Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 13/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   The Flood, fossils, & the geologic evidence
anglagard
Member (Idle past 836 days)
Posts: 2339
From: Socorro, New Mexico USA
Joined: 03-18-2006


(2)
Message 82 of 377 (529027)
10-07-2009 10:35 PM
Reply to: Message 72 by Theodoric
10-07-2009 7:24 PM


Re: A test for Calypsis4
I agree completely, therefore no responses from me in any thread involving Calypsis 4 as they are not about honest debate but rather are simply about insult, gallop, and run away.

The idea of the sacred is quite simply one of the most conservative notions in any culture, because it seeks to turn other ideas - uncertainty, progress, change - into crimes.
Salman Rushdie
This rudderless world is not shaped by vague metaphysical forces. It is not God who kills the children. Not fate that butchers them or destiny that feeds them to the dogs. It’s us. Only us. - the character Rorschach in Watchmen

This message is a reply to:
 Message 72 by Theodoric, posted 10-07-2009 7:24 PM Theodoric has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 89 by Calypsis4, posted 10-07-2009 10:57 PM anglagard has not replied

  
anglagard
Member (Idle past 836 days)
Posts: 2339
From: Socorro, New Mexico USA
Joined: 03-18-2006


Message 228 of 377 (620056)
06-13-2011 11:30 PM
Reply to: Message 227 by Minnemooseus
06-13-2011 10:24 PM


Re: Evidence of the entire geologic column?
As someone with mild familiarity with the geosciences (BS geological engineering 82 - New Mexico Tech) I completely agree with Edge, Rox, and Moose. My sole difference with Roxrkool on this issue of Woodmorappe is I would have been less polite and restrained.
Sorry, intentional deception really upsets me.

The idea of the sacred is quite simply one of the most conservative notions in any culture, because it seeks to turn other ideas - uncertainty, progress, change - into crimes.
Salman Rushdie
This rudderless world is not shaped by vague metaphysical forces. It is not God who kills the children. Not fate that butchers them or destiny that feeds them to the dogs. It’s us. Only us. - the character Rorschach in Watchmen

This message is a reply to:
 Message 227 by Minnemooseus, posted 06-13-2011 10:24 PM Minnemooseus has seen this message but not replied

  
anglagard
Member (Idle past 836 days)
Posts: 2339
From: Socorro, New Mexico USA
Joined: 03-18-2006


Message 273 of 377 (621327)
06-25-2011 3:15 AM
Reply to: Message 272 by Chuck77
06-25-2011 2:36 AM


Here's the way it looks right now
Chuck77 writes:
I believe the flood happened but not knowing what the earth looked like before the "flood" how would I know how the evidence against it is supposed to look?
It looks like an incised river valley, the Grand Canyon being one of hundreds of examples.
It looks like dozens of lakes with annual layers known as varves, Lake Shigetsu being a prime example.
It looks like every ice core pulled out of the center of Greenland and Antarctica.
It looks like every coral reef that has annual variations in growth.
It looks like every tree ring that has annual variations in growth.
It looks like every calcite formation, such as stalactites that have annual variations of growth.
It looks like every sedimentary formation with annual layers such as the Castile beneath my feet which has 200,000 alternating layers of the same sequence of anhydrite, gypsum, and halite in each one.
It looks like the four miles of salts beneath my feet, which is more than any 4350 years of evaporation can ever account for.
It looks like every sedimentary rock that shows no supposed flood layer, inter sped with water borne impossibilities such as igneous intrusions that could not have formed under oceans.
It looks like a geology that in every way accounts for preservation of mass and energy.
....
I'm just warming up.
It looks to me like you need to learn something about the geosciences before declaring your opinion as somehow informed.
{ABE}Read every word in this thread, or you will have no credibility here concerning this or similar subjects among the majority of members.
Sometimes the truth hurts, sometimes it needs to so it sticks.{/ABE}
Edited by anglagard, : Link to greatest thread of all time
Edited by anglagard, : More precision in the Castile formation bit.
Edited by anglagard, : remove parts of too strong a sentence in referring to the #1 post by RAZD

The idea of the sacred is quite simply one of the most conservative notions in any culture, because it seeks to turn other ideas - uncertainty, progress, change - into crimes.
Salman Rushdie
This rudderless world is not shaped by vague metaphysical forces. It is not God who kills the children. Not fate that butchers them or destiny that feeds them to the dogs. It’s us. Only us. - the character Rorschach in Watchmen

