional fossils.
What we find in the fossil record ...
... and contrary to the hopes of Darwin, this is the rule ...
... it is that a way exists in the fossil record,
It remains basically unchanged ...
... and disappears from the fossil record ...
... without being changed.
That has to mean more than evolution ...
... because we never see changes in a way ...
... another way rocks as such.
So it comes from elsewhere.
It is a paradigm that has been imposed on the data ...
... rather than data provide the paradigm.
So I think it's very easy for me to be a creationist ...
... simply based on my understanding ...
... the complexity of life forms.
And when we look at the fossil record,
we can see that the complexity is there from the beginning ...
... and this makes us wonder:
Where did all this complexity?
Una cosa es tener fe.
I have faith that God was the creator,
but that is sustained by what I see around me.
Say I have faith that evolution produced this ...
... when I can not even see how it could have happened, that's blind faith.
That is a leap in the dark.
It seemed that everywhere we looked was growing evidence ...
... that fits with the historical record of Genesis.
It was not just one thing:
There were many things pointing in the same direction.
When I was with Art, he told me about some recent discoveries ...
... on the material inside the bones of dinosaurs,
so I went to a lab in Arizona to talk to a scientist ...
... he's doing some of that research.
This is a fragment Triceratops horn.
When we took him out of the earth, fragmented ...
... and then obviously we had to keep fragmenting ...
... for analysis.
In 2012, the Society of Creationist Research sponsored Mark Armitage ...
... and me to go to Hell Creek formation in Montana,
a place famous for finding dinosaur bones,
and instead we dug up ...
... a horn of nearly four feet in length eye socket of a Triceratops.
It is now shattered ...
... so we can not really put it together and show a horn,
but still you have to recognize that in pieces like this,
we found tissue cells.
Oh, that's amazing.
And potentially proteins like collagen.
It is very difficult to understand how this material could have ...
... still in a dinosaur fossil that was supposed to ...
... 65, 75, 80 million years old ...
because the tissue, cells, proteins are degraded.
They are not concrete.
They do not exist for eons of time.
Decompose and, in fact,
tend to break down very fast ...
... depending on conditions,
and certainly in Hell Creek conditions would be ...
... heated, cooled, heated, cooled.
And any biochemist can tell you ...
... this is the easiest way to destroy material.
It's hard enough to imagine that survive ...
... 4 or 5000 years
But did 60 million years? ¿70 million years?
That really becomes very difficult to present ...
... any kind of biochemical basis for how he could have survived.
Okay, then, once you find a sample like this,
what do you do next?
What we do is dip the fossil material ...
... in a solution called EDTA.
And then you'll have after dissolving the fossil ...
... it is that the tissue remains ...
... that the EDTA will not dissolve the fabric.
So we took this to ...
... what we call a dissecting microscope.
This is essentially a dissolved Triceratops horn and increased ...
... so you can see how it looks.
Just like small pieces of rock.
Well Kevin, what did you find when you were ...
... watching the shows and find some tissue?
Well, this is what we found.
This is really Triceratops tissue.
It is stretchable.
It is flexible.
There is an impression of dinosaur soft tissue.
It's really soft. It is soft.
It is stretchable. It is tissue.
So you really wonder, right?
Absolutely.
And if you see a greater increase ...
... then you can see, using scanning electron microscopy,
You can see the extreme detail of cells ...
... in this picture and this picture ...
... and in particular, look at this picture.
We not expect, nor would think even see ...
... such a large and elaborate detail.
I mean that these structures are incredibly small.
This is our bar 20 microns ...
... and look how small these structures are still intact.
It would take very little break them down.
So you expect the best of cases all that ...
... it was broken and disappeared long ago.
This must have shaken ...
... the scientific community.
What has been the response to this?
The initial response when Dr. Schweitzer ...
... he published his first work,
What was it that was very popular in 2005,
He generated much response.
So initially something of response was rejection.
Oh, it is contamination.
That's not really dinosaur.
It is bacteria, because bacteria can be ...
... a little weird sometimes.
So there were many proposals for what could be.
And to his credit, Dr. Schweitzer did more research.
They started to find protein.
Pop them some of these cells,
observe the matrix to which the cells are attached ...
... and it is protein.
