In the second part of chapter one: https://youtu.be/t29XAqff1ak the narrator of the programme, Aubrey Manning, lets the local geologist at Barbican Mountainland speak of the geological formations he found there. That the whole region is made up of slabs one atop the other.
I couldn't understand his description of "serpents" "putrified" but it obviously fit in with what the narrator wanted him to say: "Originally they would have been horizontal, they represent an history of rivers, a loooong history of deposition."
So there is the proof; the word loooong. Any fossils are missing apparently. If that is what apparent means. The narrator states that to 19th century scientists a world made up of layers didn't look as if it had been created all in one go as the bible says. (3:30)
Excuse me but it doesn't say it was all created in one go and the presentation does not look like layers of sedimentation. Have a look at the waves presented in 3:46. (You can call them fold if you like.) It must have been built up over time. I can't quarrel with that. Just remove the words built up and time. (Unless you have proof of course. A wide margin is the usual requirement if it is all subjective. A wwiiidde margin.)
What it actually looks like is an hydraulic process that doesn't look much like anything we are familiar with. "How much time?" (4:00) Piquant that the producers edited the video to include surf at this point. So much for time. In fact
what is time to anyone who believes in a miracle like the Big Bang?
I would never accept the term scientist but I am slightly sentient (to some things.) How long does it take for something to happen instantly, as in a rather large bang, not necessarily The Big Bang but something of a whopper?
How long for example would the process of mountain raising take?
Suppose a process in which the earth stood still long enough to make the moon shudder. What would happen to a large mass of semi-liquid quartz solution in water. Can you have a semi-liquid solution?
Is it possible it might wave goodbye to the "springs of the deeps"? Mr Manning doesn't mention this part of the bible: "on that day all the springs of the great deep burst forth". Maybe he was unfamiliar with it. Are you?
Genesis chapter 7 gives an account of a flood, a rather silly thing to put in a potted history of the world if it wasn't true, especially if the people you wanted to convince were somewhat contrary. The whole history of Moses, once he left the safety of Pharaoh's palaces, was one of contention after contention with the very people he had freed from slavery.
Maybe he thought he had a right to expect them to believe anything that he said. Look how people like Che Guevara have been able to convince their followers. Maybe the key was to keep it simple. A succinct jingle is far more persuasive than a tome of scientific mumbo jumbo. Look how many people know the phrase: “I would rather die standing up than live life on my knees” for example.
It works, except it isn't a choice most make.
Perhaps people will do and believe anything they want to, in any period of history?
So I don't think I am going to bother trying to get anyone to believe they were not born in soup, if that is what they want to think. Attempting to pour reason down someone's throat is a recipe for disaster.
