Summations Only

Why did you kill them? Where did you bury them?

I'll be your friend.The earth really is young.
When you are judged you will be greatly rewarded for shouting down science.Feel better now?

Hezekiah's Siloam tunnel to the rescue.

Tic toc, tic toc, there, that should do it. What were we discussing again?

And this is where Noah got the pitch for the ark? Oops. Is it a crack like a butt crack? That would explain all the shite.

Now that we've covered the grand Canyon in detail can we have a repetition of this thread for each of these other canyons as well? *ducks*12 Most Beautiful Canyons of the World (with Map) - Touropia
Database Error
greatest canyons of the world Archives - DoYouKnowTurkey
http://www.travels.tl/the-deepest-canyons-in-the-world/
The largest Canyon in the world - Design SwanAnd I'm particularly interested in this canyon:(JonF posted this in the biology area but it needs to be in this thread. I saw this before but lost the reference, so I'm glad to have it back. I'm including just the snippets that made the strongest impressions in hopes the post is short enough not to lose Faith.)

quote:

---

...as a young Christian, when I was presented with the view that Christians must believe in a young-earth and global flood, I went along willingly. I knew there were problems but I thought I was going to solve them.

---

quote:

---

I finally found work as a geophysicist working for a seismic company. Within a year, I was processing seismic data for Atlantic Richfield.

​

This was where I first became exposed to the problems geology presented to the idea of a global flood.
...
One also finds erosional canyons buried in the earth. These canyons would require time to excavate, just like the time it takes to erode the Grand Canyon.

---

quote:

---

Nothing that young-earth creationists had taught me about geology turned out to be true. I took a poll of my ICR graduate friends who have worked in the oil industry. I asked them one question.

​

"From your oil industry experience, did any fact that you were taught at ICR, which challenged current geological thinking, turn out in the long run to be true? ,"

​

That is a very simple question. One man, Steve Robertson, who worked for Shell grew real silent on the phone, sighed and softly said 'No!'

---

Old Earth Creation Science Testimony - Why I Left Young Earth Creationism, by Glenn Morton

Did you read the referenced article? Apparently not. Believe it or not I can understand this reticence on your part having gone through the experience myself.

quote:

---

I would see buried mountains which had experienced thousands of feet of erosion, which required time.

---

The flood carved underground canyons? And it built underground mountains too??(I'll get to your other posts later.)

Why would you think that I attributed the quote about underground mountains to you when it is an argument against your model?
"The problem with the image of the canyon" is that it falsifies your model altogether regardless of where it is located, it's size, depth, or anything else.
And it's canyons and mountains, plural not singular. Of course it is. Falsifications: off topic. But here are the ten (off topic) sentences for the non-delusional lurkers:

quote:

---

This was where I first became exposed to the problems geology presented to the idea of a global flood. I would see extremely thick (30,000 feet) sedimentary layers. One could follow these beds from the surface down to those depths where they were covered by vast thicknesses of sediment. I would see buried mountains which had experienced thousands of feet of erosion, which required time. Yet the sediments in those mountains had to have been deposited by the flood, if it was true. I would see faults that were active early but not late and faults that were active late but not early. I would see karsts and sinkholes (limestone erosion) which occurred during the middle of the sedimentary column (supposedly during the middle of the flood) yet the flood waters would have been saturated in limestone and incapable of dissolving lime. It became clear that more time was needed than the global flood would allow. One also finds erosional canyons buried in the earth. These canyons would require time to excavate, just like the time it takes to erode the Grand Canyon.