Okay, so once we understand this, what happens?
That really shook everything I guess.
That becomes part of the controversy ...
... because now clearly you face ...
... how can you explain the survival of this ?,
the complete survival of this not only for long,
but not immaculate condition.
And so the controversy has been,
"How do you explain it?".
And if you read some of the literature,
there is almost desperation because they recognize ...
... what could be the implications of this.
Now some people might say that this means nothing ...
... because we know how old you are ...
... and then it just seems that somehow survived.
It's not so bad.
But how do you know how old are they?
You use these methods, assumptions dating methods.
Well, this is a dating method.
The fabric itself can not be ruled ...
... as part of a dating method.
So, why they say this when they do not have an account?
Well, it's because the paradigm takes you to your conclusions.
The paradigm is that it has to be old,
so we choose the methods that give us an old fossil.
Something that does not give us an old fossil, such as weaving,
we must reject it or explain it otherwise.
At least for me, and of course, I'm not a microbiologist,
but I think most people would say ...
... it seems reasonable to think ...
... maybe they are not so old.
This clearly violates the dating process.
Reta whole dating process.
If dinosaur fossils have been dated incorrectly
and I would say this is clear evidence that they have been,
then it is very likely that fossils of any organism ...
... han been incorrectly dated
and then the same geological eras are incorrect.
What you're saying is that if you take the notion ...
... a long period of time,
you are drawing a great foundation of the conventional paradigm.
Absolutely.
In fact, time is the critical component of evolution.
If you're going to say a simple cellular system ...
... it became a multicellular system, which then turned into fish,
and then the fish jumped to Earth ...
... and they grew legs and started breathing air,
and then that creature he grew feathers ...
... and wings and he began to fly.
So if you give us time, we realize ...
... all these massive changes in organisms,
but we need time.
Everything seemed to return to the question of time.
I remembered that Andrew said Charles Darwin ...
... he accepted the millions of years first,
and then he adjusted his theory of evolution that assumption.
But why time is such an important element for evolution?
Rob Carter is a marine biologist ...
... so he took me to dive ...
... to give a glimpse into a world that most people do not see.
His specialty is the coral ...
... and he knew a lot about the amazing creatures ...
... that inhabit the reefs around St. Thomas.
Oh man, we have sharks here.
Look how they move ...
... and it's almost as effortless glide.
I wish I could swim well.
Engineers wanted we could do boats like that.
Submarines they could move as efficiently as a shark,
but simply can not.
So from your perspective as a marine biologist,
and I know you've studied a lot about the area of genetics,
when people talk about evolution, what is it?
How do you define evolution?
The word means change over time ...
... but I believe in change over time,
but I'm not an evolutionist.
So how do we solve it?
In fact, evolution is a belief ...
... that enough changes over time,
through sufficient time,
They can lead to the common ancestor of all species on Earth.
So that's the part that rejection.
Of course species change.
I mean, look at these sharks here.
We have different species of sharks.
When God created, he put into these bodies ...
... the ability to change, adapt,
to respond dynamically to the environment.
But they are still sharks.
And when we look at the fossil record, they are still sharks.
People have heard the phrase the "missing link"
and usually they think of the link between man and monkey.
No, no missing links ...
... among almost all major groups of animals ...
... and almost every other major groups of plants and animals ...
... and bacteria through the entire fossil record,
It is indicating very strong so that these are ...
... different creatures actually.
So we do not see one type or family becoming another species?
No.
The theory of evolution requires small,
random changes can explain everything we see, but can not.
Because they can not?
Because life is so complex ...
... that small changes can not explain it.
Just like you can not have an operating system of a computer ...
... and watch it and say, oh right, this was built ...
... one digit at a time over a long period of time.
No, it required an intelligent person to sit ...
... and build it.
Well, I can guarantee you as someone who was in that world ...
... that if anyone in the area of computer science ...
... said that if we change some things random ...
... on this operating system will improve.
I mean, nobody would agree with that.
No, we will not get a shark evolve into a bird.
The number of changes and exchange rates ...
... they are not something you can make one change at a time.
This is a sea urchin.
Luce thorny.
It is pointed. You must be careful.
Will I stay stuck when you touch it?
No, it is pointed but ...
OMG! They are moving.
