Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
7 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/7


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Trilobites, Mountains and Marine Deposits - Evidence of a flood?
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1405 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 340 of 519 (811641)
06-10-2017 5:37 AM
Reply to: Message 339 by PaulK
06-10-2017 3:31 AM


Re: Mainstream geologic theory put into hyperdrive
... The abundance of fossils is also evidence against Flood geology - there are too many, as has been discussed previously in this forum.
And that is what this topic is about -- the marine shells in their totality disprove rather than prove a flood event.
(Faith): ... I think it quite possible without magic, but since you don't I'll just go back to the main evidence for the Flood and against the Time Scale which is the rapidly deposited strata with their abundance of fossils
Says the person who can't get past the tree rings in the Age Correlations and An Old Earth, Version 2 No 1 thread, that by themselves destroy the YEC delusional "timescale" ...
When you're living in fantasy land you can make up anything -- scouring flood waters in one place, magic carpet flood waters in another, that lift up and transport whole marine ecosystems so gently they don't break fan corals or the stems of brachiopods. Whatever you "need" explained, can be fantasized to fit in the genie bottle.
But hey, you weren't there so you can't say it didn't happen ... (riiiiiiiiiiiight)
Enjoy
Edited by RAZD, : .

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAmerican☆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 339 by PaulK, posted 06-10-2017 3:31 AM PaulK has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 341 by Tangle, posted 06-10-2017 6:27 AM RAZD has seen this message but not replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1405 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 342 of 519 (811643)
06-10-2017 6:43 AM
Reply to: Message 208 by Faith
05-31-2017 6:30 PM


Remember this Faith?
This is the song and dance, complete with hand-waving and wails of denial. Because it is always the details that flummox creationist facile "explanations" based on ignorance of the total evidence.
Faith Message 192:
The marine fossils in rock layers at the tops of mountains suggest deposition by the Flood before those mountains existed. Then tectonic pressure pushed them up all over the earth so that all those fossils are embedded there in the rocks at the tops of the mountains.
RAZD Message 203:
The marine fossils in rock layers at the tops of mountains suggest deposition by the Flood in a marine environment - for decades and decades - before those mountains existed. Then tectonic pressure pushed them up all over the earth so that all those fossils are embedded there in the rocks at the tops of the mountains.
There fixed it for you.
Where are you getting this "decades" stuff? This is just the usual situation of the deposition of limestone layers containing dead marine creatures one after another in the Flood.
Note the length of time needed for each layer to be a mature ecosystem -- some brachiopods were 30 years old when they died and were gradually buried by silt as new brachiopods grew around and on top of them ... brachiopods have growth lines, like tree rings. Even one layer means marine growth lasting longer than the reported time for the purported magic flying flood. Tens of layers means centuries of growth, hundreds of layers means millennia.
Faith Message 205:
Nothing would have grown in the Flood. All the Flood did was carry things around. Your "mature marine growth" had to have been there
Why do you insist they had to grow in the Flood rather than already have grown in a marine environment before the Flood simply picked them up and buried them in what became a sedimentary rock?
RAZD Message 207:
You just exchanged one problem for another -- the length of time needed to grow those layers over layers over layers exceeds the time you pretend lapsed between your purported creation date and your purported flood date.
Faith Message 208:
The layers did not grow over layers over layers, the layers were made by the Flood, depositing one dead-creature-laden sediment onto another.
RAZD Message 209:
And now you have created another problem: where is all the real estate that those layers came from? The whole world is covered in multiple layers. Everywhere you look it is layers on top of layers.
Faith:
crickets: chirp ... chirp ... chirp ...
When you have to keep making up more and more fantastical "explanations" to maintain your original fantasy you end up with more and more ridiculous "explanations" ... it's like lying, except that the only one that believes you appears to be you.
Enjoy

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAmerican☆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 208 by Faith, posted 05-31-2017 6:30 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 343 by Faith, posted 06-10-2017 9:11 AM RAZD has replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1405 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


(1)
Message 347 of 519 (811702)
06-10-2017 8:20 PM
Reply to: Message 343 by Faith
06-10-2017 9:11 AM


