Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,808 Year: 3,065/9,624 Month: 910/1,588 Week: 93/223 Day: 4/17 Hour: 1/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Evolution. We Have The Fossils. We Win.
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 2191 of 2887 (831756)
04-24-2018 1:19 AM
Reply to: Message 2187 by Faith
04-23-2018 11:41 PM


Re: The Imaginary Fossil Order is a false interpretation
quote:
First appreciate the evidence and arguments I've given that are really extremely telling, it's changing the subject to skip to the tracks etc
You certainly haven’t given any arguements of evidence that are extremely telling in support of your idea. And I don’t see that pointing out contrary evidence can be considered to be changing the subject.
quote:
Tracks and burrows in flat lithified sediment are far from any kind of evidence of life on such a surface, which would be impossible. Nothing could live there.
Burrows are rather good evidence that things were living there. And of course the surface wasn’t lithified when they were living there.
Nests, with young in them are even better evidence that the dinosaurs were living there.
quote:
They have to have occurred during phases of the Flood, there is no other reasonable explanation.
Paradigm blindness strikes again.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2187 by Faith, posted 04-23-2018 11:41 PM Faith has not replied

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 9489
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 4.9


Message 2192 of 2887 (831757)
04-24-2018 2:51 AM
Reply to: Message 2188 by Faith
04-23-2018 11:46 PM


Faith writes:
Magma mostly.
So we have ocean, then magma? Nothing else?
Though it's irrelevant to the topic at hand.
You claim that there is no geological column under the ocean floor. Ignoring the geological fact that the geological column is an idealised construct anyway, that seems a wild and ludicrous claim.
Now you tell us that there's molten rock there. Well there's molten rock everywhere under the earth's surface and sometimes on top of it. So something is seperating the ocean from the magma, what is it? I suggest that it rock and rock is part of the geological column. How about that?

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.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2188 by Faith, posted 04-23-2018 11:46 PM Faith has not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 2193 of 2887 (831758)
04-24-2018 3:14 AM
Reply to: Message 2190 by dwise1
04-24-2018 1:03 AM


Re: The Imaginary Fossil Order is a false interpretation
Tracks and burrows in flat lithified sediment are far from any kind of evidence of life on such a surface, which would be impossible. Nothing could live there.
Why not? You're just giving us your conclusions. How did you arrive at those conclusions?
A flat wet sedimentary surface, which is of course the surface on which all the tracks and burrows and raindrops and so on were originally made, is not a normal surface things live on. These things are impressed into rock, indicating that another deposit of sediment came along right after the impressions were made, filled them and preserved them, no doubt killing the creatures that made the impressions at the same time. This is a scenario one would expect from waves forming layers.
could be wrong, but I assume that you have some kind of an idea of the process by which a layer forms and that you are basing your conclusions on that unspoken idea. So then just what exactly is it?
There are various processes that form layers. One is precipitation out of standing water sorting according to size. Another is being laid down by ocean waves, the way sandy beaches are laid down. This is probably how the layers are formed according to Walther's Law since it is rising water that causes those layers, though they could be precipitated I suppose. Another is the simultaneous deposition of two layers at once, one above the other, in fast running water, which is shown in the flume experiments in the Berthault film I posted way back there in Message 1186, which is apparently the way the wall of layers was formed by the flooding creek shown in the same film, and I think also the way the Mt. St. Helens layers were formed, though I'm not entirely sure about that. Lots of ways though.
f you refuse to explain that process in as much step-by-step detail as possible, then we can never know what you are basing your conclusions on and you could never convince us of your "paradigm". Please note that your failure to convince us is not our fault, but rather it's all your fault for withholding required information. Therefore, only you can break the stalemate by providing that required information.
I've discussed it before though, I'm not withholding anything.
From what I've tried to figure out, it appears that you envision each layer being deposited in one single event.
I often do picture it that way, a layer carried in on a wave for instance, but I also know that a single "time period" might be formed at the same time, such as the transgressive deposits known as the Sauk Sea or Tippecanoe transgression and so on. The creationist film I brought up a while back ("Is Genesis History?") shows the geographic extent across North America of those various transgressions as blocks of sedimentary layers.
I think I've also seen evidence that you think that the lithification of that layer occurs while it is still on the surface. Are those what you think happened? If not, then please provide a detailed description of what you actually think happened.
I think it was the weight of the layers accumulating to a great depth that caused the lithification of those lower in the stack, beginning first with their intense compaction of course. In some places there is evidence that the uppermost layers, such as over the Grand Canyon/Kaibab plateau to a depth of a mile or two, washed away not too long after being deposited, leaving the presumably more consolidated lower layers intact. I postulate a great tectonic upheaval to cause that washing away. I spelled this out in some detail in Message 1982 though I'd have to go back years to find a really thorough presentation of the idea.
Showing HOW the Flood happened isn't necessary to proving THAT it happened however, and obviously since nobody was there it can't be anything but speculation. the evidence I focus on is the presentation of the strata of the geological column in straight flat layers with tight contacts between them, showing that their surfaces were not exposed for any length of time, maybe hours at the most, and the fact that the entire Phanerozoic stack up to three miles or more in depth shows no tectonic or volcanic disturbance until all the layers are in place -- in the Grand Canyon/Grand Staircase area in particular, but also extrapolated to other locations which are more deformed and harder to interpret.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2190 by dwise1, posted 04-24-2018 1:03 AM dwise1 has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 2196 by Capt Stormfield, posted 04-24-2018 11:04 AM Faith has replied
 Message 2278 by Percy, posted 04-26-2018 3:29 PM Faith has not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22389
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