This message is a reply to:
 Message 272 by Chuck77, posted 06-25-2011 2:36 AM Chuck77 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 274 by Chuck77, posted 06-25-2011 4:38 AM anglagard has replied

  
anglagard
Member (Idle past 836 days)
Posts: 2339
From: Socorro, New Mexico USA
Joined: 03-18-2006


(1)
Message 275 of 377 (621338)
06-25-2011 6:25 AM
Reply to: Message 274 by Chuck77
06-25-2011 4:38 AM


Re: Here's the way it looks right now
Chuck77 writes:
You really took my ENTIRE comment out of context.
To reiterate:
Chuck77 writes:
I believe the flood happened but not knowing what the earth looked like before the "flood" how would I know how the evidence against it is supposed to look?
Do you always try to twist what other members say and or bully them?
You said you believed in a global flood in accordance with biblical fundamentalism, I took you at your word that is what you believe. It isn't my personal problem that you don't know you are wrong until you try to force some form of cult anti-rational crap on everyone, such as happened to my daughter in the public school system in West Texas.
Yeah I'm angry, for good cause. Makes me a real bastard at times.
Here's a thought, instead of cherry picking things i've said TRY to keep my comments in context. It really isn't hard.
OK, what is the context, let's find out.
As for declaring my opinion as informed and using what I said about NOT knowing how the earth looked before the "flood" how would I know what things are supposed to look like?
As I stated, with tree rings, coral reefs, ice sheets (sometimes), evolving creatures, rocks, volcanoes, and so on. Just like it looked to those Egyptians who built the largest pyramids before this supposed flood.
From your own posts apparently everything appears to you through the filter of 'the flood happened.' Reality, unfortunately for you, clearly demonstrates there was no global flood since the Precambrian, and most likely never.
As an example (since you like to cherry pick and forget everything else i've said regarding how I said I "lack EVIDENCE" to back up MY opinions which you overlook and instead try to demean) if the earth was LEVEL or less "mountainess" before the SUPPOSED "FLOOD". Possibly the mountains TODAY are WAY higher than then and catastrophic Plate Tectonics could have caused the mountains to rise and ocean valley's to sink but I can't know for sure because I wasn't there.
Uh huh, "you weren't there" direct from the Ken Ham playbook.
So that's why I said it would be nice to know how it used to look.
Those idiot scientists, myself included, actually have a very detailed picture based upon evidence. Care to listen?
I know YOU/Scientists say they've been rising a few inches a century or so? So it must have been millions of years for them to form like they are now. HENCE the debate. I know you think there is no "debate" but that's why your here right? To debate or just shout down? I can't stand arrogant know it alls even after people admit they have a lot of work to do finding supporting evidence. It's a HYPOTHESIS. You know what a HYPOTHESIS is? I didn't say it was a proven THEORY. YET.
I know the difference between data, hypothesis, theory, and proof. From the previous sentences most all here can see you don't. As I said do some studying, here is a great place to start.
So now, you are bringing me into an argument about ideas and opinions i've already expressed and am learning not to just say things without sufficient evidence AFTER I already said I have no theory to support it. Are you just jumping in or have you been following along? If you've been following along then you're a playground bully and should stick to the coffee house and free for all and stick it to the Creationists' over there.
If you have no theory to support your assertions......, well, please continue the debate.
IF you have a shred of humility and can see that EVERYONE is NOT as smart as you then stick around, you might actually lean how to be a decent human being and how the 'FLOOD" really happened, after I get the evidence, of course.
Glad to see you have not lost your sense of humor.
The truth doesn't hurt. As the reason everyone is here IS because they WANT truth. It's only people like you that don't care about truth but instead relish in the showing of everyone how wrong you think they are.
Personally, I relish both.
So, as a flud advocate, care to look deeper into those evaporites?
How about Salt of the Earth?

