Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 89 (8876 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 12-09-2018 7:54 PM
188 online now:
14174dm, dwise1, Tanypteryx (3 members, 185 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: Bill Holbert
Post Volume:
Total: 843,723 Year: 18,546/29,783 Month: 491/2,043 Week: 43/386 Day: 43/28 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
RewPrev1
...
123124
125
126127
...
193NextFF
Author Topic:   Evolution. We Have The Fossils. We Win.
Coyote
Member (Idle past 80 days)
Posts: 6117
Joined: 01-12-2008


(2)
Message 1861 of 2887 (831253)
04-14-2018 11:04 AM
Reply to: Message 1857 by Faith
04-14-2018 10:31 AM


Re: Permian Age et al
No Coyote, I've spent a lot of time here showing evidence from geology and population genetics that the standard timing of the Old Earth and the ToE is wrong. Nothing to do with religion.

1) No one other than adherents of a particular narrow brand of religion advocates the things you do.

2) The real world evidence is all against the claims you make.

3) You tell us the bible is the highest and only form of evidence you'll accept.

Conclusion--you are doing religious apologetics, the exact opposite of science.


Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.

Belief gets in the way of learning--Robert A. Heinlein

In the name of diversity, college student demands to be kept in ignorance of the culture that made diversity a value--StultisTheFool

It's not what we don't know that hurts, it's what we know that ain't so--Will Rogers

If I am entitled to something, someone else is obliged to pay--Jerry Pournelle

If a religion's teachings are true, then it should have nothing to fear from science...--dwise1

"Multiculturalism" demands that the US be tolerant of everything except its own past, culture, traditions, and identity.

Liberals claim to want to give a hearing to other views, but then are shocked and offended to discover that there are other points of view--William F. Buckley Jr.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1857 by Faith, posted 04-14-2018 10:31 AM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 1862 by Faith, posted 04-14-2018 11:08 AM Coyote has not yet responded

  
Faith
Member
Posts: 30161
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 1862 of 2887 (831254)
04-14-2018 11:08 AM
Reply to: Message 1861 by Coyote
04-14-2018 11:04 AM


Re: Permian Age et al
What I "advocate" is just your way of obscuring the fact that I've given actual physical evidence that has nothing to do with my beliefs.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 1861 by Coyote, posted 04-14-2018 11:04 AM Coyote has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 1864 by PaulK, posted 04-14-2018 11:23 AM Faith has responded

    
edge
Member
Posts: 4450
From: Colorado, USA
Joined: 01-09-2002
Member Rating: 2.6


(1)
Message 1863 of 2887 (831255)
04-14-2018 11:09 AM
Reply to: Message 1859 by Faith
04-14-2018 10:39 AM


Re: Permian Age et al
Bald assertion. I've given actual evidence against all this many times from various presentation of the geologic column. Not one tectonic or volcanic or erosive event in the whole stack of strata that supposedly represent hundreds of millions of years. The Grand Staircase cross section is enough by itself to show that.

It may be an assertion, but plenty of evidence has been provided on these very pages multiple times in the past. Your denial is to no effect.

For instance, you ignore the fact that the Great Unconformity shows signs of erosion in the form of gravel deposits, and differential erosion such as boulders and talus around the monadnocks of Shinumo Quatzite; all the while with no evidence for shearing as you so confidently assert.

You do not recognize the various compositions and relative ages of igneous rocks in the Colorado Plateau region; nor their relationship to cross-cutting faults and erosional surfaces.

And most egregiously, you ignore the fact the Grand Canyon equivalent rocks defined by regional mapping show abundant evidence of tectonism and erosion in the rest of the world while the Faith-designated strata of the Grand Canyon were being deposited.

Even your definition of 'strata' is convoluted beyond recognition.

We could go on and on, but it is to no avail. Blind, dogmatic ignorance is impervious to facts. All you have to do is deny.

All vastly exaggerated and not demonstrated.