Re: Remember this Faith?
You want to know where the sediments came from? They were washed off the land and churned up from the ocean, haven't I said that often enough?
So now we have undisturbed marine ecologies of fully mature marine growth buried suddenly by massive influx of sediments off the lands, that isn't turbulent, but then miraculously picked up while each fossil is preserved in situ undamaged and dropped on top of other such sediment buried mature marine ecologies, stacking them up hundreds of layers deep all over the world. Tearing up the world but preserving the marine growth undisturbed.
Where do all those fantastic flying layers come from Faith? Not the sediment, the layers of fully mature marine growth deposited on top of each other hundreds of layers deep. Does the Fantastic Flying Flood now clone these deposits?
Those sediments off the lands would not have marine growth, and thus they could not provide a continuous deposit of marine growth on top of marine growth, instead they would show up as intrusions between the layers of non-marine growth.
No, Faith, that does not even begin to explain the evidence.
You really do...not...have...a...clue.
The earth is old.
There was no flood.
That's what the evidence shows.
Enjoy

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAmerican☆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 343 by Faith, posted 06-10-2017 9:11 AM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 348 by Faith, posted 06-10-2017 8:37 PM RAZD has replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1405 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


(1)
Message 350 of 519 (811742)
06-11-2017 11:55 AM
Reply to: Message 348 by Faith
06-10-2017 8:37 PM


Re: Remember this Faith?
Marine deposits come from the ocean water, what else? What IS the problem? You aren't making any sense.
The depth of those deposits -- meters thick showing continuous growth of the mature marine ecology, organisms dying and their shells being used as support for a new generation, sediments intermingled with the growth so that the floor gradually rises as new growth builds on top of old growth.
Meters thick of undisturbed mature marine growth that is only explained by extended periods of time for this to occur, hundreds if not thousands of years without interruption.
Cairaco basin for example (from The Age of the Earth (version 3 no 1), Message 19):
Synchronous radiocarbon and climate shifts during the last deglaciation (full PDF) or view on-line (with free sign-in)(3)
quote:
... Here we present 14C data from Cariaco Basin core PL07-58PC (hereafter 58PC), providing 10- to 15-year resolution through most of deglaciation. The new calibration data demonstrate conclusively that Δ14C changes were synchronous with climate shifts during the Younger Dryas. Calculated Δ14C is strongly correlated to climate proxy data throughout early deglaciation (r = 0.81). Comparing Δ14C and 10Be records leads us to conclude that ocean circulation changes, not solar variability, must be the primary mechanism for both14C and climate changes during the Younger Dryas.
Cariaco Basin core 58PC (1040.60′N, 6457.70′W; 820 m depth) has an average sedimentation rate (70 cm/kyr) more than 25% higher than core 56PC (1041.22′N, 6458.07′W; 810 m depth) (13, 14), and shares similar hydrographic conditions. Restricted deep circulation and high surface productivity in the Cariaco Basin off the coast of Venezuela create an anoxic water column below 300 m. The climatic cycle of a dry, windy season with coastal upwelling, followed by a nonwindy, rainy season, results in distinctly laminated sediment couplets of light-colored, organic-rich plankton tests and dark-colored mineral grains from local river runoff (13). It has been demonstrated previously that the laminae couplets are annually deposited varves and that light laminae thickness, sediment reflectance (gray scale), and abundance of the foraminifer Globigerina bulloides are all sensitive proxies for surface productivity, upwelling, and trade wind strength (14, 15). Nearly identical patterns, timing, and duration of abrupt changes in Cariaco Basin upwelling compared with surface temperatures in the high-latitude North Atlantic region at 1- to 10-year resolution during the past 110 years and the last deglaciation (7, 14, 15) provide evidence that rapid climate shifts in the two regions were synchronous. A likely mechanism for this linkage is the response of North Atlantic trade winds to the equator-pole temperature gradient forced by changes in high-latitude North Atlantic temperature (16).
The hydrography of the Cariaco Basin provides excellent conditions for 14C dating (17). The shallow sills (146 m depth) constrain water entering the basin to the surface layer, well equilibrated with atmospheric CO2. Despite anoxic conditions, the deep waters of the Cariaco Basin have a brief residence time, as little as 100 years (17). Two radiocarbon dates on G. bulloides of known recent calendar age gave the same surface water-atmospheric 14C difference (reservoir age) as the open Atlantic Ocean (7). Good agreement during the early Holocene and Younger Dryas between Cariaco Basin and terrestrial 14C dates, including German pines and plant macrofossils from lake sediments (1, 9, 11, 18) (Fig. 1), suggests that Cariaco Basin reservoir age does not change measurably as a response to increased local upwelling (i.e., during the Younger Dryas) (19). Planktonic foraminiferal abundance permits continuous sampling at 1.5-cm increments, providing 10- to 15-calendar-year resolution throughout most of deglaciation.
The anchored Cariaco Basin varve chronology provides radiocarbon calibration at high resolution from ∼14.8 to 10.5 cal kyr B.P.
Now I would say "tethered" rather than "anchored" because it is tethered by matching the existing 14C levels to an anchored absolution tree ring chronology that extends back to ~12,400 cal BP (before 1950 ce).
This shows a period of over 1500 years of mature marine growth. Diatoms living, reproducing, dying, in a continuous pattern, deposited and left undisturbed by any massive storms.
And this is just one set of data, used here because it is anchored in time by consilience with other evidence of an ancient earth.
We also have the evidence of Foraminifera extending back over 65 million years in a similar pattern of living, reproducing, dying, in a continuous pattern, deposited and left undisturbed by any massive storms.
... What IS the problem? ...
That there is massive evidence that has refuted each stage of your delusional fantasy explanations to the point where making the evidence cram into your delusional microcosm just does not fit.
Enjoy.