(1)
Message 2194 of 2887 (831759)
04-24-2018 10:18 AM
Reply to: Message 2168 by Faith
04-23-2018 2:24 PM


Faith writes:
I said I figure neat layers wouldn't have occurred on the sea bottom because of the disturbance by the fountains of the deep. There isn't any question how they got onto the continents since the water covered the land.
Take away the Bible and no one would think anything geologically significant happened 4500 years ago. Certainly there's no evidence for it.
I believe the geological column is a clear entity that is found around the world and not at the bottom of the sea, ever.
The geological column is conceptual and not a "clear entity". The concept applies to all the world, both land and sea.
I believe that's clear from the facts.
Why do you believe something that can be disproven so easily. Go to the Wikipedia entry on the geologic column. It's a timescale. The geologic column is not actual strata, just a framework of time periods in which strata can be placed temporally.
All the current sedimentation has nothing in common with it and the attempts to make it fit are ludicrous.
You keep saying things like this, but calling things names like "ludicrous" and "illusion" and "different paradigm" are not explanations. Can you explain what is ludicrous about current sedimentation adding to stratigraphic columns around the world?
Let me ask a a couple questions in the context of your view that the Flood created the world's geography, including all the various stratigraphic columns. When sedimentation alights atop an existing stratigraphic column why has it not added to that stratigraphic column? Since sedimentation would have continued after the Flood that created the existing stratigraphic columns, how could that sedimentation not have added to them?
That any of the strata of the geo column were formed as river deltas or erosion from mountains is ludicrous in the extreme,...
But again, calling things ludicrous is not an explanation - it's mere name calling. What is ludicrous about the idea that erosion of mountains and landscapes creates sediments, and that these sediments are transported by wind and rain and streams and rivers to coastal regions and river deltas and lakes and seas?
...and what is your evidence for such an idea?
Practically any river in the world is evidence for this idea. Take the Mississippi. A fair amount of sediment is transported to the Mississippi by streams and smaller rivers which the Mississippi transports to the Mississippi River Delta. This is from the Wikipedia article on the Mississippi River:
quote:
Before 1900, the Mississippi River transported an estimated 400 million metric tons of sediment per year from the interior of the United States to coastal Louisiana and the Gulf of Mexico. During the last two decades, this number was only 145 million metric tons per year. The reduction in sediment transported down the Mississippi River is the result of engineering modification of the Mississippi, Missouri, and Ohio rivers and their tributaries by dams, meander cutoffs, river-training structures, and bank revetments and soil erosion control programs in the areas drained by them.
The column shows continuous rapid deposition over very large areas to a depth of miles, and not a shred of a hint of any length of time beyond hours between layers.
There is radiometric evidence of millions of years between strata. What is your evidence of only hours between layers?
And yes I insult the current theory, it's ridiculous.
Calling something ridiculous is neither evidence nor argument. You keep claiming to have cited a great deal of evidence. What is the evidence that the difference in age between adjacent strata levels in only hours?
You insult my views...
You take insult rather easily. I think it's usually in the form or ridicule, but almost always with excellent justification. You present your views in the form of bald assertions with no accompanying evidential support, or you cite evidence that actually contradicts your assertions. We explain why the evidence doesn't support your assertions and you, apparently not comprehending a thing, double down on your assertions. Of course people are going to ridicule your decades-long lack of knowledge and understanding.
...and I insult yours.
The proper response to evidence and explanations placing that evidence in context is not insults. The proper response is rebuttal that explains how the evidence supports your views in ways that don't violate known physical laws of nature and that don't cite religious texts as authoritative. In a science thread the world is the record of what happened in the past, not the Bible.
Get over it. Sometimes science makes a fool of itself, and gets away with it for centuries.