Okay, then you explain the processes involved in creating an angular unconformity at numerous places within the geological record.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 1859 by Faith, posted 04-14-2018 10:39 AM Faith has not yet responded

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 14544
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 1.6


(1)
Message 1864 of 2887 (831256)
04-14-2018 11:23 AM
Reply to: Message 1862 by Faith
04-14-2018 11:08 AM


Re: Permian Age et al
quote:

What I "advocate" is just your way of obscuring the fact that I've given actual physical evidence that has nothing to do with my beliefs.

That just isnt true.

In reality the evidence shows a long history of tectonic events.

To first this in with your religious doctrine you come up with the idea that they all happened at the same time. Its not based on the physical evidence - its an attempt to deny the obvious implications of real physical evidence.

But you go on, and now you are insisting that your apologetic excuse is evidence of a Young Earth, and even an observable fact!

In reality youve only looked at one small part of the planet, and you havent come up with any real evidence that your idea is true even there.

That is your physical evidence - a lousy religious apologetic that you try to pass off as a fact.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1862 by Faith, posted 04-14-2018 11:08 AM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 1867 by Faith, posted 04-14-2018 11:35 AM PaulK has responded

    
edge
Member
Posts: 4450
From: Colorado, USA
Joined: 01-09-2002
Member Rating: 2.6


Message 1865 of 2887 (831257)
04-14-2018 11:25 AM
Reply to: Message 1854 by Faith
04-14-2018 10:20 AM


Re: Permian Age et al
Christianity does not evolve. We have it all down in writing and it has never changed. What a king does can't affect the unchangeable written tenets of the religion. If people start to live by the king's rules instead of the Bible's it's not Christianity.

I guess you never heard of the Reformation.

So, why are there so many Christian sects?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1854 by Faith, posted 04-14-2018 10:20 AM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 1866 by Faith, posted 04-14-2018 11:31 AM edge has not yet responded

  
Faith
Member
Posts: 30161
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 1866 of 2887 (831258)
04-14-2018 11:31 AM
Reply to: Message 1865 by edge
04-14-2018 11:25 AM


Re: Permian Age et al
Christianity does not evolve. We have it all down in writing and it has never changed. What a king does can't affect the unchangeable written tenets of the religion. If people start to live by the king's rules instead of the Bible's it's not Christianity.

I guess you never heard of the Reformation.

The Reformation RESTORED the true biblical Christianity that had been ignored and twisted by Roman Catholic pagan superstitition.

So, why are there so many Christian sects?

If they ARE Christian, they differ only on secondary minor points. But you probably wouldn't recognize a denomination from an all out heresy so this discussion would get way to complicated and I'd rather not go there.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1865 by edge, posted 04-14-2018 11:25 AM edge has not yet responded

    
Faith
Member
Posts: 30161
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 1867 of 2887 (831259)
04-14-2018 11:35 AM
Reply to: Message 1864 by PaulK
04-14-2018 11:23 AM


Re: Permian Age et al
In reality the evidence shows a long history of tectonic events.

It's a misinterpretation. Perhaps you could show one to be sure.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1864 by PaulK, posted 04-14-2018 11:23 AM PaulK has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 1868 by PaulK, posted 04-14-2018 11:43 AM Faith has not yet responded
 Message 2027 by Percy, posted 04-18-2018 12:18 PM Faith has not yet responded

    
PaulK
Member
Posts: 14544
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 1.6


(1)
Message 1868 of 2887 (831261)
04-14-2018 11:43 AM
Reply to: Message 1867 by Faith
04-14-2018 11:35 AM


Re: Permian Age et al
quote:

It's a misinterpretation

So you say. But you havent even made a reasonable case for that in the examples that have been discussed.

quote:

Perhaps you could show one to be sure

Id rather stick to the point than go back to something where we already have made a good case.

Why you are you trying to pass off an opinion you hold for religious reasons as evidence? Why are you insisting that it can be shown from the physical evidence when you cant even do that for the region weve discussed most? Let alone the rest of the planet?

