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: 0/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Why the Flood Never Happened
herebedragons
Member (Idle past 858 days)
Posts: 1517
From: Michigan
Joined: 11-22-2009


Message 1786 of 1896 (717785)
02-01-2014 9:10 AM
Reply to: Message 1781 by Percy
02-01-2014 8:02 AM


Re: faults and erosion
I'm not sure what HBD was trying to say, he didn't provide much detail.
Even looking only at that cross section and visualizing how the layers were before the uplift, it is obvious the layers are not flat. Your diagram works as a good illustration. How she decided they were flat based on that cross section is beyond me. Of course, her rebuttal (some time back) was "relatively" flat.
HBD

Whoever 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.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1781 by Percy, posted 02-01-2014 8:02 AM Percy has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1788 by Faith, posted 02-01-2014 6:02 PM herebedragons has replied

  
frako
Member (Idle past 306 days)
Posts: 2932
From: slovenija
Joined: 09-04-2010


Message 1787 of 1896 (717798)
02-01-2014 1:33 PM
Reply to: Message 1776 by Faith
01-31-2014 11:45 AM


Re: faults and erosion
Faith can you write a thesis on how you think the flood happened all of it. From noah building the ark to him getting the animals on board how he did hit... To where the watter came from was it the ice canopy "theory, moon bukake ... to how the animals got back to their homes and life resumed... in as much detail as possible.

Christianity, One woman's lie about an affair that got seriously out of hand
What are the Christians gonna do to me ..... Forgive me, good luck with that.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1776 by Faith, posted 01-31-2014 11:45 AM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1789 by Faith, posted 02-01-2014 6:14 PM frako has not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1445 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 1788 of 1896 (717804)
02-01-2014 6:02 PM
Reply to: Message 1786 by herebedragons
02-01-2014 9:10 AM


Re: faults and erosion
You're splitting hairs -- to what purpose? "Flat" means they have not been tilted or broken or otherwise altered in some OBVIOUS way. All that happened after a few hundred million years' worth of strata were laid down (on the Old Earth theory of course).
The mere fact that you are assuming I mean some kind of perfection means you haven't grasped a thing I've been trying to say.
Oh well, there really is no point, is there?
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1786 by herebedragons, posted 02-01-2014 9:10 AM herebedragons has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1791 by Percy, posted 02-01-2014 8:53 PM Faith has not replied
 Message 1794 by herebedragons, posted 02-01-2014 9:42 PM Faith has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1445 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 1789 of 1896 (717805)
02-01-2014 6:14 PM
Reply to: Message 1787 by frako
02-01-2014 1:33 PM


Re: faults and erosion
Faith can you write a thesis on how you think the flood happened all of it. From noah building the ark to him getting the animals on board how he did hit... To where the watter came from was it the ice canopy "theory, moon bukake ... to how the animals got back to their homes and life resumed... in as much detail as possible.
No, frako, I don't usually get into all those issues, I'm trying to make a few points I thought were pretty simple. Should have known better I guess, 'cause this is Evo Wonderland where anything a creationist says will be so garbled and twisted and obscured beyond recognition within moments there's certainly no point in trying to say something that's less than simple.
I think I can say, however, that the animals may not have had "homes" to "get back to" after the Flood but simply dispersed in all directions, even to great distances. The whole climate is supposed to have changed rather dramatically so whatever "home" had been would probably have been unrecognizable anyway. If the continental plates didn't start moving immediately then there must have been enough time for them to disperse to those great distances, including into the areas that became the new continents that were moving away from the original.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1787 by frako, posted 02-01-2014 1:33 PM frako has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1793 by Percy, posted 02-01-2014 9:28 PM Faith has not replied
 Message 1802 by herebedragons, posted 02-02-2014 8:14 AM Faith has not replied
 Message 1804 by RAZD, posted 02-02-2014 9:29 AM Faith has not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1445 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 1790 of 1896 (717806)
02-01-2014 6:23 PM
Reply to: Message 1782 by frako
02-01-2014 8:06 AM


Re: faults and erosion
GOOD GRIEF, FRAKO, HAVE YOU READ ANYTHING I'VE WRITTEN HERE? VERTICAL LAYERS WERE THE RESULT OF TECTONIC FORCES THAT OCCURRED AFTER ALL THE STRATA WERE LAID DOWN. HAVEN'T I SAID THAT ONLY ABOUT A HUNDRED TIMES ON THIS THREAD? BUT YOU ALL THINK YOU CAN POST A PICTURE OF TECTONICALLY AFFECTED STRATA AND THINK YOU HAVE ANSWERED ME. AS I SAID, SOME OF THE PICTURES ARE AMBIGUOUS ENOUGH TO NEED DISCUSSION BUT THE POINT, AGAIN, IS THAT THE TECTONIC DISTORTIONS OCCURRED AFTER THE STRATA WERE ALL IN PLACE. ABE: YOUR PICTURE SHOW STRATA THAT WERE UPTILTED AS A BLOCK, RIGHT?
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1782 by frako, posted 02-01-2014 8:06 AM frako has not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22392
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.3