No one is claiming science is perfect, and that lack of perfection is embodied in its very definition that includes the property of tentativity. But as a method for understanding the world science is far superior to religion, and religion is what you're really practicing when you argue for the Flood, not science
Scientific explanations of these processes include all the little details
And they are LU-DI-CROUS. I mean really. Imagination run amok.
You can't just say it - you have to show it, something you've proven spectacularly unable to do.
...that your fantasy flood cannot. Insanity would be spending more than a decade and a half arguing for processes that even a child can see are not physically possible.
By which you should mean the current geological explanations of the geological column but unfortunately you don't. The denial I encounter shows a strange self-delusion, such as when I point out such obvious things as that the extent of a layer of sediment such as is seen in the geological column would prevent anything from living in the area it covers; it explains how it is a mass graveyard but the notion that any of those fossils ever lived during the time of its laying down is bizarre. It doesn't deserve the name "science" at all, not these days anyway, maybe a couple centuries ago.
On the scale of centuries much of the land between mountains and seas represents landscapes of sedimentary equilibrium. As much sediment enters these landscapes as leaves. Elevated portions of these landscapes experience net erosion, gradually reducing their height. For example, there has always been sedimentary runoff from Pikes Peak, but construction of a highway to the summit increased erosion and sedimentary runoff to such a great extent (by channeling water runoff into gullies) that there is now a court imposed mitigation program.
You might recall the movie The Man Who Went Up a Hill and Came Down a Mountain. It's based upon a true story of a hill in Wales that was a few feet short of a mountain, so in 1917 the locals added a mound at the top so that it could be a mountain. By the time of the film in 1995 erosion had reduced the mountain back to a hill, so the locals added to the mound at the top so that it was again a mountain.
The point is that erosion causes high points of a landscape, be they mountains, hills or just rises, to shed sediment that is then deposited in the low points. Landscapes are constantly undergoing this leveling process. Landscapes generally slope toward the sea, and so the sediments from the high points that are carried to the low points of the local landscape are also gradually carried toward the local streams and rivers and thence to the sea or perhaps a lake.
If this is in reality delusional or illusory then you have to explain why. I don't understand why you think applying derogatory labels to things constitutes valid argument.
I'm just answering absurdities now, as I said, I have no reason to try to defend my position beyond that at this point, did that many times in the past.
Calling ideas absurd with no justification and indeed in the face of a great deal of unanswered rebuttal is what is truly absurd. And if you're not here to defend your position then why are you here? Nothing better to do? Ad hominem is just your thing?
Just tired of this nonsense.
I can understand your tiring of your nonsensical exercise in futility arguing against and denying obvious evidence that surrounds everyone in the world including yourself.
I know you can't help yourselves, you really do believe all this unprovable unscientific carrying on, somehow it got to be accepted, and it goes on being elaborated, all because there is no way to test anything in the distant past, so all you have is theory, imagination, uncheckable mental conjurings.
Anything that actually happens leaves evidence behind, and in the case of geology an incredible amount of evidence *has* been left behind. We walk atop it every day. Geologists decipher this evidence of the past in a manner analogous to forensic detectives.
I know it will all eventually collapse but it's too bad that in the meantime it holds you all captive.
You creationists are fond of predictions like this. Geology will collapse, biology will collapse, cosmology will collapse. Your fellow religionists have often predicted the end times, and they've been wrong a lot, too. Religion is not a solid foundation for making reliable predictions.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2168 by Faith, posted 04-23-2018 2:24 PM Faith has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 2197 by NoNukes, posted 04-24-2018 12:14 PM Percy has seen this message but not replied

