Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
7 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,816 Year: 3,073/9,624 Month: 918/1,588 Week: 101/223 Day: 12/17 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   The Great Creationist Fossil Failure
Tangle
Member
Posts: 9489
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 4.9


(2)
Message 271 of 1163 (787351)
07-11-2016 2:59 AM
Reply to: Message 270 by Faith
07-10-2016 11:10 PM


Re: Paleogeology resources
Faith writes:
I would like to be able to see how the claim of the fossil order holds up across all the evidence, not particularly for the sake of my own arguments, however. I'm glad to know the information is out there, but I don't think I'll be able to sort through it to answer my questions.
Don't you think those that spend their lives working with fossils would notice if there were fossils out of order in the record? It would be the find of a lifetime, it would be evidence against one of the most established scientific theories in existence. It's Nobel prize stuff.
The fact that it's never happened while millions of fossils have been found is the evidence supporting it. You bet your life you'd never be able to 'sort through it.'

Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien.
Life, don't talk to me about life - Marvin the Paranoid Android
"Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."
- Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 270 by Faith, posted 07-10-2016 11:10 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 272 by Faith, posted 07-11-2016 3:38 AM Tangle has not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 272 of 1163 (787352)
07-11-2016 3:38 AM
Reply to: Message 271 by Tangle
07-11-2016 2:59 AM


Re: Paleogeology resources
I wouldn't expect to find anything obviously out of order, but perhaps some gray areas where interpretation makes something fit into the order that's questionable, or perhaps just seeing it all laid out I'd find the whole concept of the order to be iffy. It's all a subjective thing anyway, you know.
To be noticed by anyone other than a creationist a fossil or group of fossils would have to be quite dramatically out of the established order, and the tendency would always be to fit in an ambiguity rather than consider it as out. Just how likely do you think it is that anyone committed to the established way of looking at these things would want to find something that might overthrow the whole idea of evolution anyway?
This idea that they'd be eager to find such a thing doesn't really fly. In the hard sciences, yes, there would definitely be rewards for overthrowing an established theory, but not in an interpretive science like evolutionism and Old Earthism. abe: And that's because most anomalies and contradictions can be rationalized away. Even the supposed falsification of finding a rabbit in Precambrian rock would just be rationalized away, not allowed to be the falsification everyone claims it would be.
Over and over in the debate here it's just one interpretation against another, because that's what this science is made of, interpretation. There is rarely the definiteness of the sort of find you get in the hard sciences. You can't fudge the shape of the DNA molecule for instance, you can't fudge its chemical components, but you CAN fudge the meaning of mutations because of their variety of effects and lack of consistency. You CAN get away with supposing a whole era of time from the fossil contents of a slab of rock because there is really no way to prove it one way or the other.
I can knock myself out trying to show the absurdity of the interpretation, which I think is eyepoppingly obvious, but I have no way of proving it: you either see it or you don't, and committed evos have no motivation to see it.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 271 by Tangle, posted 07-11-2016 2:59 AM Tangle has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 273 by Dr Adequate, posted 07-11-2016 4:48 AM Faith has not replied
 Message 274 by Pressie, posted 07-11-2016 5:57 AM Faith has not replied
 Message 280 by jar, posted 07-11-2016 8:44 AM Faith has not replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 284 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


(1)
Message 273 of 1163 (787353)
07-11-2016 4:48 AM
Reply to: Message 272 by Faith
07-11-2016 3:38 AM


Re: Paleogeology resources
Even the supposed falsification of finding a rabbit in Precambrian rock would just be rationalized away, not allowed to be the falsification everyone claims it would be.
That's an interesting daydream. Still, even if it was true and not the insane fantasy of a bewildered mind, just think how pleased your fellow-creationists would be if you managed to find one. Good luck. Go for it.
Over and over in the debate here it's just one interpretation against another, because that's what this science is made of, interpretation.
You made that up, Faith. It isn't remotely true.
There is rarely the definiteness of the sort of find you get in the hard sciences. You can't fudge the shape of the DNA molecule for instance, you can't fudge its chemical components, but you CAN fudge the meaning of mutations because of their variety of effects and lack of consistency. You CAN get away with supposing a whole era of time from the fossil contents of a slab of rock because there is really no way to prove it one way or the other.
You can fudge these things 'cos of your vast ignorance of the facts and the scientific method. Scientists would find it much harder.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 272 by Faith, posted 07-11-2016 3:38 AM Faith has not replied

  
Pressie
Member
Posts: 2103
From: Pretoria, SA
Joined: 06-18-2010


(2)
Message 274 of 1163 (787354)
07-11-2016 5:57 AM
Reply to: Message 272 by Faith
07-11-2016 3:38 AM


Re: Paleogeology resources
Faith writes:
Over and over in the debate here it's just one interpretation against another, because that's what this science is made of, interpretation.
Ignoring data, making stuff up and blatantly telling untruths about reality can't be counted as as interpretation.
Your assumption that educated people will be to stupid to realize what you're doing isn't working for your side, either.
Edited by Pressie, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 272 by Faith, posted 07-11-2016 3:38 AM Faith has not replied