(2)
Message 1791 of 1896 (717814)
02-01-2014 8:53 PM
Reply to: Message 1788 by Faith
02-01-2014 6:02 PM


Re: faults and erosion
Fatih writes:
"Flat" means they have not been tilted or broken or otherwise altered in some OBVIOUS way.
You keep complaining that no one understands what you're saying, and this is yet another example why. That is not the definition of "flat". Flat does not mean "not been tilted". Horizontal means "not been tilted."
And "flat" does not mean "not broken". You certainly wouldn't say that a flat layer with a fault running through it somewhere wasn't flat.
When no one can figure out what you're saying, the problem is you, not everyone else.
The point that HBD is trying to discuss with you and that you keep finding lame and irrelevant reasons to not discuss is that there are features at the boundary between layers that can't be explained by a global flood. There are also features within the layers that can't be explained by the flood. Even the layers themselves can't be explained by the flood.
But you have no answers for all that, so you find excuses for talking about everything but.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1788 by Faith, posted 02-01-2014 6:02 PM Faith has not replied

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


Message 1792 of 1896 (717815)
02-01-2014 8:56 PM
Reply to: Message 1778 by herebedragons
01-31-2014 12:42 PM


Re: faults and erosion
* the cracks run east - west
--- but when shown that the stress cracks run north to south in the entire area; you should abandon that argument.
IIRC she once said that all the river canyons in this cross-section
Were east-west cracks that all became canyons.
Or something like that.

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American 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 1778 by herebedragons, posted 01-31-2014 12:42 PM herebedragons has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1795 by herebedragons, posted 02-01-2014 9:57 PM RAZD has seen this message but not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22392
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.3


(2)
Message 1793 of 1896 (717818)
02-01-2014 9:28 PM
Reply to: Message 1789 by Faith
02-01-2014 6:14 PM


Re: faults and erosion
Faith writes:
Should have known better I guess, 'cause this is Evo Wonderland where anything a creationist says will be so garbled and twisted and obscured beyond recognition within moments there's certainly no point in trying to say something that's less than simple.
The true reason for your inability to communicate your ideas is that they are incomprehensible, incoherent, irrational, make no sense, and because they aren't based on evidence are vague, ethereal and ever changing.
The whole climate is supposed to have changed rather dramatically...
This is based on neither Bible nor science. This is just you making up things again.
If the continental plates didn't start moving immediately then there must have been enough time for them to disperse to those great distances, including into the areas that became the new continents that were moving away from the original.
More fantasy.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1789 by Faith, posted 02-01-2014 6:14 PM Faith has not replied

  
herebedragons
Member (Idle past 858 days)
Posts: 1517
From: Michigan
Joined: 11-22-2009


(1)
Message 1794 of 1896 (717820)
02-01-2014 9:42 PM
Reply to: Message 1788 by Faith
02-01-2014 6:02 PM


Re: faults and erosion
You're splitting hairs -- to what purpose?
It's not splitting hairs, Faith. It is dealing with the evidence. There are good, solid reasons why I have come to the conclusion that the earth is old and that the flood was not a global phenomenon. Arguments for a global flood and a 6,000 year old earth are based on half truths, lack of evidence, ignorance and outright dishonesty.
The mere fact that you are assuming I mean some kind of perfection means you haven't grasped a thing I've been trying to say.
Here's your own image:
Look how perfectly you have those layers drawn. That is flat. All those layers are flat and horizontal. Its a "rock pancake" as you call it. But. the real world looks nothing like that. Not even the Grand Staircase section you like so much looks like that.
So because I am telling you that you are wrong in your assessment of the strata that means I don't understand what you are saying? How silly. I understand just fine the point you are making and it is simply wrong.
Oh well, there really is no point, is there?
No probably not.
HBD

Whoever 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.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1788 by Faith, posted 02-01-2014 6:02 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1797 by Faith, posted 02-02-2014 2:06 AM herebedragons has replied

  
herebedragons
Member (Idle past 858 days)
Posts: 1517
From: Michigan
Joined: 11-22-2009


