As a YEC, I do not know where to put the ice-age....is it possible to have an ice-age...but not a world-wide ice-age?
I'm voting "yes" for localized ice-ages. If enough people vote "yes"....then, that's how it happened, right?
What is the proof that we ever had an ice-age, anyway? I'm trying to figure this out because it keeps bothering me.
30 comments
Proof? I live on Cape Cod, which is basically a gigantic pile of barely-consolidated rubble, much of which doesn't match the local rocks. Glacial movement is pretty much the beginning and the end of the explanation of how it got here.
You can vote the guidelines and directives from a football club, you can vote who the next chairman of a comittee will be, and so on. But science is not democracy, either there is evidence or THERE ISN´T.
Vote... for an ice-age...?
>>If enough people vote "yes"....then, that's how it happened, right?<<
No.
>>What is the proof that we ever had an ice-age, anyway?<<
The rocks under my parents' house, and across large parts of Europe, central Asia/Siberia, and North America.
The cores deep into the ice sheets in Greenland and Antarctica.
Sediment on the ocean floor, all the way around the world.
Yes, there was more ice in the north temperate zone then anywhere else when the planet was cooler. But the entire place was cooler.
The ice-age were never world-wide, stupid.
You can't vote on history, stupid. It already happen, that's a fact.
One proof of the ice age is that the south of Sweden is very, VERY flat and all the "surplus" is collected in the "Hallandsås", the Horst between the counties of Skåne and Halland. It was created some 80 million years ago.
Just one more ignorant cry justifying a meritocratic system of qualifying voters. Democracy is a power these idiots cannot be trusted to wield, in their uneducated state; Informed governance only works when the participants choose to be properly informed.
Fox hardly counts as "information"; Mandate a full grade-school education followed up by a minimum of two years secular post-secondary tutelage to enable voting power, and we're getting somewhere. Oh, and naturally? Discount time spent in a faith-based institution. Doctrinal nonsense doesn't count for doodly-squat towards comprehension of the scientific method, basic physics, world history...
I guess it's possible to have an ice-age but not a world-wide ice age in that not all areas of the world are going to be affected the same way by an ice age. The earth's climate is complex. If an ice age is the expansion of ice sheets and an overall drop in global temperatures, that doesn't mean that everywhere on earth got colder all of a sudden at the exact same time and there were no heat waves anywhere on the planet during that entire time. After all, the people who say things like "Hey, it's snowing outside, so global warming can't be real!" are clearly ridiculous. Similarly, when we are talking about an ice-age, we're talking about an overall cooling trend, that doesn't mean it was completely constant or that it happened everywhere at once or affected everything the exact same way.
Also, if you wonder what "proof" (although I think the word you should be using here is "evidence") we have for ice ages, I think you really ought to start by Googling the subject. Look at Wikipedia or something. Wikipedia may not be the world's most reliable source of information, but it's quite often a good started place, as it provides sources for you to do further research and often can at least give you the general feel for a topic you don't know anything about.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ice_age
It also might interest you that Louis Agassiz was one of the first to put forward the idea that the earth had undergone an ice age. And he did so in 1837. So we've kind of had evidence for ice ages for nearly two centuries now. The idea existed before Darwin proposed the theory of evolution by natural selection, and just like evolution, in the intervening years we've only managed to gather more evidence in favor of ice ages. (It also might interest you to know that Agassiz was a creationist of a sort himself -- he was alive when Darwin published On the Origin of Species , but he never accepted the idea of evolution. However, he was a geologist, and could have told you even better than I could how this Young Earth stuff is utter nonsense.)
You believe in a world-wide flood, which have no evidence for it whatsoever, but have a problem with the ice-age, of which there is lots and lots of evidence?
The ice-age was never world-wide, btw.
In what fantasy fairy tale do you live? You can't vote on what's already happened.
People cleverer than you (not that hard to be, apparently) have alreay figured out the ice-age.
[If enough people vote "yes"....then, that's how it happened, right?]
BwahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahNO!
If enough people vote that Elvis Presley is still alive, then he is still alive, right?
No. The truth most certainly does not work that way. Idiot.
Poe? Please? I would like to keep a little faith in humanity, if that's possible...
Reality does not fit with your mythology, and you choose to adhere to the myth? Nice one, fishy.
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.