  
Coyote
Member (Idle past 2105 days)
Posts: 6117
Joined: 01-12-2008


(1)
Message 2195 of 2887 (831760)
04-24-2018 10:52 AM
Reply to: Message 2186 by Faith
04-23-2018 11:36 PM


Re: The Imaginary Fossil Order is a false interpretation
The dating issue can't disprove all the evidence I've mustered.
But it has!
All the dating methods are questionable, not established with anything like the certainty you bestow on them.
Read those several threads RAZD dedicated to dating. They show you are wrong and conclusively show the YEC model is false. You may cry, "Assumptions" and "Uncertainty" all you want, but that's just wishful thinking on your part.
The evidence is in and it shows we live on an old earth.

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 2186 by Faith, posted 04-23-2018 11:36 PM Faith has not replied

  
Capt Stormfield
Member (Idle past 455 days)
Posts: 428
From: Vancouver Island
Joined: 01-17-2009


(3)
Message 2196 of 2887 (831761)
04-24-2018 11:04 AM
Reply to: Message 2193 by Faith
04-24-2018 3:14 AM


Re: The Imaginary Fossil Order is a false interpretation
A flat wet sedimentary surface, which is of course the surface on which all the tracks and burrows and raindrops and so on were originally made, is not a normal surface things live on.
You mean like beaches, or wetlands, or lake bottom? The places that are literally crawling with life?
Verily it is said, the difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits.
ABE: Faith, did you pause for even an instant to think about the implications of stating that tracks and burrows, the artifacts of living things, are found in a place where things don't normally live? I mean really?
Edited by Capt Stormfield, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2193 by Faith, posted 04-24-2018 3:14 AM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 2199 by Faith, posted 04-24-2018 12:53 PM Capt Stormfield has replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


(2)
Message 2197 of 2887 (831767)
04-24-2018 12:14 PM
Reply to: Message 2194 by Percy
04-24-2018 10:18 AM


This exchange in the conversation between you and Faith grabbed my attention:
Faith writes:
I believe the geological column is a clear entity that is found around the world and not at the bottom of the sea, ever.
Percy writes:
The geological column is conceptual and not a "clear entity". The concept applies to all the world, both land and sea.
What I quoted above is something that folks have made dozens of posts trying to explain to Faith, only to have her stick to her belief.
Faith's position is, of course, ridiculous on its face. The geological column is a construct of scientists, and as such is whatever scientists say that it is. It is literally impossible for them to be wrong about what the geological column is.
Now, one might question whether the geological column represents anything real on earth. That would be a challenge and possibly worthy of entertaining a debate on. But the position that scientists are wrong about their own idealizations is an absolute simply asinine stance. Yet I can find posts going back years with Faith insisting on this stupidity.
I don't know who was the first person to use the phrase, "you've become a caricature of yourself" at EvC, but that certainly fits here.
Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