And why are you evading this point ?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1867 by Faith, posted 04-14-2018 11:35 AM Faith has not yet responded

    
herebedragons
Member (Idle past 20 days)
Posts: 1483
From: Michigan
Joined: 11-22-2009


(1)
Message 1869 of 2887 (831264)
04-14-2018 12:16 PM
Reply to: Message 1859 by Faith
04-14-2018 10:39 AM


Re: Permian Age et al
Not one tectonic or volcanic or erosive event in the whole stack of strata that supposedly represent hundreds of millions of years.

Not true at all Faith. You have been shown evidence of erosion and tectonic events between and within layers of the GC and you simply hand-wave them away with explanations that have little or nothing to do with reality.

For example, the channels cut into the Muav Ls. and filled with Temple Butte Ls. which you explain as water running between the layers and then back-filling with limestone. Yet, these channels look nothing like karst formations (what waters forms when running underground) and there is no place for the water to flow to or the Temple Butte limestone to come from (since it is different from both the layers above and below it).

The Great Unconformity is another example. You explain it as some kind of weird tilting and sliding process. It is an explanation that makes absolutely no sense and has little resemblance to reality. It is quite impossible to even imagine how your scenario could have happened as it has that little connection to reality. It is simply a "good enough" explanation for you and allows you to dismiss the unconformity as being an erosional surface. In other words, your explanation has nothing to do with trying to understand what actually DID happen but is just trying to maintain the premise that there is no tectonic or erosion events in the entire stack.

The monadnocks are another example. They are clearly erosional features very similar to those we see in places like Monument Valley or like the image below from the Sonoran Desert.

That image is very similar to what the Shinumo monadnocks probably looked like in their day. Since we have the same type of features in the modern landscape that obviously formed by erosion, suggesting that the Shinumo monadnocks were formed by pushing up from underneath, through other layers, just has no connection with reality.

You are arriving at the conclusion that there was no tectonic or erosive event during the deposition of the entire stack because you start with the premise that the flood deposited all the sediment of the geological column and then you craft your explanations to support the premise. If you examined the evidence without that presupposition and instead tried to connect the observations with reality, you would not come to the conclusion that there was no tectonic or erosional events during the deposition of the Grand Canyon.

As it is, your explanations for the features we see in the Grand Canyon are purely imaginary.

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 1859 by Faith, posted 04-14-2018 10:39 AM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 1870 by Faith, posted 04-14-2018 1:14 PM herebedragons has responded

  
Faith
Member
Posts: 30161
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 1870 of 2887 (831266)
04-14-2018 1:14 PM
Reply to: Message 1869 by herebedragons
04-14-2018 12:16 PM


Re: Permian Age et al
The Temple Butte channel couldn't possibly be something that had ever been on the surface. That's obvious to me, sorry if you don't see it.

There are many separate observations that go into my view of the Great Unconformity. I'm too sick of arguing about this right now to want to review all that.

I don't get what you or anyone is trying to say about the monadnocks and don't know if it's worth hearing more about it.

No I have not arrived at the judgment that there was no disturbance to the geo column from presuppositions but from actual evidence. I worked on it a lot back when. I clearly clearly demonstrated what I was seeing in the Grand Canyon.

But everybody's usual denial is just getting too tiresome. I wish I'd written it all out somewhere independently of this place where it's so hard to find anything. .

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1869 by herebedragons, posted 04-14-2018 12:16 PM herebedragons has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 1871 by PaulK, posted 04-14-2018 1:45 PM Faith has not yet responded
 Message 1872 by herebedragons, posted 04-14-2018 1:46 PM Faith has not yet responded
 Message 1873 by herebedragons, posted 04-14-2018 2:13 PM Faith has not yet responded
 Message 2028 by Percy, posted 04-18-2018 12:44 PM Faith has not yet responded

    
PaulK
Member
Posts: 14544
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 1.6


(1)
Message 1871 of 2887 (831268)
04-14-2018 1:45 PM
Reply to: Message 1870 by Faith
04-14-2018 1:14 PM


Re: Permian Age et al
quote:

The Temple Butte channel couldn't possibly be something that had ever been on the surface. That's obvious to me, sorry if you don't see it

Nobody sees it. You just assume it.

quote:

There are many separate observations that go into my view of the Great Unconformity. I'm too sick of arguing about this right now to want to review all that.