  
ThinAirDesigns
Member (Idle past 2373 days)
Posts: 564
Joined: 02-12-2015


(1)
Message 275 of 1163 (787355)
07-11-2016 6:24 AM


Hubris
'I don't understand it. I don't feel the need to understand it. I think it's silly that you think I should study and understand it before I analyse and render a verdict. But, rest assured that from my position of little knowledge I can promise you that the data is being fudged.'
Sound almost exactly like the position of one George McReady Price when Harold Clark, one of his prized students got off his ass and went to the field to compare what Price said against the evidence. Clark wrote back :
quote:
The rocks do lie in a much more definite sequence than we have ever allowed. The statements made in your book, The New Geology, do not harmonize with the conditions in the field. All over the Midwest the rocks lie in great sheets extending over hundreds of miles, in regular order. Thousands of well cores prove this. In East Texas alone are 25,000 deep wells. Probably well over 100,000 wells in the Midwest give data that has been studied and correlated. The science has become a very exact one. Millions of dollars are spent in drilling, with the paleontological findings of the company geologists taken as the basis for the work. The sequence of the microscopic fossils in the strata is remarkably uniform. The same sequence is found in America, Europe, and anywhere that detailed studies have been made. This oil geology has opened up the depths of the earth in a way that we never dreamed of twenty years ago.
The report was that Price was 'enraged'.
JB

Replies to this message:
 Message 276 by Pressie, posted 07-11-2016 6:29 AM ThinAirDesigns has replied
 Message 277 by Faith, posted 07-11-2016 6:31 AM ThinAirDesigns has not replied

  
Pressie
Member
Posts: 2103
From: Pretoria, SA
Joined: 06-18-2010


Message 276 of 1163 (787356)
07-11-2016 6:29 AM
Reply to: Message 275 by ThinAirDesigns
07-11-2016 6:24 AM


Re: Hubris
ThinAirDesigns writes:
Sound almost exactly like the position of one George McReady Price when Harold Clark,...
Who were those guys? Why should anyone take notice of what they said?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 275 by ThinAirDesigns, posted 07-11-2016 6:24 AM ThinAirDesigns has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 314 by Theodoric, posted 07-14-2016 1:45 PM Pressie has not replied
 Message 316 by ThinAirDesigns, posted 07-14-2016 3:25 PM Pressie has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 277 of 1163 (787357)
07-11-2016 6:31 AM
Reply to: Message 275 by ThinAirDesigns
07-11-2016 6:24 AM


Re: Hubris
The sequence and extent of the strata described in that quote support the Flood very nicely. I don't argue with the apparent order of the fossil contents at all, contrary to the views expressed here. I have no knowledge of the work of Price. He's your guy, not mine.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 275 by ThinAirDesigns, posted 07-11-2016 6:24 AM ThinAirDesigns has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 278 by Pressie, posted 07-11-2016 6:39 AM Faith has replied
 Message 282 by dwise1, posted 07-11-2016 10:22 AM Faith has replied
 Message 283 by jar, posted 07-11-2016 10:38 AM Faith has not replied
 Message 284 by Dr Adequate, posted 07-11-2016 12:11 PM Faith has not replied

  
Pressie
Member
Posts: 2103
From: Pretoria, SA
Joined: 06-18-2010


Message 278 of 1163 (787358)
07-11-2016 6:39 AM
Reply to: Message 277 by Faith
07-11-2016 6:31 AM


Re: Hubris
Faith writes:
The sequence and extent of the strata described in that quote support the Flood very nicely. I don't argue with the apparent order of the fossil contents at all, contrary to the views expressed here. I have no knowledge of the work of Price. He's your guy, not mine.
Strata? I can't see anything like "strata" in that quote. Are you telling untruths again, Faith?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 277 by Faith, posted 07-11-2016 6:31 AM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 279 by Faith, posted 07-11-2016 6:46 AM Pressie has not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 279 of 1163 (787359)
07-11-2016 6:46 AM
Reply to: Message 278 by Pressie
07-11-2016 6:39 AM


Re: Hubris
My opponents have a habit of hallucinating "untruths" in my opinions where there are none. Be that as it may, "strata" are indeed the main subject of the quotation, which would be the case even if the word itself wasn't used, but the fact is that the word IS in the paragraph:
The rocks do lie in a much more definite sequence than we have ever allowed... All over the Midwest the rocks lie in great sheets extending over hundreds of miles, in regular order. Thousands of well cores prove this. ...The sequence of the microscopic fossils in the strata is remarkably uniform.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 278 by Pressie, posted 07-11-2016 6:39 AM Pressie has not replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


(4)
Message 280 of 1163 (787364)
07-11-2016 8:44 AM
Reply to: Message 272 by Faith
07-11-2016 3:38 AM