---

Old Earth Creation Science Testimony - Why I Left Young Earth Creationism, by Glenn Morton

Ok, it's quoted from Morton. The reference to your other posts was about the salt post. Like Morton? Who was a YEC?? Of evidence.
As opposed to Faith's interpretation.
Of scripture. As opposed to *creationist researchers* who bring absolutely nothing to the table, who provide no evidence of anything, who whine and demand to be spoon fed basic physics and chemistry so that they too can properly interpret evidence that is simple and very straight forward? Who is this we? Is it wee little you that is too lazy to look up references and investigate anything on her own? Poof, an earth, poof stars and sun, poof Adam complete with memories to walk and talk and get into trouble with Eve. Clearly you see NOTHING that requires time.
We DO see through this. More problems with cracks? You have attributed all tectonic activity to one small window of time.A couple of streets in the town of Pushover, North Dakota. I would continue this discussion but I've spied a homeless person rambling on incoherently into the air. Bye.

In looking over the flat earth society forum I saw interesting parallels to YECism. This site is not a joke. We are actively promoting the Flat Earth Movement worldwide. The evidence for a flat earth is derived from many different facets of science and philosophy. The simplest is by relying on ones own senses to discern the true nature of the world around us. The world looks flat, the bottoms of clouds are flat, the movement of the sun; these are all examples of your senses telling you that we do not live on a spherical heliocentric world. This is using what's called an empiricist approach, or an approach that relies on information from your senses. Perhaps the best example of flat earth proof is the Bedford Level Experiment. In short, this was an experiment preformed many times on a six-mile stretch of water that proved the surface of the water to be flat. It did not conform to the curvature of the earth that round earth proponents teach. In light of the above, please note that we are not suggesting that space agencies are aware that the earth is flat and actively covering the fact up. They depict the earth as being round simply because that is what they expect it to be. There are many pictures on the internet and in other media depicting the earth as being round. Why do these not disprove flat earth theory?In general, we at the Flat Earth Society do not lend much credibility to photographic evidence. It is too easily manipulated and altered. Many of the videos posted here to "prove a round earth" by showing curvature will show no curvature or even convex curvature at parts. The sources are so inaccurate it's difficult to build an argument on them in either case. Furthermore, barrel distortion and other quirks of modern cameras will cause a picture to distort with little or no apparent altercation; especially without references within the picture. Photographs are also prone to distortion when taken through the bent glass of a pressurized cabin as well as atmospheric conditions on the outside. With this litany of problems, it's easy to see why photographic evidence is not to be trusted. How do you explain day and night cycles?Day and night cycles are easily explained on a flat earth. The sun moves in circles around the North Pole. When it is over your head, it's day. When it's not, it's night. The sun acts like a spotlight and shines downward as it moves. Why doesn't gravity pull the earth into a spherical shape?The earth isn't pulled into a sphere because the force known as gravity doesn't exist or at least exists in a greatly diminished form than is commonly taught. The earth is constantly accelerating up at a rate of 32 feet per second squared (or 9.8 meters per second squared). This constant acceleration causes what you think of as gravity.TOP 10 REASONS Why "We Know the Earth is Round" Debunked 3. The Coriolis Effect
Once again, Henry is making assumptions. There are a few differing opinions about this, as Flat Earth Theory is not a unified theory. Some people doubt the existence of Coriolis as anything more than a theorized force, as the evidence for it is largely contrived. Others have various explanations for it, such as the Shadow of the Aetheric Wind theorized by myself. 8. The Horizon
This is just a perspective effect. First of all, apparently large waves will obscure apparently small objects. Therefore, looking out long distances over water you will of course be unable to see land on the other side. In addition, refraction has an effect. Some flat Earthers theorize an electromagnetic acceleration which appears to bend light upward.

Oh good, I was trying to imagine the light source coming from the right side.

quote:

---

We should expect that all mountain ranges (being all formed during or immediately after the Flood) should show similar, near equal amounts of erosion. They don't.

---

WEBSITE.WS - Your Internet Address For Life™

quote:

---

The Loess Plateau in China has a layer of loess more than 300 m thick. Loess is wind-blown sediment that would not occur during a global flood. The Loess Plateau occurs around the downwind edges of the Ordos Desert, its source of sediments, and the grain size of the loess decreases the further one gets from the desert (Vandenberghe et al. 1997).

---

CH550: Flood Deposited Geologic Column