|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Summations Only | Thread ▼ Details |
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Evolution. We Have The Fossils. We Win. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
Yeah my emotions do run away with me. The utterly stupid things people say against my arguments get to me. What difference could writing in all caps make when nothing I say gets the slightest fair hearing anyway? Who cares?
nothing like that kind of erosion is between any of the layers either. Like Percy's "flat" fields there's nothing like them in the Geo Column strata.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
All of these images are areas of net erosion. The marshy areas from Capt Stormfield's image might be considered an area of sedimentation, but the sands are erosional - you can tell because of the ripple marks (ooo, we have seen those in between layers too!). StormMan was claiming that wetlands existed where there is now flat flat rock. He doesn't seem to have noticed that there is the same kind of terrain as the one I posted in his very own picture. Nobody seems to take into account how HUGE the extent of the rock strata actually are. As for ripples, any like those in the picture that appeared between layers could be seen at a distance and no such thing exists.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17822 Joined: Member Rating: 2.2 |
quote: Like when you are caught in an obvious lie. Message 2238 You can call that stupid and unfair all you want. But that’s just more lies. If you don’t like getting caught telling obvious lies then don’t tell obvious lies.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
I guess the problem is just that you all live on some other planet.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17822 Joined: Member Rating: 2.2 |
quote: So on your planet it is stupidand unfair to catch you telling obvious lies ? Please tell us about it. ABE
Message 1664 and this is the post where Faith admits that she CAN’T prove that the tectonic disturbances only occurred after all the strata were in place. And it was posted only a couple of weeks ago. Edited by PaulK, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Tangle Member Posts: 9489 From: UK Joined: Member Rating: 4.9
|
Faith writes: I guess the problem is just that you all live on some other planet. Well we live on a planet that's over 4 billion years old with rocks stopping the molten inside becoming the outside. You live on one that was built a few years ago by a bad tempered superguy who got it wrong on his first attempt so ripped it up, killed everything and started over. Oh, and made it look like it's old, just so he could have a laugh at us. I prefer my planet.Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien. I am Mancunian. I am Brum. I am London.I am Finland. Soy Barcelona "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.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 394 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
Faith writes: Oh they are flat flat flat to the naked eye and even Edge the geologist calls them "tabular," so stop with the misrepresentations. No, Faith. What actually exists are layers that are flat in places, bent in places, missing in places, eroded and filled in later in places and you have been show examples of all of there. What we see in the past is what we see today.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 22392 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 5.2
|
Faith writes: In the course of an argument I get sloppy on side issues and details, but as for the overall arguments I defend I stand by them. There are only two and I've thought them through on my own, not defending them secondhand, and it does sincerely look to me like it's my opponents who are misrepresenting the argument and refusing to see obvious facts. The straw man arguments and misrepresentations from the other side here are wearisome and depressing. Let it be noted that you have posted yet another message consisting of no evidence or argument, just self praise and unsupported criticisms of those arguing the other side. Just more content-free stuff. This is your pattern: a) Describe your position and provide a little of what you believe is supporting evidence and argument; b) In response to detailed rebuttals post message after message of praise for your position and content-free criticisms of the other position consisting primarily of ad hominem; c) Abandon the thread for a period of a few days to a few weeks; d) Reengage the thread and repeat the process from step a. --Percy
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
herebedragons Member (Idle past 857 days) Posts: 1517 From: Michigan Joined:
|
Your response makes no sense to me. Here is the exchange again...
Faith: There is not enough erosion between the layers to have been on the surface for millions of years. Me: How do you know how much erosion there SHOULD be? Faith: By looking at the surface now (the present is the key to the past) Me: Well, here is some pics of areas of net erosion that do not have a noticeable amount of relief as you say you expect. The reason is that not all areas experience erosion in the same way.
Faith writes: StormMan was claiming that wetlands existed where there is now flat flat rock. He doesn't seem to have noticed that there is the same kind of terrain as the one I posted in his very own picture. Nobody seems to take into account how HUGE the extent of the rock strata actually are. ???????
As for ripples, any like those in the picture that appeared between layers could be seen at a distance Ripples are a couple inches high. You think you should be able to see them in pics of the GC or in your favorite cross section? I don't see how that is a valid objection.
and no such thing exists. Now how am I to make sense of this since it is so obviously wrong?