There are no actual observations that provide any significant support. None.

quote:

I don't get what you or anyone is trying to say about the monadnocks and don't know if it's worth hearing more about it.

They were clearly formed by surface erosion - like the ones herebedragons showed pictures of. They were there when the Tapeats was being deposited.

quote:

No I have not arrived at the judgment that there was no disturbance to the geo column from presuppositions but from actual evidence. I worked on it a lot back when. I clearly clearly demonstrated what I was seeing in the Grand Canyon.

That is an obvious falsehood. You would have had to have looked at a great many locations to determine that, not just one. And you are almost certainly wrong about the one region you did look at. Its obvious that you just made it up, and it isnt exactly hard to guess the motive.

quote:

But everybody's usual denial is just getting too tiresome. I wish I'd written it all out somewhere independently of this place where it's so hard to find anything. .

Dont worry, you arent missing anything. Just more irrational nonsense.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1870 by Faith, posted 04-14-2018 1:14 PM Faith has not yet responded

    
herebedragons
Member (Idle past 20 days)
Posts: 1483
From: Michigan
Joined: 11-22-2009


(1)
Message 1872 of 2887 (831269)
04-14-2018 1:46 PM
Reply to: Message 1870 by Faith
04-14-2018 1:14 PM


Re: Permian Age et al
That's obvious to me, sorry if you don't see it.

Being "obvious" to you is hardly evidence, since it is also "obvious" to me that those channels in the Muav Ls. WERE formed at the surface. What is different about our "obvious" is that I can point out what surface channels look like compared to underground karsts and compare the formations in the Mauv to those features.

There are many separate observations that go into my view of the Great Unconformity.

Observations are fine... what you fail to do is connect those observations to reality. You just make stuff up to explain those observations.

No I have not arrived at the judgment that there was no disturbance to the geo column from presuppositions but from actual evidence.

Sure you have. Coming to any other conclusion would destroy your faith, are you going to allow that to happen? No, there is only one possible conclusion for you.

But everybody's usual denial is just getting too tiresome.

There must be some confusion about what "denial" means. What I see people on the old ages side doing is disagreeing with your explanations and giving reasons and arguments as to why they aren't valid. What I see you doing is making excuses to ignore evidence and arguments people are presenting because you "know" they are wrong and you are right. It's not that you don't make any legit arguments, but when opposed you have a whole arsenal of denial tactics that you utilize. Percy has detailed them many times as have others.

For example:

I don't get what you or anyone is trying to say about the monadnocks

That is simply denial and does not address the arguments or rebuttals regarding how the monadnocks formed.

and...

and don't know if it's worth hearing more about it.

That's your avoidance tactic.

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 1870 by Faith, posted 04-14-2018 1:14 PM Faith has not yet responded

  
herebedragons
Member (Idle past 20 days)
Posts: 1483
From: Michigan
Joined: 11-22-2009


(1)
Message 1873 of 2887 (831270)
04-14-2018 2:13 PM
Reply to: Message 1870 by Faith
04-14-2018 1:14 PM


Re: Permian Age et al
I don't get what you or anyone is trying to say about the monadnocks

Ok, look at this image again...

now look at the cross section of the Supergroup.

Can't you see that the image from the Sonoran desert looks a lot like the unconformity in the cross section?

Here's another cross section of the canyon (I had not run across this one before - it's quite detailed).

You honestly don't see any disturbance there until the entire sedimentary deposition was complete?