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAmerican☆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 348 by Faith, posted 06-10-2017 8:37 PM Faith has not replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1405 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


(1)
Message 360 of 519 (811775)
06-12-2017 6:08 AM
Reply to: Message 355 by Faith
06-11-2017 8:01 PM


YEC Time Scale is Disproved, Flood is NOT Supported, Summary Statement is Garbage
As so often happens in these debates the Flood debunker asserts something unprovable about how this or that makes the Flood impossible and I respond with something equally unprovable to argue that it doesn't have to be that way but some other way that makes the flood possible. ...
Time Scale is Disproved, ...
Age Correlations and An Old Earth, Version 2 No 1
  • Bristlecone Pines - The minimum age of the earth is 8,000 years by annual tree rings in California.
  • European Oaks - The minimum age of the earth is 10,434 years by annual tree rings in Europe (different environment, different genus, not just different species and from two different locations ).
  • German Pines - The minimum age of the earth is 12,405 years by adding more annual tree rings in Europe (different environment and species), confirmed by carbon-14 levels in the samples (different information from the same sources).
  • Lake Suigetsu Varves - The minimum age of the earth is 35,987 years by annual varve layers of diatoms in Japan (different process, biology and location).
  • Annual Layers of Ice - The minimum age of the earth is 40,000 years by annual layers of ice in China (different process altogether).
  • Ice Cores in Greenland - The minimum age of the earth is 37,957 years by visually counting layers, 60,000 years by counting dust layers, 110,000 years by measuring electrical conductivity of layers, and up to 250,000 years by counting of layers below a discontinuity, all counting annual layers of ice in Greenland (different location).
  • Ice Cores in Antarctica - The minimum age of the earth is 422,776 years by annual layers of ice in the Vostok Ice Core, extended to 740,000 years with the EPICA Ice Core with an estimated final depth age of 900,000 years. (different location again).
  • The Devil's Hole - The radiometric age of the earth is validated to 567,700 years by annual deposition of calcite in Nevada and correlation to the annual ice core data
  • Talking Coral Heads - The minimum radiometric age of the earth is of coral is >400,000,000 years by radiometric age correlated with the astrono-physics predicted length of the day correlated with the daily growth rings in ancient coral heads. (different location, different environment, different methods).
  • Discussion of Radiometric Correlations - the radiometric dates for a number of specific events show a consistent accuracy to the methods used, and an age for the earth of ~4,500,000,000 years old.
  • The Bottom Line - the bottom line is that the valid scientific age for the earth is ~4,500,000,000 years old.
  • Theme Song - just for fun.
Denial of contradictory evidence is not confronting the evidence, but delusion. You have made 3 posts on that thread, including"
Faith writes:
No, RAZD, I can't explain it to support the Flood, it's good evidence for your side, so I leave it at that for now.
So no, you have not disproven the time scale, you haven't even attacked it, all you have done is avoided the evidence.
Enjoy
Edited by RAZD, : .