Yes, they are moving.
And among thorns are small tube feet,
especially in the bottom.
Look at that move.
So he walks with their spines with these little tube feet here,
and that's what you use to attach to things.
But looking carefully there is one, two, three, four, five,
six, seven, in fact there are ten radials in this animal.
In fact, the starfish is his cousin.
Is seriously? You can not be serious.
Absolutely.
Starfish is an echinoderm ...
... but note that has a pentaradial symmetry instead of 10 parts.
This starfish.
At the bottom, look, we see the thorns.
We see the tube feet.
His mouth in the middle here.
So there are similarities here?
... though outwardly they look totally different.
Very different.
You want to see something that looks very different ...
Clear.
... which it is also cousin of the starfish and sea urchins?
It's okay.
Almost it looks like a rock.
Yes, yes, I must be careful.
He is dripping above.
This is a sea cucumber.
He has thorns.
He has tube feet.
You'd never know until you study enough ...
... this is also an echinoderm.
Not very happy to be out of water ...
... so let me put it back.
So they are all related but look ...
... very, very different.
Related creation.
Not in an evolutionary sense,
but our Creator took the edge of living beings, echinoderms,
and he created this and this and this in a similar pattern.
And that's what we see throughout the realm of living things,
similarities and differences.
So what makes them different?
Well, genetically they share most of their genes,
but their developmental genes,
called Hox genes,
which establish these patterns in animals as it develops.
They develop from a single cell.
In one they establish a pentarradial symmetry.
In another set ten fold symmetry.
And in another form this long thin animal.
Control embryo development ...
... in these amazing ways.
So what you're saying when we look at this ...
... from a genetic or molecular perspective, what we find ...
... It is a really fascinating in this design.
Absolutely.
But what we heard in the conventional paradigm,
conventional history tells us that these random changes ...
... they have brought all this.
Insurance.
Back in the 18,005, when life was simple,
when they did not know what was going on inside the cell,
they did not know how complex the genetics,
You could imagine all sorts of things.
But now we know what happens in reality ...
... behind the scenes, the story is much more complicated.
You see, I like to say that the genome is four-dimensional.
We have a dimensional chain called DNA.
And if you want to continue with that,
you have to write all the letters of DNA,
all three billion letters,
and then you have to draw lines or arrows ...
...from one place to another...
... because this part off this part,
this part interferes with this one, this part increases this one.
It is a huge network of interactions in two dimensions ...
... and that's how you have a two-dimensional genome.
Let me pause for a second because it is ...
... really amazing, think about this ...
... because I think in terms of a computer program ...
... which is pretty static.
The instructions are there.
But you're talking about a program ...
... it is being reprogrammed himself.
It is modifying its own instructions.
Oh, and wait until you get to the fourth dimension,
because there is a third dimension before.
The information in this first dimension, the linear chain,
It must be organized so ...
... that when folded in three dimensions, still works.
Oh, that's amazing.
Genes that are used together ...
... next to each other in three dimensional space.
Are you saying that once this is bent,
It is almost like having a new set of instructions?
Yes, a new level of information that whoever ...
... he programmed the first level needed to understand ...
... what would happen to work on the third level.
You said there is another dimension.
Oh yes, the fourth dimension is time.
And how does that work?
The genome changes shape as time passes.
Maybe you ate something that was bad for you ...
... and your liver say, I can get rid of that toxin ...
Now chromosomes in the liver will change shape,
to expose a new protein gene, make copies of it,
and build a new protein that can ...
... remove this toxin and when no longer needed,
they change shape and bend again.
dynamic programming, the three levels change ...
... on the fourth level, time.
Rob, that goes far beyond anything we know ...
... even in our most complex software systems ...
... that almost goes beyond our imagination,
think that someone could look at that ...
... and say that everything happened by chance.
Yes, and that gives glory to God.
So is.
You can not build something like that one thing at a time.
You need to work in all its intertwined complexity ...
... in four dimensions.
It's not something you can do ...
... one letter at a time by natural selection.
I should have been there.
Yes, in the same way we talk about ...
... the atmosphere here at the coral reef.
If you do not have all these pieces ...
... the interlocking puzzle,
you do not have this ecology.
The system would fall apart if you simply remove ...