Just one example, the Cardenas Basalt separates the Unkar Group and the Chuar Group of sediments. It is a 300 meter thick lava flow, in two separate units, interbedded with sandstones and more. But I'm sure you can make up something...

HBD

Edited by herebedragons, : typo


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 1870 by Faith, posted 04-14-2018 1:14 PM Faith has not yet responded

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 17962
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 2.1


(1)
Message 1874 of 2887 (831271)
04-14-2018 2:23 PM
Reply to: Message 1702 by Faith
04-11-2018 7:08 AM


Re: The Imaginary Fossil Order is a false interpretation
Responding to several of your messages...


Replying to your Message 1702 to PaulK:

Faith in Message 1702 to PaulK writes:

What would be strange is if I always came up with the best explanation for what I'm trying to get across, or that even when I did, which I do from time to time,...

Most everything you say draws a response because most everything you say is in error.

...my opponents could transcend their adherence to the other paradigm in order to get my point.

You do not have a paradigm. You have a fiction, dogmatically adherent to a religious book by ancient nomads, that ignores almost all evidence and often perversely distorts facts and analysis.

I was merely addressing the fact that it is marine creatures that are found in the lowest levels. That doesn't mean they don't appear in higher levels as well. There must be factors due to how water behaves involved in the location of whale fossils.

Marine strata with marine fossils are found in all levels of the geological record, from top to bottom, but the species differ. In fact, they become increasingly different from modern forms with increasing depth in the geologic column. Water does not have the ability to sort in this way, nor by radiometric age, nor by sediment type.

I was suggesting that the first deposits would have been mostly of the creatures found originally at lower depths. The habitat of land animals is higher up than the marine creatures so it would make sense that they got caught ni the Flood in the later stages. I'm sure there are all kinds of exceptions because there would have been many factors involved, but original habitat should be one big factor.

There wouldn't be exceptions to what you describe because what you describe doesn't exist in the real world. Marine and non-marine strata are interspersed.


Replying to your Message 1703 to PaulK:

Faith in Message 1703 to PaulK writes:

They would have a different opinion because they are seeing everything through a different paradigm.

You do not have a paradigm. You have a religious story unsupported by, indeed contradicted by, real world evidence.


Replying to your Message 1711 to Coyote:

Faith in Message 1703 to Coyote writes:

Exactly It is ONLY the radiometric dating that shows it wrong, just one kind of evidence, and that's partly why I don't address it.

It isn't just radiometric dating that says you're wrong. It's also fossil order, the ways sediments originate through erosional processes, sedimentation order, sedimentation rates, strata with tracks, burrows and nests, Walther's Law as a slow process requiring long time periods, unconformities representing missing millions of years of time, sea floor striping recording flips in the Earth's magnetic field, sea floor spreading rates, slope retreat rates at canyons, sharp contacts between strata.

And I'm sure we're all curious to understand your process in better detail. Do I have this right:

  1. The flood sweeps across the landscape stripping it bare so that all sediments are swept into the water.
  2. The water recedes from the land, then sorts the sediments by type and radiometric age, and the fossils by increasing difference from modern forms.
  3. The water returns to the land in the form of a long sequence of successive waves that redeposits the sediments and fossils, but only of particular types each time. There's little mixing of sediments of different types, or of fossils of different eras, and none of sediments of different radiometric ages.
  4. Even though the flood had earlier swept across the land to strip the sediments from it, animals still somehow inhabit the land so that they can run out onto the mudflats between successive waves in order to create tracks, burrows, nests, etc.

There are creationists who do address it though, I just haven't studied the subject enough to follow them.

No, sorry, there are no creationists who address these things. And don't you tire of constantly having to resort to, "Answers exist, I just don't have them."

Also, although the method looks consistent in the present, there is no way to know if it holds up in the past.

There is no evidence that processes in the past were any different than they are today. In fact, today we observe sedimentary processes creating the same geologic structures that we find in ancient strata.