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAmerican☆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 355 by Faith, posted 06-11-2017 8:01 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 361 by Faith, posted 06-12-2017 6:23 AM RAZD has replied
 Message 380 by Adminnemooseus, posted 06-12-2017 12:52 PM RAZD has replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1405 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 363 of 519 (811784)
06-12-2017 7:42 AM
Reply to: Message 361 by Faith
06-12-2017 6:23 AM


Re: Time Scale is Disproved, Flood is Well Supported, Summary Statement
Edited by Adminnemooseus, : Content hidden. Declaring it to be off-topic.

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAmerican☆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 361 by Faith, posted 06-12-2017 6:23 AM Faith has not replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1405 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


(1)
Message 367 of 519 (811801)
06-12-2017 9:35 AM
Reply to: Message 366 by Faith
06-12-2017 9:27 AM


Re: What would it take to open eyes?
Re: What would it take to open eyes?
Indeed, Faith. What would it take to open your eyes to the real world that surrounds you, the evidence that was left that shows an old earth and evolving life. These are real things. You are one lone voice pretending to know more than the combined scientific knowledge of all the world's scientists. That is delusion.
Enjoy

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAmerican☆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 366 by Faith, posted 06-12-2017 9:27 AM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 368 by Faith, posted 06-12-2017 9:38 AM RAZD has replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1405 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 374 of 519 (811812)
06-12-2017 10:18 AM
Reply to: Message 371 by Faith
06-12-2017 9:58 AM


Re: Changing the subject is bad debate form
NOBODY has even tried to address the points I made about the cross section (Message 355) and the map. You've all either changed the subject entirely or blasted me with accusations. Not any attempt to address my argument.
You mean like the way you have not addressed the evidence showing meters deep layers of marine growth layer upon layer on mountains that could not be from a WWFlood?
Or the evidence shown in Message 350 showing "a period of over 1500 years of mature marine growth" with correlating 14C levels to the dendrochronology, and then extending to ∼14.8 cal kyr B.P.
That subject?
Enjoy

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAmerican☆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 371 by Faith, posted 06-12-2017 9:58 AM Faith has not replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1405 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 381 of 519 (811842)
06-12-2017 3:57 PM
Reply to: Message 380 by Adminnemooseus
06-12-2017 12:52 PM


Re: YEC Time Scale is Disproved, Flood is NOT Supported, Summary Statement is Garbage
Actually that last one was from the new version in the works, but I get your point.

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAmerican☆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 380 by Adminnemooseus, posted 06-12-2017 12:52 PM Adminnemooseus has seen this message but not replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1405 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 390 of 519 (811882)
06-13-2017 6:36 AM
Reply to: Message 387 by Faith
06-13-2017 12:37 AM