... a couple of very important factors that is there.
They have to be together or not happen.
So not only do we have this interdependence,
This mutualism, so to speak, at the genetic level,
but we do even more complex saying ...
... that same mutuality exists on a higher level as well.
Yes.
In fact, the whole world has mutualism.
It is impossible to think that all this could have happened ...
... only by a series of slow processes ...
... over thousands of millions of years.
That's exactly what I'm saying.
It is clear that the world in which we live is ...
... incredibly interdependent, from the smallest biological system ...
... to the largest ecosystem.
There are complex relationships and mutual everywhere.
I realized that the six-day creation makes more sense ...
... from an engineering perspective.
You need everything to work together while ...
... so that everything works properly.
And that's exactly as Genesis says that God created it.
Rob also said that God created animals ...
... with the ability to change and adapt to their environment.
Could it be that this ability to change ...
... you have been confused with evolution?
While Todd Wood and I were walking through the zoo,
we saw incredible beauty and amazing design ...
... wherever we looked.
I realized the great diversity among some animals ...
... like the amazing similarity of others.
As a biologist, what do you see ...
... when you look at all these creatures?
Yes, when I see this,
these lions specifically, I see cats.
And all the other cats have here at the zoo,
all have a fundamental felinity in them ...
... it is really apparent.
It is really apparent when you start playing, right?
You see them playing with some sort of ball or anything and they are ...
Just like a cat.
They look like a cat.
Scientists classify this in a family called Felidae.
And I understand that felines are ...
... representatives of a single type / family created.
So continuity, there is similarity ...
... so significant that I would say that all these animals have fallen ...
... a single pair of creatures that were in the ark ...
... and eventually generated ...
... all different kinds of cats that we have today.
So instead of a random accident,
it seems that all these species are ...
... a really elaborate design.
Oh, absolutely.
And it's not just a design like God intended ...
... and he created the lion.
It is that God created something that could make a lion.
So it's more like a multi-purpose tool or a Swiss Army Kn*fe where ...
... you have all these pieces you can get ...
... when you need it, but it's one thing.
Give me some other examples of types / families created.
Yes, then you have to grizzly and polar bear.
They are all members of the / family of bears.
You have ducks, swans and geese.
Thing with the type of dogs is really very interesting.
All this creature that looks like a wolf ...
... and we can bring in a few hundred years ...
... many different races.
Well, Todd, that's something fascinating,
think about what God was doing ...
... when He brought two of each type / family.
What do you think was going on there?
Oh yeah.
He did not have to bring every little variety in the ark.
So when you do the math ...
... and, okay, we do not know exactly how many ...
... species created in the ark ...
... but maybe a few thousand, and are small.
Most animals are quite small.
So you have plenty of room, plenty of room literally.
And all the diversity we have now ...
... It is within these two of each type / family.
Well Todd, we're looking at the zebras ...
... and all are unique and yet all these creatures,
... there is so much complexity and diversity.
How do you explain the standard story,
the conventional paradigm?
Well, they would use evolution, right?
Millions of years, random variations,
all things that are alive today, the cactus, the zebra ...
... the grass is here, everything is related.
We all come from a common ancestor who lived ...
... thousands of millions of years ago ...
... and through the process of mutation and genetic variation ...
... and natural selection, hence we get ...
... all we have today.
Natural selection ... What's that?
Does the kind of creative potential ...
... we need to get all this?
Natural selection is basically ...
... to k*ll things that are not suitable for the environment.
So if you're a finch in the Galapagos ...
... and you have a really small peak ...
... and the only food you have available are ...
... really large, hard seeds, you will die.
And that's exactly what we observe.
So we can see how they change the sizes of finch peaks ...
... throughout the generations in the Galapagos.
But they're still finches.
Birds remain.
The notion that natural selection can generate ...
... all the diversity we see, has not been demonstrated.
What we usually see with natural selection it is ...
... that natural selection makes many subtle tunings.
Here we have these oryx,
beautiful creatures and very, very pale colors.
Extension wild oryx is right in the southern end ...
... Sahara Desert.
So you can see that their coloration makes sense.
If you were one of a very dark color ...
... would be very easy for predators found him,
so they end up being of these beautiful and light colors.
And that's an example of where the selection ...
