Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Seashells on tops of mountains.
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1405 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


(2)
Message 301 of 343 (637295)
10-14-2011 3:16 PM
Reply to: Message 300 by RAZD
10-14-2011 2:51 PM


Summary
Seashells cannot be evidence of a global flood, because:
  • The seashell fossils found, range in age from 1 to 30 years old.
  • The seashells are found in multiple layers.
  • Each layer shows mature marine growth of entire ecosystems.
  • Later layers grow on the debris of previous layers.
  • Layers of seashells extend deep inside mountains.
  • The combined age of the layers extends into decades if not millenia.
  • The purported duration of the biblical flood (~100 days) is too brief for any marine growth to occur, other than what one would see on a ship (some weed and slime).
  • The type of growth on ships in a 100 day period is not the type of growth seen in the fossil seashells layers.
Enjoy.

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 300 by RAZD, posted 10-14-2011 2:51 PM RAZD has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 302 by pandion, posted 10-15-2011 1:47 AM RAZD has replied
 Message 306 by Robert Byers, posted 10-19-2011 4:57 AM RAZD has replied

  
pandion
Member (Idle past 3001 days)
Posts: 166
From: Houston
Joined: 04-06-2009


Message 302 of 343 (637343)
10-15-2011 1:47 AM
Reply to: Message 301 by RAZD
10-14-2011 3:16 PM


Re: Summary
Zen Deist writes:
Seashells cannot be evidence of a global flood, because:
The seashell fossils found, range in age from 1 to 30 years old.
I presume that you mean millions of years old. But as I understand it, the Himalayan seashell fossils are older than 65 million years. They are all extinct species.
The seashells are found in multiple layers.
True.
Each layer shows mature marine growth of entire ecosystems.
True. But creationists don't understand that mature ecosystems develop over millennia.
Later layers grow on the debris of previous layers.
True without question.
Layers of seashells extend deep inside mountains.
True. Not "on top of mountains", but deep inside the mountains - in several layers that indicate several succeeding ecosystems.
The combined age of the layers extends into decades if not millenia.
You got me here. The age of the layers date from about 50 million years to about 200 million years.
The purported duration of the biblical flood (~100 days) is too brief for any marine growth to occur, other than what one would see on a ship (some weed and slime).
Actually, the biblical flood lasted for a bit over a year. But still, your point is well taken, except that you fail to mention barnacles.
The type of growth on ships in a 100 day period is not the type of growth seen in the fossil seashells layers.
OK. But I miss your point.
Enjoy.
Thanks. I did.
Edited by pandion, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 301 by RAZD, posted 10-14-2011 3:16 PM RAZD has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 303 by Percy, posted 10-15-2011 8:36 AM pandion has not replied
 Message 336 by RAZD, posted 11-09-2011 8:32 AM pandion has not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22392
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.3


(1)
Message 303 of 343 (637376)
10-15-2011 8:36 AM
Reply to: Message 302 by pandion
10-15-2011 1:47 AM


Re: Summary
pandion writes:
  • The combined age of the layers extends into decades if not millenia.
  • You got me here. The age of the layers date from about 50 million years to about 200 million years.
    I think I understand what Zen Deist is getting at. He's referring to layers of continuous deposition. Layers representing continuous periods of deposition for decades or even millennia could not have formed in a single flood year.
    --Percy

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 302 by pandion, posted 10-15-2011 1:47 AM pandion has not replied

      
    Robert Byers
    Member (Idle past 4369 days)
    Posts: 640
    From: Toronto,canada
    Joined: 02-06-2004


    Message 304 of 343 (638002)
    10-19-2011 4:46 AM
    Reply to: Message 291 by Admin
    10-14-2011 8:15 AM


    Re: Himalayas as volcanos
    I always say the evidence is in the fauna fossil record. In short the reason they push for a k-t line is the reason i use. except i say its the flood line.
    The same great events separating fossil assemblages above the k-t line is the measuring stick I use.
    This is the evidence in the field.
    Then I add interpretation of the data.
    Yet its not accurate to say I'm not providing evidence.
    Its the same field evidence for everyone.

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 291 by Admin, posted 10-14-2011 8:15 AM Admin has seen this message but not replied

      
    Robert Byers
    Member (Idle past 4369 days)
    Posts: 640
    From: Toronto,canada
    Joined: 02-06-2004


    Message 305 of 343 (638003)
    10-19-2011 4:54 AM
    Reply to: Message 300 by RAZD
    10-14-2011 2:51 PM


    Re: Just asking
    Too many questions.
    Its fine about when the mountains were made.
    Yes those below the k-t line were from the flood year. those above from later events. I understood many are from above the k-t line.
    Marine deposits, like shells, would only be found below the k-t line.
    So if they are not there its because the mts came later or that area did not receive marine deposits during the flood.
    Simple concept.
    nothing I say has to do with bible verses except biblical boundaries.