Trilobites, Mountains and Marine Deposits
It seems we are getting away from the Trilobites and Marine Deposits and the discussion of mountains has devolved into something other than the composition of layers and layers and layers of marine deposits in the rocks making up the non-volcanic mountains all over the world.
At this point I'm sick of Siccar point chatter, so let's talk trilobites.
quote:
Trilobites (pronunciation: /ˈtraɪləˌbaɪt, ˈtrɪ-, -loʊ-/;[2][3] meaning "three lobes") are a fossil group of extinct marine arachnomorph arthropods that form the class Trilobita. Trilobites form one of the earliest known groups of arthropods. The first appearance of trilobites in the fossil record defines the base of the Atdabanian stage of the Early Cambrian period (521 million years ago), and they flourished throughout the lower Paleozoic era before beginning a drawn-out decline to extinction when, during the Devonian, all trilobite orders except the Proetids died out. Trilobites disappeared in the mass extinction at the end of the Permian about 252 million years ago. The trilobites were among the most successful of all early animals, roaming the oceans for over 270 million years.[4]
By the time trilobites first appeared in the fossil record, they were already highly diversified and geographically dispersed. Because trilobites had wide diversity and an easily fossilized exoskeleton, an extensive fossil record was left behind, with some 17,000 known species spanning Paleozoic time. The study of these fossils has facilitated important contributions to biostratigraphy, paleontology, evolutionary biology, and plate tectonics. Trilobites are often placed within the arthropod subphylum Schizoramia within the superclass Arachnomorpha (equivalent to the Arachnata),[5] although several alternative taxonomies are found in the literature.
Trilobites had many lifestyles; some moved over the sea bed as predators, scavengers, or filter feeders, and some swam, feeding on plankton. Most lifestyles expected of modern marine arthropods are seen in trilobites, with the possible exception of parasitism (scientific debate continues).[6] Some trilobites (particularly the family Olenidae) are even thought to have evolved a symbiotic relationship with sulfur-eating bacteria from which they derived food.[7]
There are no trilobites today, so all we know is from the fossil record.
Spanning such a long time period with so many species, the different species have been associated with layers of specific ages -- biostratigraphy -- so that when they are found we know the relative age of that rock. Species A is associated with rock of relative age A, species B is associated with relative age B.
We can date the layers with radioactive isotopes using measurements of their concentrations.
Again this sorting of fossils into specific strata is a problem (Faith will deny it) for flood fantasies folks -- water does not sort similar organisms, only magic ... or time ... but that is not the only problem that Faith and other creationists have:
Why do one species of trilobites appear only in rocks that date to a specific radiometric time frame and others appear only in rocks that date to a different radiometric time frame?
Let's ignore for now what those dates are and how they are calculated, just that they are derived from the specific isotopes of radioactive elements and their measurable concentrations in the rocks:
How does the water sort those isotopes in the specific concentrations to match those trilobites with different concentrations for different trilobites?
Does water have some "Geiger counter" ability heretofore unknown?
Inquiring minds want to know.
Enjoy

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAmerican☆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 387 by Faith, posted 06-13-2017 12:37 AM Faith has not replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1405 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


(1)
Message 391 of 519 (811883)
06-13-2017 7:01 AM
Reply to: Message 368 by Faith
06-12-2017 9:38 AM


The evidence, Faith ... ALL the evidence, no cherry picking
The problem is that all the OTHER evidences are just a distraction since what I posted trumps them all. IF you would think about it. But you prefer the distractions, can't even get you to focus on the evidence I've presented. You accuse me without even thinking about the evidence. It's the evidence that shows the truth, I'm not believing anything except what the evidence shows.
Indeed it is the evidence ... ALL the evidence. Cherry picking isolated choice items does not explain the rest of the evidence.
How do you explain the radiometric isotope concentrations being sorted with the trilobites in Message 390?
We can ask the same question with foraminifera and diatoms -- organisms that are free floating in the ocean, and when they die their shells\tests settle to the ocean floor, year after year after year.
In the real world we can also date them to millions and millions of years ago with radiometric isotopes, isotopes in dust particles that blow over the ocean and settle to the bottom year after year after year.
Relative age by layers, anchored age by radioactive isotopes, ages that hold up around the world.
How does water match radioactive isotopes with biostratigraphy?
Enjoy
Edited by RAZD, : .

