|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1469 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Evidence that the Great Unconformity did not Form Before the Strata above it | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NoNukes Inactive Member |
which makes him a different kind of creationist than the kind ThinAir was describing You did not actually say anything about different kinds of creationists. What you actually wrote labeled your view on animal death as creationist. But it is not creationist. It's a particular fundamentalist doctrine about what the nature of life post creation. It is no more creationist than is Original Sin. But if that's what you meant, then you should not take my post as a correction. Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.Je Suis Charlie Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846) If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NoNukes Inactive Member |
I didn't say a single thing about Martin Luther's position on creation -- not a single word. Perhaps not. But you did seem to attribute the view about animal death to Martin Luther. Perhaps that was wrong?Je Suis Charlie Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846) If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 419 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
Faith writes: And I still haven't seen the basis for the idea of two miles of missing rock -- assertions galore notwithstanding -- so I have no idea whether it lies or not. You have been shown the basis for the idea of two miles of missing rock and have even acknowledged that you were already familiar with the evidence but what the hey, here it is yet again. From Message 4:
quote: Notice that the Tapeats Sandstone immediately overlies the Super Group except where it is immediately above the Vishnu Schist. At that point all of the Super Group rocks (over two miles of rocks) are missing. Read the numbers on the far right. The Sixty Mile Formation is 200 feet thick. The Chuar Group is 5200 feet thick. The NanKoweap Formation is 370 feet thick. The Unkar group is 6800 feet thick. 200 + 5200 + 370 + 6800 = 12700 feet. One mile = 5280 feet. 12700 / 5280 = 2.38 miles. In the area where the Tapeats Sandstone immediately abuts the Vishnu Schist at least 2.38 miles of rock is missing. Of course it could be considerably more missing rock but we can say with near certainty that at least two miles of rock was eroded away before the Tapeats Sandstone was laid down. Edited by jar, : appali spallin in sub-titleAnyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ThinAirDesigns Member (Idle past 2399 days) Posts: 564 Joined: |
NoNukes writes: But you did seem to attribute the view about animal death to Martin Luther. Perhaps that was wrong? Certainly not my intention -- I have no idea as to any of Luther's views on creation and death. The first paragraph outlines Luther's (and other) views on geocentricity and establishes that they fought helocentricity on biblical grounds. The third paragraph compares the YEC mistake to the geocentric mistake -- namely claiming the bible is above science. Poor wording perhaps. JB
quote: Edited by ThinAirDesigns, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ThinAirDesigns Member (Idle past 2399 days) Posts: 564 Joined: |
Faith writes: I've always regarded an angular unconformity as comprising the entire physical unit of upper horizontal and lower folded strata. The idea that only the "missing" time is included in the definition is new to me. And I actually suspect that's not always the case. My understanding (and I just learned this) is that the very geological definition of an unconformity IS the point where there is missing rock. JB
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NoNukes Inactive Member |
Very nice apology, Faith. I offer this quote from John Calvin for your consideration.
quote: Je Suis Charlie Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846) If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NoNukes Inactive Member |
You really should provide some quotes in evidence for all that. I assume you are looking for evidence regarding heliocentric views. Surely the holding of creationist views is not in doubt. John Calvin
quote: Martin Luther
quote: Je Suis Charlie Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846) If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
edge Member (Idle past 1731 days) Posts: 4696 From: Colorado, USA Joined: |
My understanding (and I just learned this) is that the very geological definition of an unconformity IS the point where there is missing rock.
In the broadest sense, an unconformity is the depositional contact between two rock bodies of different ages, and hence, represents a gap in the geological record. An unconformity would be approximately horizontal (if not deformed), with the younger rocks above it; and does not include intrusive contacts or fault contacts. There are several different types of unconformities, as shown at: Unconformity - Wikipedia As you can see, the upper contact of the Vishnu with the GC Supergroup, or with the Tapeats, could also be called a nonconformity. With this in mind, I sometimes refer to the land surface on which we live an unconformity as a way of showing YECs that unconformities do actually exist.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1430 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
Arguing that all plant and animal life was created together, that there was no death until ~6000 years ago, ... or 10,000 years ago ... ? or 12,000 years ago ... ? Young Earth creationism - Wikipedia
quote: Also see Estimates of the age of the earthand Beliefs in the Earth's age Not much consilience in the age calculations? Enjoy Edited by RAZD, : more Edited by RAZD, : .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)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1469 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
Interesting that they believed all that.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
kbertsche Member (Idle past 2157 days) Posts: 1427 From: San Jose, CA, USA Joined: |
In their day and age, Martin Luther, John Calvin, Philipp Malanchthon, Bellermine and ALL the giants of Christianity believed and insisted that the earth sat unmoved and the heavens rotated around us. They declared those who disagreed to be apostate and even devil possessed. They claimed that if science and the bible contradicted, it wasn't the bible that was going to be altered because all science had to be measured against the bible. The verses proclaiming geocentricity were "divine evidence" and who has the authority to argue against the divine?