... take a change and become adaptation.
And that brings us back to the notion ...
... of that design truly exquisite in the beginning ...
Oh, I think so. Absolutely.
It has provided these creatures the ability ...
... to survive and change to their advantage.
Absolutely.
So the ability to change your color ...
... this way, to fit into an environment,
That must be integrated into the system before you start.
Now, do not get me wrong,
natural selection and random variation ...
... They can do amazing things.
The changes we see are very surprising.
But we see a type changing to another type.
All we see are the changes that happened within a created kind.
So we have a tree félidos with all cats in it.
Canids tree with all the dogs on him.
There is a tree ursids with all the bears in it.
It is the tree of equines with all horses in it.
Each individual type created has its own individual tree,
So you end up with something like an orchard or forest.
As a scientist, I think what you're saying is ...
... that the paradigm of Genesis responsive to all this data.
Ultimately I think it does because it embraces ...
... both similarity and difference.
Now, as I said, there are many questions ...
... they are still there ...
... but I'm pretty sure, because what our paradigm can explain,
I am quite sure that these answers will be found.
After we left the zebras,
we headed gorillas.
Todd wanted to talk about the question of human evolution.
Todd, we see it all the time, a new discovery, new skulls,
new skeletons that supposedly solidify around here.
What you see there?
Yeah, well, I have some here in my backpack.
Oh, a skull.
So this is a Neandertal.
A very low forehead, and we have very high foreheads.
The face, the middle of the face, is out ...
... but at the same time, well, he looks very human.
So that's the Neandertal.
Would you help me hold it?
Yes.
We have others who are very different.
This is Australopithecus africanus.
You can see that really has nothing against.
It is completely leans back.
A cranial capacity very, very, low, snout protrudes much ...
... so the face is tilted forward.
What are you doing with this?
I mean, there is much more that we could show, many more photographs,
many skulls over and saw them all together you realize that ...
... there are many differences between them.
Well, so it goes.
All kind of created we were talking,
I can show over and over again with a lot of research ...
... I can find discontinuity between humans and nonhumans.
So this falls on the human side.
This Neandertal here is one of us.
This is not it.
Is different.
But this would be just one more of those varieties among living things ...
... that God created in the beginning and that survived the flood in the ark.
So when we see the Neanderthals,
we are seeing a human,
but it is a human that as we see in dogs,
There are many varieties of dogs ...
We have many varieties of people.
So even looking at the gorilla,
we can see the obvious differences between him and us,
and one of no small importance is that he is there ...
... and we can go home when we finish.
So these differences are very big, right?
Yes absolutely.
The image of God implies the idea of being ...
... God's representatives on Earth.
Part of this is to have dominion and authority,
a spiritual quality that we ...
... and we do not share with animals like this.
It is obvious that we are different from the rest of creation ...
... because we were made in God's image.
We are the only ones who have created zoos ...
... to contemplate the beauty of God's animals.
And we are unique in record time ...
... and want to know our own history.
But where does our concept of time?
It was a beautiful night.
Danny took me away, out of town,
and I stayed up late to show ...
... something I will never forget.
Oh wow, so now you do buy a telescope.
You know, we have some purposes that were given to the stars.
In Genesis 1: 14-19, the fourth day of creation,
mentions that the stars and other bodies ...
... celestial mark time,
reign over night, to be a sign, seasons, festivals and others.
People have used the stars to mark the passage of time.
every night patterns are repeated.
They are repeated every year.
They returned in their season.
There is very regular here.
What about the design of the sun and moon?
There are a couple of things I can say about it.
On rare occasions, the moon passes between us and the sun.
It does not happen very often, and when it happens ...
... the moon barely covers the sun.
If the moon were a little smaller ...
... or a bit further, it would fail to do so.
If larger or were closer to us,
cover it completely.
So these eclipses are spectacular and unusual,
and this is the only planet that matter,
and is the only planet that happens.
And you have to think and that's the way the world works ...
... for no apparent reason ...
... or that the world is so for a purpose and design.
For me, this speaks of creation.
Okay, here on our heads,
we have the great square of Pegasus.
It is this big box.
Leaving Pegaso is a blurred spot along there.
You see?
That's the Andromeda galaxy.