The idea of the sacred is quite simply one of the most conservative notions in any culture, because it seeks to turn other ideas - uncertainty, progress, change - into crimes.
Salman Rushdie
This rudderless world is not shaped by vague metaphysical forces. It is not God who kills the children. Not fate that butchers them or destiny that feeds them to the dogs. It’s us. Only us. - the character Rorschach in Watchmen

This message is a reply to:
 Message 274 by Chuck77, posted 06-25-2011 4:38 AM Chuck77 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 276 by Chuck77, posted 06-25-2011 7:28 AM anglagard has replied

  
anglagard
Member (Idle past 836 days)
Posts: 2339
From: Socorro, New Mexico USA
Joined: 03-18-2006


Message 277 of 377 (621341)
06-25-2011 7:51 AM
Reply to: Message 276 by Chuck77
06-25-2011 7:28 AM


Re: Here's the way it looks right now
Chuck77 writes:
You have to much pride and not enough humility to admit error.
I don't know any better, yet. I only go by what I see.
One of the above statements is true.
Thanks for bringing the simple comment I made a few comments up and taking everything in it off topic. As a veteren member here you should know better
Yeah, I guess if the topic is the Flood, fossils, & the geologic evidence, my post concerning The Flood & the geologic evidence is off topic.
Guess I left one out.
You have 57 posts, the kid gloves are off.
Now about those evaporites.
{ABE} upon viewing the OP, I see it is primarily about having too many fossils in one place at one time to please creationists. Well you should see the Permian limestone around here, damn near solid fossils of brachiopods and crinoids every centimeter. That is of course when that inland sea wasn't making evaporites. May be on topic after all, but I am not the one to judge. {/ABE}
Edited by anglagard, : No reason given.

The idea of the sacred is quite simply one of the most conservative notions in any culture, because it seeks to turn other ideas - uncertainty, progress, change - into crimes.
Salman Rushdie
This rudderless world is not shaped by vague metaphysical forces. It is not God who kills the children. Not fate that butchers them or destiny that feeds them to the dogs. It’s us. Only us. - the character Rorschach in Watchmen

This message is a reply to:
 Message 276 by Chuck77, posted 06-25-2011 7:28 AM Chuck77 has not replied

  
anglagard
Member (Idle past 836 days)
Posts: 2339
From: Socorro, New Mexico USA
Joined: 03-18-2006


Message 281 of 377 (621349)
06-25-2011 8:38 AM
Reply to: Message 278 by Percy
06-25-2011 7:56 AM


Re: Brief notes on the "flood"
Percy writes:
A side comment: I wish Anglagard would adopt a more dispassionate tone, and I hope this doesn't escalate.
Agreed, am taking this way too personal.
I suspend myself from this thread for one week, regardless of temptation.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 278 by Percy, posted 06-25-2011 7:56 AM Percy has seen this message but not replied

  
anglagard
Member (Idle past 836 days)
Posts: 2339
From: Socorro, New Mexico USA
Joined: 03-18-2006


Message 320 of 377 (622383)
07-02-2011 7:42 PM
Reply to: Message 308 by Chuck77
06-30-2011 2:58 AM


End of Self-Imposed Exile
Chuck77 writes:
I say this with as much respect as I can, the only reason this debate has lasted so long is because of the long line of ignorant Creationists that come here that havn't or don't want to realise that Creationism in it's current form doesn't fit into the Scientific method. So when people like myself are new to the whole thing we don't realise this right off the bat. It's like boot camp and you guys are the drill sergants, another crop of creationists every couple months, but that's what keeps the debate alive. Im not conceding that Creationism is wrong, it's just not Scientific in it's current form. So now what? I think a lot of Creation Scientists are lazy because they "know" their right and therefore don't see a need to put forth the effort to try to mold it around the Scientific method. Something needs to change.
While it is the end of my self-imposed exile, I feel I must apologize for my previous behavior in this thread in acknowledging your willingness to consider other viewpoints.
Therefore I am sorry, and with that ask no quarter as to my poor behavior.
As to the scientific facts, I give no quarter. However, I will refrain from posting in this thread unless I personally deem it absolutely necessary.
I leave this discussion to those who are kinder and have more patience than I have recently shown.

The idea of the sacred is quite simply one of the most conservative notions in any culture, because it seeks to turn other ideas - uncertainty, progress, change - into crimes.
Salman Rushdie
This rudderless world is not shaped by vague metaphysical forces. It is not God who kills the children. Not fate that butchers them or destiny that feeds them to the dogs. It’s us. Only us. - the character Rorschach in Watchmen

This message is a reply to:
 Message 308 by Chuck77, posted 06-30-2011 2:58 AM Chuck77 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