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAmerican☆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 368 by Faith, posted 06-12-2017 9:38 AM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 392 by Faith, posted 06-13-2017 10:25 AM RAZD has replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1405 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 394 of 519 (811943)
06-13-2017 3:19 PM
Reply to: Message 392 by Faith
06-13-2017 10:25 AM


The evidence: sorted trilobites, sorted radiometric isotopes
RAZD Message 391: How do you explain the radiometric isotope concentrations being sorted with the trilobites in Message 390?
Faith: If you have contradictory evidences you go with those that are indisputable and put aside those that require something to be true that you can't prove.
What is indisputable is that the trilobite species are sorted in different layers for different species, and the sediments in those layers are also sorted for different radiometric isotope concentrations. Two sets of data that are consilient in the sorting. Explainable by actual real world age, not explainable by flood flying carpet fantasies.
What you can't prove is that water does anything like this type of sorting for either category, trilobites or radiometric isotopes.
So it looks like you have to go with the actual real world age .... by your argument.
Enjoy

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAmerican☆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 392 by Faith, posted 06-13-2017 10:25 AM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 395 by PaulK, posted 06-13-2017 3:33 PM RAZD has seen this message but not replied
 Message 396 by Faith, posted 06-13-2017 4:15 PM RAZD has replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1405 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 397 of 519 (811953)
06-13-2017 5:37 PM
Reply to: Message 396 by Faith
06-13-2017 4:15 PM


Re: The evidence: sorted trilobites, sorted radiometric isotopes
The trilobites are nothing more than cousins, ...
Irrelevant. Are the radioactive isotopes cousins too?
... and for whatever reason the Flood did sort sediments and creatures. ...
How does the magic flying flood know which isotope is which?
... You have no proof for your theory either, it IS all theory, period.
Curiously I'm just giving you the facts, you can't handle the facts.
Enjoy

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAmerican☆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 396 by Faith, posted 06-13-2017 4:15 PM Faith has not replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1405 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


(1)
Message 402 of 519 (811972)
06-13-2017 8:52 PM
Reply to: Message 400 by Faith
06-13-2017 8:19 PM


Cognitive dissonance ... incoming
I don't know, which I've said many times before. All I can say is that water sorts things ...
How can it possibly sort different isotopes Faith? They react the same in chemical reactions, so the water would have to use some unknown physical means -- like magic.
You have two possibilities:
(1) the old age of the earth is the truth, or
(2) your god plants false evidence to delude people, and where do you draw the line on where that false evidence leads ... if the bible is the word of god and he is leading us astray then there must be a false narrative in the bible, that is the logical conclusion: ALL is illusion.
... otherwise I stick to arguments I know prove the Flood without question.
... and ignore the possibility that you could be deluded.
Enjoy

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAmerican☆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 400 by Faith, posted 06-13-2017 8:19 PM Faith has not replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1405 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


(2)
Message 416 of 519 (812020)
06-14-2017 10:48 AM
Reply to: Message 407 by Faith
06-13-2017 9:06 PM


Focus AGAIN: Trilobites and Marine Deposits
It seems we are getting away from the Trilobites and Marine Deposits and the discussion of mountains has devolved into something other than the composition of layers and layers and layers of marine deposits in the rocks making up the non-volcanic mountains all over the world.
At this point I'm tired of Grand Canyon and map cross section arguments about geology when the topic is about trilobites and marine environments on mountain tops.
... and there is no sign whatever of anything between the layers to suggest any time periods ever existed. ...
Irrelevant, there is so much evidence of the passage of time, large chucks of time, including the question you can't answer about how trilobites and radiometric isotopes are sorted according to age, large chunks of it, that if you don't address this issue alone then your posting on this thread is irrelevant and unwanted.
It's been proved. You'll deny it and deny it but it's been proved.
Only a fool thinks they have proven something that was false from the start.
The trilobites and radiometric isotopes show it is false.
You have three choices:
(1) show how they can be sorted by apparent age,
(2) deny the evidence exists (your favorite dodge), in which case leave this thread and post elsewhere, or
(3) accept the evidence for what it shows.
Trilobites and Marine Deposits as observed all over the world are what we would expect from evolution and the known age of the world. Marine strata on the tops of mountains are what we would expect from plate tectonics over the course of the long age of the earth.
Muddy jumbles of all life forms living at the time are what we would expect from a flood, and these are ONLY observed in isolated areas at different times, frequently in a repeating pattern, and none of it matching the fantastic flying flood fantasy.
Trilobites and Marine Deposits Faith, Trilobites and Marine Deposits.
Enjoy
Edited by RAZD, : .

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAmerican☆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 407 by Faith, posted 06-13-2017 9:06 PM Faith 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