It is the most distant object you can see with the naked eye.
It's a bit beyond, we think it is,
a little more than two million light years away ...
... and it contains a couple hundred thousand million stars.
Danny Okay, that brings me to a big question ...
... a big question in the minds of many people.
If we have stars that are so far away,
million light years away,
and if the Earth is as young as we ...
... then how can the starlight can be here?
Yes.
We call this the problem of travel time of light ...
... and I will try to raise it in a slightly different way.
We believe that creation has only thousands of years old,
say 6,000 or 7,000 years something.
And I just get noticed something ...
... we think it is 2 million years away.
I think those distances are reasonably accurate ...
... and creationists need to answer this question ...
... and we have offered several different solutions to it.
I will discuss with you my solution to this.
Several things catch my eye in the narrative of creation.
One, many processes were happening,
very fast processes, but still processes.
If you look at the third day of narrative,
talks about Earth sprouting plants.
He says that the earth produces these plants and the Earth produced.
I think if you had been there,
It would have looked like a film in fast motion.
Growth that would normally take decades,
taking place in a matter of minutes and hours at most.
normal growth of abnormally fast.
I think you can play on day one of creation ...
... in terms of another day.
So I turn to the story of the fourth day.
There is not much information is given ...
... but I believe God made the stars also quickly ...
... and other astronomical bodies and then to ...
... they could fulfill their role of being seen,
He quickly had to bring that light.
Just as He brought plants and matured quickly,
He had to bring light here.
I am suggesting that these objects really look ...
... as the Andromeda galaxy we saw a few minutes ago,
We are looking at the light that actually came out of that object.
So I think that rapid maturation took place.
Danny, are there any other things you see ...
... you indicate a young universe?
I think so.
For example, spiral galaxies, Andromeda Galaxy which ...
... we talked about, is a spiral galaxy.
Ours is too.
And inside galaxies should rotate faster ...
... that the outside of the galaxy.
So after a few rotations finish ...
... undoing those spiral patterns.
They must disappear after a few rotations.
Now, most astronomers think that spiral galaxies have ...
... 10 billion years old,
So why do we see spiral patterns yet?
we should not see them,
and it has long recognized this problem.
But if we see the outer planets of the solar system,
gas giants, all have rings.
And we also know that they are changing.
It's extinguish.
They have documented changes that have happened within the ring system.
You have all these gravitational pulls ...
... other orbiting satellites.
So these ring systems are quite young.
This does not prove that the solar system is young ...
... but it proves that the ring systems are young ...
... and that's interesting.
Well, you mentioned many theories ...
... on spirals and others,
And that brings us to what most people see ...
... as the great theory of cosmology and the universe, the Big Bang.
How do you see this?
Are you survive the passage of time?
I do not think so.
I think he's having a lot of problems to the point that ...
... more than twelve years ago ...
... I think it was in New Scientist Magazine that there was ...
... an open letter protesting the Big Bang theory ...
... and since then has hundreds of signatures.
And most people who signed were atheistic,
they are not even creationists.
So this idea that the Big Bang model ...
... is universally accepted is not true.
There are many people out there, acquaintances,
physical and very famous astronomers ...
... they have real problems with the Big Bang.
And I find no way you can reconcile ...
... the Big Bang to the Bible,
although many people seem to think you can do it.
I think the temptation is to try to have ...
... interpret Scripture in terms ...
... the current cosmological thinking.
Thats nothing new.
That has happened before, and has had disastrous results.
So I think when you see the history of science,
the way we have discarded theories over time,
We've had theories that were supposedly beyond any discussion ...
... and then they were discarded.
When you see that lesson in history ...
... and then you want to join Genesis,
you want to interpret Genesis in terms of the most popular paradigm,
I think you should be very careful.
I realized that Danny was refocusing our perspective.
We need to interpret the Universe ...
... in terms of Genesis, not the reverse.
And Genesis tells us that God created the sun, moon, and stars ...
... to be a magnificent clock that records the passage of time.
Even the ancient towers built to follow the stars.
But what Genesis tells us about these people ...
... and the languages they spoke?
Doug took me one of the best archaeological museums ...
... in the world to show some of the unique artifacts ...
... that they relate to Genesis.
Bible events unfold ...
... in the ancient Near East.
