Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total)
1 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,913 Year: 4,170/9,624 Month: 1,041/974 Week: 368/286 Day: 11/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   What is your best arguments against a world wide flood.
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17828
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.5


Message 9 of 47 (36671)
04-10-2003 10:02 AM
Reply to: Message 8 by Convince-me
04-10-2003 9:33 AM


The rock strata of the canyon were deposited in varying conditions over hundreds of millions of years. The river is responsible for eroding the canyon, not supplying the sediment.
Perhaps it would be better to ask the YECs how all this rock got there with so little time ? And then how it was eroded ? I've yet to see an answer that stood up to proper examination - taking into account the different types of rock, the fossils and the erosion between strata.
There are no polystrate fossils in the sense used by YECs.
Massive fossil graves can be explained by local catastrophes. Many fossils are the result of quick burial - geology doesn't insist on a constant rate of deposition at all.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 8 by Convince-me, posted 04-10-2003 9:33 AM Convince-me has not replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17828
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.5


Message 23 of 47 (37646)
04-23-2003 4:19 AM
Reply to: Message 22 by Mister Pamboli
04-23-2003 2:46 AM


Re: Sanhorn
The only references Google could find were on creationist sites, citing a geological paper from 1829. Sanhorn is not mentioned elsewhere - or in my atlas. I would expect it to be in Norway although there is no way to be sure.
Given that there is a nountain there it is obvious that there has been uplift, and the date of the paper clearly means that that possiiblity was not considered at the time. Given the obscurity of the source and location it is unlikely that there has been any serious check.
Here is one source mentioning a fossil whale found in Norway :
"At Smestad in Brum (near Oslo, Norway), a 20 metres long, almost complete skeleton of a baleen whale was found in 1978, in compact blue clay. The whalemust have stranded in a shallow bay, which seabottom sediments today lie 106 metres above sea level. This is due to the rising of the land (isostasy) after the last Ice Age. The whale died about 8500-9000 years ago."
[Added by Edit] At this point it seems to me that the most likely explanation is that the whale fossil was found much lower on the mountain and that it was raised to that point by isostatic rebound. Rebounds of over 200m are apparent from the geology.
Until proper documentation of the find is available I will stick with this explanation.
[This message has been edited by PaulK, 04-23-2003]

This message is a reply to:
 Message 22 by Mister Pamboli, posted 04-23-2003 2:46 AM Mister Pamboli has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 24 by Mister Pamboli, posted 04-23-2003 11:31 AM PaulK has not replied
 Message 25 by Coragyps, posted 04-23-2003 12:30 PM PaulK has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024