But having only ONE kind of evidence doesn't cut it in any case.

Pretending that many lines of evidence pointing in the same direction don't exist is silly. You're engaged in a multi-year performance of denial. Stubbornly refusing to make sense of evidence or acknowledge evidence or even understand how reality works is guaranteed not to work as persuasion. Perhaps you see it as a way to testify for your God, but this is a science thread. You need to weave the many lines of evidence into a consistent whole.


Replying to your Message 1712 to Jar:

Faith in Message 1712 to jar writes:

And in addition there is fossil evidence of land based plants that certainly could not move to avoid the flood yet show the very same pattern as we see with the critters.

Which are misinterpreted by the timescale paradigm just as the animals are.

I think you've got paradigm on the brain. Casting accusations of paradigm is not an answer. If you've got an interpretation of the evidence that is consistent with natural laws then let's hear it - otherwise all you're doing is posting a big fat, "I've got nothing."

We see proto-trees below true trees

YOu see a different variety of tree, or a different plant, period, not a "proto" tree. Just another unwarranted application of the timescale paradigm.

You're like a broken record. Crying "paradigm" is not a response. You've still got nothing.

grasses don't show up until near the extinction of the dinosaurs about 70 million years ago but the first flowers showed up about 140 million years ago.

Utterly ridiculous. Flowers and grasses co-existed and merely got buried in different layers.

Oh, this should be good. Please explain how flowers and grasses in the same field ended up in different layers.

And when we look at the plant evidence we see the same changes over time within each grouping with every species evolving over the millions of years and new forms never found below the older forms.

The whole idea of "newer" and "older" is a wildly subjective totally unwarranted judgment. You aren't seeing "changes" at all, you are seeing different kinds of plants that your adherence to the timescale paradigm deceives you into classifying in terms of evolution.

You're just not going to stop with this paradigm nonsense, are you. There is no such thing as a Flood paradigm. You can't seem to answer any challenges, only invent names. The fossil order is not an illusion, and it isn't something you can explain as a result of the Flood.

How did the Biblical Flood sort the plant fossils in the order found in reality?

It didn't. The "order" is an illusion conjured up out of feverish imagination and pasted onto the physical world without justification. It's like Phrenology, as I said a while back, nothing but mental conjurings reified or taken for reality. It's like seeing patterns or meaning in tea leaves or the lines of the palm of the hand. Like a Rorschach test or formations in clouds.

If the fossil order is an illusion then you should be able to show that it's an illusion. But you can't, because it's real.


Hmmm, been a bit busy, and before I had a chance to post this the thread seems to have up and run away from me - I'm now about 150 messages behind. It's no longer practical to respond to each of your misstatements, so I'll just post what I've got so far and read to the end of the thread.

--Percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1702 by Faith, posted 04-11-2018 7:08 AM Faith has not yet responded

    
Percy
Member
Posts: 17962
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 2.1


(1)
Message 1875 of 2887 (831272)
04-14-2018 2:35 PM
Reply to: Message 1733 by Faith
04-11-2018 3:45 PM


Re: The Imaginary Fossil Order is a false interpretation
Faith writes:

Naturally the orders will be the same, by the law of superposition.

Wow, I think that must be the most wacko thing I've heard yet.

Couldn't resist commenting on this one. PaulK is invoking the law of superposition, the one law of Steno that you still accept. Without some kind of tectonic inversion, how could fossils in a lower strata be deposited after fossils in a higher strata? What is wrong with you that you're rejecting not just science established and accepted for hundreds of years, but even just simple common sense.

There is only one fossil order represented by the actual fossils in actual geological strata. As usual when you have no argument you confound discussion by insisting on nonsense that you argue for interminably. That probably explains the 140 messages I have yet to read.

--Percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1733 by Faith, posted 04-11-2018 3:45 PM Faith has not yet responded

    
RewPrev1
...
123124
125
126127
...
193NextFF
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2015 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2018