So all these lands are extremely important ...
... to understand how and what took place in the biblical text.
So this continues the events we have been seeing ...
... Genesis of Creation and the Flood ...
... and we are now in the dispersion of mankind ...
... arising from Noah and his family.
Exactly.
And the dispersion would have happened ...
... somewhere in the mountains northwest of Mesopotamia ...
... and what we see in the narrative of the biblical text ...
... it is that a number of people have migrated to southern Mesopotamia,
to the land of Shinar,
and they set out to urbanize, to live in cities.
And that's the famous Tower of Babel.
Absolutely.
Do we know where is this place?
There are about seven or eight Babels,
cities of Babel, in ancient Mesopotamia areas.
So I studied each of these areas ...
... and I have found only one that meets all the criteria ...
... the famous monument of the Tower of Babel and Eridu,
which is in southeastern Mesopotamia.
We signals expansion north, south,
east, west, all the way to Egypt.
And when you say evidence, does that refers to artifacts ...
... we found in archaeological excavations?
Exactly.
There is a huge amount of material culture ...
... very specific that attest to this expansion of people ...
... I'm connecting with the dispersion after Babel.
Here are the bowls bevelled edges, these two,
Riemchen brick that we see up there ...
... and those two jars with nozzle.
All these diagnostic forms of ceramics and material culture,
They are found throughout the Middle East.
The Bible describes an event that is not only the confusion of language ...
... but the scattering of people away from the city,
because we see the language or the written language expression ...
... appear out of nowhere and then different languages ...
... being represented by cuneiform ...
... or through hieroglyphic writings or other means.
So you do not have a universal plan that is followed in all languages.
You can see a great diversity in the form of grammar ...
... from language to language even among ancient languages.
It seems then that the event recorded in Genesis ...
... about the Tower of Babel,
It is a very, very critical for archeology event.
It is.
And all this fits perfectly with what we would ...
... as the Bible record of how languages emerged.
It really is the only way to explain this.
So the integrity of biblical history is justified definitively ...
... the expression of these languages.
Currently most of us think of a tower like the kind of thing ...
... we see in big cities with big walls and straight.
It is that what they were building?
Well, essentially it was a variation of the pyramid,
and he had four sides and several stairs to reach the top.
In Eridu we have a temple that existed in 18 different stages ...
... and at each stage it grew in size and complexity.
And that final temple, the last phase of the temple,
It was abandoned immediately right at the time ...
... Late in the expansion of Uruk.
Corner against the temple was a completely huge platform.
Do you think these could have been the foundation ...
... of the Tower of Babel?
Absolutely.
And I would suggest that this late Uruk expansion ...
... which began this technology was something ...
... that spread to people.
We find ways of these ziggurats around the world.
We find them in China.
We find them in India.
We are found in various parts of America.
We find them everywhere.
Well, obviously here we have evidence of civilization ...
... and people began to join in communities, including cities.
Do we have more evidence of that?
Yes of course.
We can anticipate the time of Abraham because we know ...
... that Abraham lived in Ur,
I was also south of Mesopotamia ...
... at the end of the third millennium BC.
That brings us to the end of Genesis chapter 11.
Exactly.
In fact, we can see ceramics and some cuneiform tablets ...
... all dating from the period of the Third Dynasty of Ur.
It is amazing to think about this ...
... while we're sitting here, thinking of Abraham ...
... and this represents the culture ...
... and civilization in which he lived.
It is a great link to that record in Genesis.
It is fascinating and gives you the feeling ...
... put your hands around the events happening ...
... in the biblical text.
When I looked through the history,
I realized that each of these cultures had been ...
... impacted by the events recorded in Genesis.
But what is the importance of Genesis to us today?
George Grant wanted to meet ...
... in a garden near his home.
He said it was a good reminder of where our history began.
So there is something important ...
... about the text in Genesis in which Adam and Eve ...
... were placed in a garden to look after him.
That's more than a simple story.
It is much more than a simple story.
One of the things you see in Genesis chapter 1 is ...
... the structure for time.
The universe was created for a 24-hour day.
So everything from our sleep cycles ...
... and how our work cycle work, all come from ...
... the definitive historical record.
When we come to Genesis chapter 2,
we begin to see the meaning and purpose of man.