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

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2194 by Percy, posted 04-24-2018 10:18 AM Percy has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 2198 by Faith, posted 04-24-2018 12:42 PM NoNukes has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 2198 of 2887 (831768)
04-24-2018 12:42 PM
Reply to: Message 2197 by NoNukes
04-24-2018 12:14 PM


Geological Column also known as Stratigraphic Column
What a bunch of fatuous nonsense. The Geological Column is represented in many actual geographical areas representing actual rock formations representing the Geological Timescale in that area. Just because the entire stack doesn't exist in any one place doesn't make the formation nonexistent. The rocks representing time periods exist all over the world. The Geological Column is quite famously represented for the Grand Canyon for instance. I guess you're all trying to make the actual slabs of rocks that cover massive areas of ground go poof and disappear because they are such good evidence for the Flood.
a columnar diagram that shows the rock formations of a locality or region and that is arranged to indicate their relations to the subdivisions of geologic time 2
: the sequence of rock formations in a geologic column
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2197 by NoNukes, posted 04-24-2018 12:14 PM NoNukes has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 2200 by NoNukes, posted 04-24-2018 12:58 PM Faith has replied
 Message 2209 by jar, posted 04-24-2018 1:40 PM Faith has not replied
 Message 2279 by Percy, posted 04-26-2018 4:50 PM Faith has not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 2199 of 2887 (831769)
04-24-2018 12:53 PM
Reply to: Message 2196 by Capt Stormfield
04-24-2018 11:04 AM


Re: The Imaginary Fossil Order is a false interpretation
The tracks represent creatures fleeing from the Flood across the latest sediment deposit by the latest wave of the rising water, other things burrowed trying to escape, other things were floated there. You've just joined the conversation very recently but all this has been said many times before.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2196 by Capt Stormfield, posted 04-24-2018 11:04 AM Capt Stormfield has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 2204 by JonF, posted 04-24-2018 1:19 PM Faith has not replied
 Message 2206 by PaulK, posted 04-24-2018 1:24 PM Faith has replied
 Message 2213 by Capt Stormfield, posted 04-24-2018 2:12 PM Faith has replied
 Message 2280 by Percy, posted 04-26-2018 5:12 PM Faith has not replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


(1)
Message 2200 of 2887 (831770)
04-24-2018 12:58 PM
Reply to: Message 2198 by Faith
04-24-2018 12:42 PM


Re: Geological Column also known as Stratigraphic Column
The Geological Column is represented in many actual geographical areas representing actual rock formations representing the Geological Timescale in that area
What that means, dumb ass, is that "The Geological Column" actually is reflected in the real world.
Consider this, when you say that "The Geological Column" is not under the oceans, what could that possibly mean in view of your definition? Seriously, this is why I no longer get into arguments with you. The entire premise of your arguments is hogwash.
And with that, I will leave the polite arguing to dwise and the rest of the folks here.

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

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2198 by Faith, posted 04-24-2018 12:42 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 2201 by Faith, posted 04-24-2018 1:11 PM NoNukes has not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 2201 of 2887 (831771)
04-24-2018 1:11 PM
Reply to: Message 2200 by NoNukes
04-24-2018 12:58 PM