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 300 by RAZD, posted 10-14-2011 2:51 PM RAZD has replied

    Replies to this message:
     Message 308 by Dr Adequate, posted 10-19-2011 5:17 AM Robert Byers has not replied
     Message 337 by RAZD, posted 11-09-2011 8:49 AM Robert Byers has not replied

      
    Robert Byers
    Member (Idle past 4369 days)
    Posts: 640
    From: Toronto,canada
    Joined: 02-06-2004


    Message 306 of 343 (638004)
    10-19-2011 4:57 AM
    Reply to: Message 301 by RAZD
    10-14-2011 3:16 PM


    Re: Summary
    Nope.
    Seashell ages are irrelevant to the flood or just wrongly dated.
    Segregated flows would deposit shells etc in segregated layers like everything else.
    It could only be that way.

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 301 by RAZD, posted 10-14-2011 3:16 PM RAZD has replied

    Replies to this message:
     Message 307 by Dr Adequate, posted 10-19-2011 5:10 AM Robert Byers has replied
     Message 338 by RAZD, posted 11-09-2011 9:08 AM Robert Byers has not replied

      
    Dr Adequate
    Member (Idle past 285 days)
    Posts: 16113
    Joined: 07-20-2006


    Message 307 of 343 (638005)
    10-19-2011 5:10 AM
    Reply to: Message 306 by Robert Byers
    10-19-2011 4:57 AM


    Re: Summary
    What is a segregated flow? Can you give us an example of a segregated flow sorting shells according to species? Can you give us an example of a segregated flow or anything else transporting shells around in such a way as to leave the arrangement of the shells looking just the same as beds of undisturbed shells?

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 306 by Robert Byers, posted 10-19-2011 4:57 AM Robert Byers has replied

    Replies to this message:
     Message 309 by Robert Byers, posted 10-21-2011 3:29 AM Dr Adequate has replied

      
    Dr Adequate
    Member (Idle past 285 days)
    Posts: 16113
    Joined: 07-20-2006


    Message 308 of 343 (638007)
    10-19-2011 5:17 AM
    Reply to: Message 305 by Robert Byers
    10-19-2011 4:54 AM


    Re: Just asking
    Marine deposits, like shells, would only be found below the k-t line.
    But there are in fact Tertiary marine sedimentary rocks, as you could have found out by googling on tertiary marine sedimentary rocks.

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 305 by Robert Byers, posted 10-19-2011 4:54 AM Robert Byers has not replied

      
    Robert Byers
    Member (Idle past 4369 days)
    Posts: 640
    From: Toronto,canada
    Joined: 02-06-2004


    Message 309 of 343 (638262)
    10-21-2011 3:29 AM
    Reply to: Message 307 by Dr Adequate
    10-19-2011 5:10 AM


    Re: Summary
    Such a chaos of powerfully moving water could only do such actions of being segregated and desposting material in segregated flows.

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 307 by Dr Adequate, posted 10-19-2011 5:10 AM Dr Adequate has replied

    Replies to this message:
     Message 310 by Nuggin, posted 10-21-2011 3:37 AM Robert Byers has replied
     Message 311 by Coragyps, posted 10-21-2011 8:30 AM Robert Byers has not replied
     Message 312 by Admin, posted 10-21-2011 8:54 AM Robert Byers has replied
     Message 313 by Dr Adequate, posted 10-21-2011 10:29 PM Robert Byers has not replied

      
    Nuggin
    Member (Idle past 2493 days)
    Posts: 2965
    From: Los Angeles, CA USA
    Joined: 08-09-2005


    (2)
    Message 310 of 343 (638263)
    10-21-2011 3:37 AM
    Reply to: Message 309 by Robert Byers
    10-21-2011 3:29 AM


    Re: Summary
    Such a chaos of powerfully moving water could only do such actions of being segregated and desposting material in segregated flows.
    When water sorts objects, it does so by size and shape.
    You can test this yourself.
    If "the Flood" were really happening, we'd expect to find the same thing in the fossil record. We'd see all the large animals together - T-rex, elephants, giraffes, wooly mammoths, giant sloths, all in big heaps.
    And we'd expect to see chickens, dogs, rabbits, microraptors, etc all in other heaps.
    That never happens.
    What we find are elephants and jackels and mice together in fossil beds.
    That only makes since of those animals were living in a different time and place from the T-rex.
    Further, we never find the elephants and the mice in the same level as the T-rex and the microraptors.
    Also we never find them in a lower level.
    If the Flood were the explanation, then it would have to be that ALL dinosaurs were bad swimmers and drown, while ALL mammals were good swimmers. And THEN, we'd have to say that sabertooth tigers were worse swimmers than giraffes, etc.
    Of course, this doesn't make sense when we consider the fact that there are layers of marine fossils.
    Also, when we consider the fact that marine fossils from the dinosaur era or earlier are never found in the same level as marine fossils containing whales or seals, etc.
    So, now we have to say what? That aquatic dinosaurs were worse swimmers than camels?
    No, the physical evidence does not support a "great flood" which is fine because it's a MYTH.
    It was never meant to be taken seriously. It's a bedtime story.