So it is obviously not true that "no such thing [as fossilized ripple marks] exists." What could you have possibly meant by the statement? It is very difficult to make sense of your objection to ancient landscapes being preserved in the rock record. You seem to think our scenario involves a massive block of sediment falling from above onto the existing landscape, but that's what your scenario postulates, so ... idk... Our scenario involves small amounts of sediment covering existing landscapes over long periods of time. If an area was covered by 1/2 of sediment per year, that would not disrupt the life that lived there - the critters and plants would just continue living 1/2 inch higher. Occasionally, a critter would be buried in such a way that it's skeleton would be preserved and eventually fossilized. Over a million years of that happening continuously, there would be a layer 500,000 inches high (~ 8 miles) and many different critters that represent life at various times. If the extent of the deposits also shifted laterally 1 inch every year, after a million years the area covered with sediment would extend at least 16 miles. Now what could happen in 100 million years? Now call all this an illusion if you wish, but at least recognize this is how we envision the sedimentary layers forming, not bare rock forming at the surface. Or whatever weird thing you have envisioned in your head. HBDWhoever calls me ignorant shares my own opinion. Sorrowfully and tacitly I recognize my ignorance, when I consider how much I lack of what my mind in its craving for knowledge is sighing for... I console myself with the consideration that this belongs to our common nature. - Francesco Petrarca "Nothing is easier than to persuade people who want to be persuaded and already believe." - another Petrarca gem. Ignorance is a most formidable opponent rivaled only by arrogance; but when the two join forces, one is all but invincible.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
herebedragons Member (Idle past 857 days) Posts: 1517 From: Michigan Joined:
|
Yeah my emotions do run away with me. The utterly stupid things people say against my arguments get to me. If someone responds with something "stupid" against your argument then it is on them, it should not affect your argument in such a way as to make you angry. Like when you respond with something stupid against my argument, it doesn't affect my argument one bit. Now if you denigrated something I held very dear with something that was true or partially true, I might get bothered because that might cause me to question that thing I held dear. But your stupid rebuttals against my arguments do not affect my arguments in any way. And you should feel the same way. I think you get angry because your core beliefs are being challenged and you hold your flood geology very, very dear and when it gets challenged with arguments you can't refute, you begin to doubt and question your beliefs. Then you blow up and run away and regroup... you convince yourself that you are right and then jump back in as if nothing ever happened.
What difference could writing in all caps make when nothing I say gets the slightest fair hearing anyway? Who cares? That's my point. It doesn't have the effect you want it to.
nothing like that kind of erosion is between any of the layers either. Like Percy's "flat" fields there's nothing like them in the Geo Column strata. But see this makes no sense since you are always going on about how flat, flat, flat the rocks are... just like "Percy's flat fields." I can not make sense of your objection. We do see those things in the geological record. Erosion does flatten surfaces but not all erosion occurs equally. Some areas are flat others are not. If you expect to see intact landscape preserved between layers, that;s not how our model works. That is what we should see if a global flood occurred. So if we don't see that... So it seems to me as if you are actually objecting to flood geology but attributing that objection to the mainstream geology without really understanding what you are objecting to. "Not Even Wrong." HBDWhoever calls me ignorant shares my own opinion. Sorrowfully and tacitly I recognize my ignorance, when I consider how much I lack of what my mind in its craving for knowledge is sighing for... I console myself with the consideration that this belongs to our common nature. - Francesco Petrarca "Nothing is easier than to persuade people who want to be persuaded and already believe." - another Petrarca gem. Ignorance is a most formidable opponent rivaled only by arrogance; but when the two join forces, one is all but invincible.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Capt Stormfield Member (Idle past 456 days) Posts: 428 From: Vancouver Island Joined:
|
...claiming that wetlands existed where there is now flat flat rock. He doesn't seem to have noticed that there is the same kind of terrain as the one I posted in his very own picture. Nobody seems to take into account how HUGE the extent of the rock strata actually are. Are you actually suggesting that grass and plants preclude this environment from being compressed into a layer of flat rock? Is it your belief that the interface of 2 layers, buried, compressed, exposed by erosion, buried again, etc., represent the character of the surface of that material when it was literally on the surface and covered with living organisms? Have you forgotten the hole we dug in the yard of your asylum? Remember how just a few inches down, the grass and trees and plants and dead bugs had turned into material that no longer looked like what it used to be? You are giving the impression that you think that the next distinguishable layer will appear on top of this area overnight, with every hummock and blade of grass preserved.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Capt Stormfield Member (Idle past 456 days) Posts: 428 From: Vancouver Island Joined:
|
So it seems to me as if you are actually objecting to flood geology but attributing that objection to the mainstream geology without really understanding what you are objecting to. "Not Even Wrong." It is the personification of Asimov's "shield of ignorance, proudly borne". Edited by Capt Stormfield, : typo
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
JonF Member (Idle past 168 days) Posts: 6174 Joined: |
I think the Redwall limestone, has been found on the Atlantic floor. You think wrong.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 394 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
Just another example that need explaining.
Fossil Raindrops Yet more images of fossil rain drops How can a flood create fossil raindrops?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NoNukes Inactive Member |
Have you forgotten the hole we dug in the yard of your asylum? Remember how just a few inches down, the grass and trees and plants and dead bugs had turned into material that no longer looked like what it used to be? You are giving the impression that you think that the next distinguishable layer will appear on top of this area overnight, with every hummock and blade of grass preserved. A fine attempt at reason. Please take better care of your pearls. Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846) "Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, the wretched refuse of your teeming shore. Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed to me, I lift my lamp beside the golden door! We got a thousand points of light for the homeless man. We've got a kinder, gentler, machine gun hand. Neil Young, Rockin' in the Free World. Worrying about the "browning of America" is not racism. -- Faith I hate you all, you hate me -- Faith
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024