So far as I know, Luther held pretty much to a medieval view of the cosmos. He believed that the firmament was solid, with sun, moon, and stars firmly attached to it, because Gen 1 said that God placed these objects IN the firmament of the heavens. He apparently held to geocentrism, referring to Copernicus (or Galileo?) as an "upstart young astrologer" ("astrologer" meant "astronomer" in his day). Luther was almost certainly a form of YEC, but I suspect that he followed Augustine and did NOT believe that the Days of Gen 1 were literal. Calvin is a bit harder to figure out. He seems to have been more open to science than Luther. He frequently noted in his commentaries that biblical language was "accommodated" to human understanding; God could only communicate with mankind in what was essentially an over-simplified "baby-talk", which should not be read more literally than intended. Calvin apparently held the generally-accepted Ptolemaic astronomy rather than the newer, controversial Copernican system, but he didn't make a huge issue of this. More information is available in an excellent paper by Matthew Dowd. I don't know much about the views of Malanchthon, Belarmine, or others. FYI, below are a few quotes from Calvin's commentaries:Re the "waters above the firmament" in Gen 1:6, Calvin said: quote: Re the "greater light", the "lesser light" and the stars in Gen 1:16, Calvin wrote:
quote: Re Ps 19:4-6, Calvin wrote:
quote: Re the earth being "founded upon the seas" in Ps. 24:2, Calvin said:
quote: Edited by kbertsche, : Fixed link (why didn't exactly the same thing work inside of quotes?)"Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind." — Albert Einstein I am very astonished that the scientific picture of the real world around me is very deficient. It gives us a lot of factual information, puts all of our experience in a magnificently consistent order, but it is ghastly silent about all and sundry that is really near to our heart, that really matters to us. It cannot tell us a word about red and blue, bitter and sweet, physical pain and physical delight; it knows nothing of beautiful and ugly, good or bad, God and eternity. Science sometimes pretends to answer questions in these domains, but the answers are very often so silly that we are not inclined to take them seriously. — Erwin Schroedinger
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NoNukes Inactive Member |
I was unable to make this link work.
More information is available in an excellent paper by Matthew Dowd. Je Suis Charlie Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846) If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
kbertsche Member (Idle past 2157 days) Posts: 1427 From: San Jose, CA, USA Joined: |
I was unable to make this link work. I think it's fixed now. (I thought the URL address was supposed to be inside quotes in the URL tag. This always worked for me before, but it didn't work with this URL for some reason.)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NoNukes Inactive Member |
and the stars in Gen 1:16, Calvin wrote: Calvin here explicitly takes the position that Moses description of astronomy is largely a liberal taking of poetic license. How is Calvin's position not to be taken as interpreting the Bible to fit with science?Je Suis Charlie Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846) If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
kbertsche Member (Idle past 2157 days) Posts: 1427 From: San Jose, CA, USA Joined: |
Calvin here explicitly takes the position that Moses description of astronomy is largely a liberal taking of poetic license. How is Calvin's position not to be taken as interpreting the Bible to fit with science?
I would not describe it as "a liberal taking of poetic license". Calvin was pretty clear that he believed "Moses wrote in a popular style". Calvin believed that the biblical writers had to "accommodate" their message to the the unsophistication of their audience. This is clear in his other quotes that I presented, as well as many others, e.g. Gen. 14:1:
quote: "Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind." — Albert Einstein I am very astonished that the scientific picture of the real world around me is very deficient. It gives us a lot of factual information, puts all of our experience in a magnificently consistent order, but it is ghastly silent about all and sundry that is really near to our heart, that really matters to us. It cannot tell us a word about red and blue, bitter and sweet, physical pain and physical delight; it knows nothing of beautiful and ugly, good or bad, God and eternity. Science sometimes pretends to answer questions in these domains, but the answers are very often so silly that we are not inclined to take them seriously. — Erwin Schroedinger
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024