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 309 by Robert Byers, posted 10-21-2011 3:29 AM Robert Byers has replied

    Replies to this message:
     Message 330 by Robert Byers, posted 10-27-2011 4:47 AM Nuggin has replied

      
    Coragyps
    Member (Idle past 735 days)
    Posts: 5553
    From: Snyder, Texas, USA
    Joined: 11-12-2002


    Message 311 of 343 (638275)
    10-21-2011 8:30 AM
    Reply to: Message 309 by Robert Byers
    10-21-2011 3:29 AM


    Re: Summary
    Such a chaos of powerfully moving water could only do such actions of being segregated and desposting material in segregated flows.
    QFT. This is probably true, but only in languages where "chaos" means "order." English is not one of those, Robert.

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 309 by Robert Byers, posted 10-21-2011 3:29 AM Robert Byers has not replied

      
    Admin
    Director
    Posts: 12998
    From: EvC Forum
    Joined: 06-14-2002
    Member Rating: 2.3


    (2)
    Message 312 of 343 (638279)
    10-21-2011 8:54 AM
    Reply to: Message 309 by Robert Byers
    10-21-2011 3:29 AM


    Moderator Request
    Hi Robert,
    I'm going to request that you cease participation in this thread until such time as you begin supporting your assertions with evidence. You need evidence for the following:
    • That the k-t line is from a geologically recent flood.
    • That the age of things like seashells isn't relevant to the dating of events, or is dated incorrectly (this also seems to be a contradiction - if the age of seashells isn't relevant, then why would it matter whether or not they're dated correctly).
    • That chaos segregates things into the order found in the geologic column above the k-t layer.
    In the past your responses to my requests for evidence indicated that you do not understand what it means to connect evidence to ideas, and I have been reluctant to carry out any enforcement action when you didn't understand what was being asked of you. But this has happened too many times. It is long past the time when you should have been able to figure out how to support your ideas with evidence. If you post again without evidence I will remove your posting privileges in this forum.
    Edited by Admin, : Typo.

    --Percy
    EvC Forum Director

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 309 by Robert Byers, posted 10-21-2011 3:29 AM Robert Byers has replied

    Replies to this message:
     Message 331 by Robert Byers, posted 10-27-2011 4:53 AM Admin has replied

      
    Dr Adequate
    Member (Idle past 285 days)
    Posts: 16113
    Joined: 07-20-2006


    Message 313 of 343 (638394)
    10-21-2011 10:29 PM
    Reply to: Message 309 by Robert Byers
    10-21-2011 3:29 AM


    Re: Summary
    Such a chaos of powerfully moving water could only do such actions of being segregated and desposting material in segregated flows.
    Do you know what the word "example" means?

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 309 by Robert Byers, posted 10-21-2011 3:29 AM Robert Byers has not replied

      
    Possessor
    Junior Member (Idle past 4523 days)
    Posts: 19
    Joined: 10-24-2011


    Message 314 of 343 (638667)
    10-24-2011 5:52 PM
    Reply to: Message 1 by iceage
    10-01-2007 2:17 AM


    It is true that they got there because of the flood.Now this happend because the water had to rise above the highest point on earth so there was no escape from death.So the shells rise with the water because certain organisims can only live so deep in the water,and then when the water goes down they are left stranded on the mountain.

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 1 by iceage, posted 10-01-2007 2:17 AM iceage has not replied

    Replies to this message:
     Message 315 by crashfrog, posted 10-24-2011 7:02 PM Possessor has replied
     Message 316 by Panda, posted 10-24-2011 7:03 PM Possessor has seen this message but not replied
     Message 319 by Dr Adequate, posted 10-24-2011 9:46 PM Possessor has seen this message but not replied

      
    crashfrog
    Member (Idle past 1467 days)
    Posts: 19762
    From: Silver Spring, MD
    Joined: 03-20-2003


    Message 315 of 343 (638674)
    10-24-2011 7:02 PM
    Reply to: Message 314 by Possessor
    10-24-2011 5:52 PM


    I feel like there's a problem with your explanation, and it's this: where did the water go? If there's enough water on Earth to cover all mountains, then there's no way to move it around such that it doesn't keep covering all mountains.

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 314 by Possessor, posted 10-24-2011 5:52 PM Possessor has replied

    Replies to this message:
     Message 320 by Possessor, posted 10-25-2011 12:33 PM crashfrog has not replied
     Message 326 by Bailey, posted 10-26-2011 8:05 AM crashfrog 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