(2)
Message 1795 of 1896 (717822)
02-01-2014 9:57 PM
Reply to: Message 1792 by RAZD
02-01-2014 8:56 PM


Re: faults and erosion
IIRC she once said that all the river canyons in this cross-section ... Were east-west cracks that all became canyons.
That's pretty much the impression I got, it kinda hard to keep it all straight though - like shifting sand.
Or something like that.
I think it started out as a simple way for her to explain how the water from the lake spill-over found its way over the uplift and begin cutting the canyon, and it just escalated from there ... rather than just admitting it wouldn't work and just abandoning the idea.
HBD

Whoever 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.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1792 by RAZD, posted 02-01-2014 8:56 PM RAZD has seen this message but not replied

  
Pollux
Member
Posts: 303
Joined: 11-13-2011


Message 1796 of 1896 (717824)
02-01-2014 10:31 PM


Quote mine from Faith's #1789
...anything a creationist says will be so garbled and twisted...

Replies to this message:
 Message 1798 by Faith, posted 02-02-2014 2:10 AM Pollux has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1445 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 1797 of 1896 (717836)
02-02-2014 2:06 AM
Reply to: Message 1794 by herebedragons
02-01-2014 9:42 PM


Re: faults and erosion
I don't believe it. You're the one taking a diagram way too literally. I am unable to draw freehand on my Paint program. The strata would be completely unintelligible if I tried. So I had to use the straight line to show the layers. I made no attempt to be exact about anything. The point of the diagram was to indicate the depth and overall horizontality of ALL the strata right after they were laid down.
You're all nuts.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1794 by herebedragons, posted 02-01-2014 9:42 PM herebedragons has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1800 by herebedragons, posted 02-02-2014 8:03 AM Faith has not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1445 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 1798 of 1896 (717837)
02-02-2014 2:10 AM
Reply to: Message 1796 by Pollux
02-01-2014 10:31 PM


Re: Quote mine from Faith's #1789
Right, taking me out of context, which just demonstrates the level of deception you're willing to go to, as if things weren't confused enough already. You were EVER a YEC? Well, not a Christian YEC I'd bet.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1796 by Pollux, posted 02-01-2014 10:31 PM Pollux has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1799 by Pollux, posted 02-02-2014 2:23 AM Faith has not replied

  
Pollux
Member
Posts: 303
Joined: 11-13-2011


Message 1799 of 1896 (717838)
02-02-2014 2:23 AM
Reply to: Message 1798 by Faith
02-02-2014 2:10 AM


Re: Quote mine from Faith's #1789
It was clearly labelled as a quote mine, which is taking something out of context. In this case it seemed rather apt.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1798 by Faith, posted 02-02-2014 2:10 AM Faith has not replied

  
herebedragons
Member (Idle past 858 days)
Posts: 1517
From: Michigan
Joined: 11-22-2009


(1)
Message 1800 of 1896 (717847)
02-02-2014 8:03 AM
Reply to: Message 1797 by Faith
02-02-2014 2:06 AM


Re: faults and erosion
You're the one taking a diagram way too literally.
No I'm not.The flatness and horizontality of the strata is the crux of your main argument.
Faith in msg 1730 writes:
Flat slabness of the sedimentary rocks in the strata: proves they were laid down in water, all of them despite claims they couldn't have been, and that none of them was ever at the surface for any great length of time. We'll just have to explain the angle of repose somehow.
This is your main argument right? That ALL the strata was laid down BEFORE any tectonic disturbance occurred. Your drawing nicely shows what "flat" and "horizontal" looks like.
So, if you could have drawn freehand, you would have drawn the layers with varying thicknesses, cutting off other layers, with river channels between the layers, with dished out surfaces, with rubble between the layers. etc ... Doubtful, since your point is that the layers were all laid down flat and horizontal. Drawing erosional surfaces would have been counter-productive.
So I take it you concede that the layers are not flat, since you think I'm crazy for suggesting that you thought they were flat?
Of course, your answer is (besides we are all crazy) that the erosion occurred BETWEEN the layers AFTER they were laid down. It was this claim that led to a whole slew of side issues, such as underground canyons, unlithified sediment, etc ... But you don't want to get bogged down in these side issues, right?
-----
So, based on your original argument and the relevant facts, no side issues withstanding ... either:
A. original horizontality is NOT a principal of geology, or
B. they were laid down flat (on the top surface) and subsequently disturbed or eroded BEFORE the next layer was put down.
Which is it?
------
You're all nuts.
No I'm not. My mother had me tested.
HBD

Whoever 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.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1797 by Faith, posted 02-02-2014 2:06 AM 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