The established way of looking at things did get overturned.
Faith writes:
Just how likely do you think it is that anyone committed to the established way of looking at these things would want to find something that might overthrow the whole idea of evolution anyway?
That is a very important and telling statement Faith because that is exactly what happened in real life.
Geologist and all other scientists were committed to the established idea that the earth was young, that there had been a Biblical Flood, that Special Creation actually happened and went out looking for evidence that supported and would confirm the established idea.
What they found though was that there was overwhelming evidence that the Earth was very old, that man was not a Special Creation but instead the result of billions of years of evolution and that there was absolute evidence that no world wide flood had happened at anytime when man existed on Earth. In fact the evidence was so complete, so totally convincing that in just one lifetime every scientist in every field of knowledge agreed that the established paradigm that there had been a Biblical Flood, that Special Creation and a young Earth actually happened was simply wrong and had to be abandoned.
The evidence shows that Science as opposed to Dogma does overthrow established ideas when the evidence demands it.
Edited by jar, : appalin spallin
Edited by jar, : fix sub-title

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 272 by Faith, posted 07-11-2016 3:38 AM Faith has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 289 by NoNukes, posted 07-12-2016 1:26 AM jar has not replied

  
ThinAirDesigns
Member (Idle past 2373 days)
Posts: 564
Joined: 02-12-2015


Message 281 of 1163 (787365)
07-11-2016 9:34 AM


State of mind
Faith, the point of the Clark quote was not to compare any technical position you may or may not hold similar to Price, but to illustrate the commonality between the two states of mind.
Price was an 'arm chair' geologist (actually, not a geologist at all as opposed to his fancy) who liked to talk a lot but didn't really think it was necessary for him to learn if it meant things turned out different than his ignorance held them to be.
JB

  
dwise1
Member
Posts: 5930
Joined: 05-02-2006
Member Rating: 5.8


(3)
Message 282 of 1163 (787366)
07-11-2016 10:22 AM
Reply to: Message 277 by Faith
07-11-2016 6:31 AM


Re: Hubris
George McCready Price (Wikipedia) was a Canadian creationist and the True Father of Flood Geology -- Henry Morris stole that baby from its crib and claimed the credit. A Seventh-Day Adventist, he wrote about his ideas about geology 1906 to 1923. His degrees were awarded to him by Seventh-Day Adventists schools based mainly on his writings and hence were honorary. He used them to teach in a number of Seventh-Day Adventist colleges.
The article notes:
quote:
While Price claimed that his book-selling travels gave him invaluable "firsthand knowledge of field geology", his "familiarity with the outside world" remained rudimentary, with even his own students noting that he could "barely tell one fossil from another" on a field trip shortly before he retired.
Le plus a change, le plus la mme chose.
Faith, he is your guy through and through. Your ignorance of creationism is no excuse.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 277 by Faith, posted 07-11-2016 6:31 AM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 285 by Faith, posted 07-11-2016 6:44 PM dwise1 has not replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


(1)
Message 283 of 1163 (787367)
07-11-2016 10:38 AM
Reply to: Message 277 by Faith
07-11-2016 6:31 AM


Speaking of Hubris
Faith writes:
The sequence and extent of the strata described in that quote support the Flood very nicely.
You keep making claims like the above Faith yet you (as well as every other so called Flood believer) never provide a model, method, process, procedure or thingamabob that actually explains the way any flood could sort the fossils in the order that they are found, sort materials to lay down geological layers in the sequence they are found or any other evidence found in reality.
If you wish to continue to make such claims then don't you think it is about time you actually provided a model, method, process, procedure or thingamabob that actually explains the way any flood could sort the fossils in the order that they are found, sort materials to lay down geological layers in the sequence they are found or any other evidence found in reality.

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 277 by Faith, posted 07-11-2016 6:31 AM Faith has not replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 284 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 284 of 1163 (787370)
07-11-2016 12:11 PM
Reply to: Message 277 by Faith
07-11-2016 6:31 AM


Re: Hubris
The sequence and extent of the strata described in that quote support the Flood very nicely.
Perhaps you could relate that to the topic by explaining why the sequence of the strata does not exhibit hydraulic sorting.
I don't argue with the apparent order of the fossil contents at all, contrary to the views expressed here.
Do you have any way of explaining it?
*cough * topic *cough *

This message is a reply to:
 Message 277 by Faith, posted 07-11-2016 6:31 AM Faith has not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 285 of 1163 (787374)
07-11-2016 6:44 PM
Reply to: Message 282 by dwise1
07-11-2016 10:22 AM


Re: Hubris
Faith, he is your guy through and through. Your ignorance of creationism is no excuse.
Going by the quote Thin Air put up Price is not my guy because I agree with the quote which was an argument against some of his claims.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 282 by dwise1, posted 07-11-2016 10:22 AM dwise1 has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 286 by Coragyps, posted 07-11-2016 11:27 PM Faith has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024