Of course, in Genesis 3 we see corruption chapter all by the fall.
And the implications of a historical fall,
a real man and a real woman,
really they fell in real sin had ...
... implications for the rest of the Bible.
If you remove the literal Adam and Eve,
That changes the whole shape of what the story is ...
... and how history is remembered.
Is that because when we get ...
... Adam and Eve from the historical record,
then we can basically invent ...
... what we think about man, marriage,
and even sexuality?
Completely.
The apóstol Pablo understood the events ...
... of the first chapters of Genesis as training,
not only for our understanding of history,
but also the relations between men and women and their children,
the character and nature of marriage,
right and wrong in moral relations, including sexuality.
All this assumes of those early chapters in Genesis,
often quoting passages word for word.
It seems that even Pedro takes that event the Flood ...
... such as a historic event ...
... and putting it in the context of which ...
... it is pointing to a coming judgment.
So even the trial is a part of understanding ...
... the historical record.
You can cut out parts of the story ...
... and lose sight of the meaning of it all.
I think most Christians, when we talk about ...
... for example, the life of Christ,
these are understood as historical records.
Why, when we look at the record in Genesis,
we have a tendency not to want to do that?
We tend to do so because ...
... he constantly exhorts us not see it that way.
Why culture around us?
The culture around us, by theologians,
modern theologians who are trying in some way,
in their minds, fit the truths of Scripture ...
... with the supposed discoveries of science,
so if you know anything about the history of science ...
... you know it's incredibly unreliable way.
So we are constantly being bombarded with this message ...
... that we need to adjust our view.
But I think there are many Christians who have a ...
... idea that the historicity of Genesis does not ...
... it's so important for Christianity.
I think with that we have been ripped off.
Somehow when you put those chapters ...
... in a completely different and not historical category,
What are you doing the rest of the Bible ...
... it assumes that the Bible is true,
the Bible treats it as historical truth,
the Bible refers to all characters who were there?
Does that then negates the whole Bible?
Well, yes, and that was exactly the strategy ...
... High criticism in the 18th and 19th century.
They knew that if somehow you could att*ck ...
... the first three or first eleven chapters of Genesis ...
... you're done with everything.
Well, George, all this brings us back ...
... the notion that history is recorded in Genesis ...
... or any real story is really critical for us ...
... in terms of understanding what is happening around us.
Yes.
In fact, it reminds us how important it is history ...
... to anchor all other human disciplines.
It is the story that helps us to inform science for science ...
... you can start your journey of discovery in the world.
So what the story is to tell us what happened.
And then what science tries to do is ...
... ask the question, how did it happen? ...
And then begins to explore how, mechanics,
the structures that were present at these events.
If you try to reverse that, if you try to make science ...
... tell what really happened, then you end up ...
... with a worldview that is constantly changing ...
... where nothing is certain,
and moral relativism will inevitably be the consequence.
And God has given us that foundation.
He has given us that foundation in the historical record.
He has given us in the historical record that comes ...
... to Genesis chapter 1 in the garden.
Ultimately, I guess we always go back to our home.
And for me my home is Colorado.
I always think more clearly ...
... when I'm out on the beauty of God's creation.
I have been to many places and seen many things,
but considering everything together,
it is clear that nothing in the world makes sense ...
... except in the light of Genesis.
I love being in the mountains,
especially in mountains how are you.
They help us to have a good perspective,
They help us realize that we are ...
... small, finite, and vulnerable.
They make us humble.
And we need to be humble because we have a tendency ...
... to base our ideas on our small set of experiences.
That is why the wisdom of the ages tells us ...
... again and again we know the story.
Everything we've done up to this point has looked ...
... the evidence shows us that the Word of God,
the history that has been exposed to us in Genesis is true.
God created the world in six days.
Adam and Eve really existed.
There was actually a fall.
It really was a flood that destroyed the world and produced all this.
It is glorious, but represents God's judgment.
Everything supports what God has told us.
Genesis is history. True History.
Is Genesis History? (2017)
Moderator: Maskath3
Watch Easter Watch Spiritual Shop Spiritual Shop Easter
Easter, Religious/Spiritual Movie Collection.
Easter, Religious/Spiritual Movie Collection.