Re: Geological Column also known as Stratigraphic Column
YOU BET IT'S ACTUALLY REFLECVTED IN THE REAL WORLD SO WHAT STUPID POINT DO YOU THINK YOU ARE MAKING BY EMPHASIZING THAT IT DOESN'T EXIST FULLY IN ANY ONE PLACE? YOU CANNOT TAKE THE GEOLOGICAL COLUMN THAT EXISTS ON THE CONTINENTS AND IS KNOWN TO EXIST ON THE CONTINENTS AND IS IDENTIFIED BY ITS PRESENCE ON THE CONTINENTS AND THE TIMESCALE THAT IS KNOWN TO BE ATTACHEDE TO THOSE ROCKS ON THE CONTINENTS AND DECIDE TO RELOCATE IT AT THE BOTTOM OF THE SEA JUST BECAU7SE IT IS NO LONGER FORMING ON THE CONTINENTS. IT STOPPED FORMING BECAUSE IT BEGAN AND ENDED WITH THE FLOOD. WHATEVER STRATA ARE STILL FORMING IN THE SEAS HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH THE ACTUAL GEOLOGICAL COLUMN.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2200 by NoNukes, posted 04-24-2018 12:58 PM NoNukes has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 2202 by ringo, posted 04-24-2018 1:18 PM Faith has replied
 Message 2281 by Percy, posted 04-26-2018 5:42 PM Faith has not replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 411 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


(1)
Message 2202 of 2887 (831772)
04-24-2018 1:18 PM
Reply to: Message 2201 by Faith
04-24-2018 1:11 PM


Re: Geological Column also known as Stratigraphic Column
Faith writes:
YOU CANNOT TAKE THE GEOLOGICAL COLUMN THAT EXISTS ON THE CONTINENTS AND IS KNOWN TO EXIST ON THE CONTINENTS AND IS IDENTIFIED BY ITS PRESENCE ON THE CONTINENTS AND THE TIMESCALE THAT IS KNOWN TO BE ATTACHEDE TO THOSE ROCKS ON THE CONTINENTS AND DECIDE TO RELOCATE IT AT THE BOTTOM OF THE SEA JUST BECAU7SE IT IS NO LONGER FORMING ON THE CONTINENTS. IT STOPPED FORMING BECAUSE IT BEGAN AND ENDED WITH THE FLOOD.
That makes no sense to me. In a worldwide flood, how can you distinguish land from sea? The layers under the (present) sea should be the same as the layers on the (present) land.

An honest discussion is more of a peer review than a pep rally. My toughest critics here are the people who agree with me. -- ringo

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2201 by Faith, posted 04-24-2018 1:11 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 2203 by Faith, posted 04-24-2018 1:18 PM ringo has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 2203 of 2887 (831773)
04-24-2018 1:18 PM
Reply to: Message 2202 by ringo
04-24-2018 1:18 PM


Re: Geological Column also known as Stratigraphic Column
Some of the strata of the geo column also span the ocean beds. So what?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2202 by ringo, posted 04-24-2018 1:18 PM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 2205 by ringo, posted 04-24-2018 1:22 PM Faith has not replied
 Message 2208 by JonF, posted 04-24-2018 1:35 PM Faith has replied
 Message 2215 by Tangle, posted 04-24-2018 4:58 PM Faith has replied

  
JonF
Member (Idle past 167 days)
Posts: 6174
Joined: 06-23-2003


(1)
Message 2204 of 2887 (831774)
04-24-2018 1:19 PM
Reply to: Message 2199 by Faith
04-24-2018 12:53 PM


Re: The Imaginary Fossil Order is a false interpretation
And they did that over and over and over again. Yeah, burrowing is very common in the animal world to escape rising water. Of course the trackways usually are walking, not running.
Plus pausing to compost to make paleosols.
And growing various plants in those paleosols so they would be found with roots intact.
And carrying entire forests, soil and roots and all, to drop on top of existing forests. 27 of them at Specimen Ridge.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2199 by Faith, posted 04-24-2018 12:53 PM Faith has not replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 411 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


(1)
Message 2205 of 2887 (831775)
04-24-2018 1:22 PM
Reply to: Message 2203 by Faith
04-24-2018 1:18 PM


Re: Geological Column also known as Stratigraphic Column
Faith writes:
Some of the strata of the geo column also span the ocean beds. So what?
All of them should, if there was a global flood. Why do you make a distinction between them at all?

An honest discussion is more of a peer review than a pep rally. My toughest critics here are the people who agree with me. -- ringo

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2203 by Faith, posted 04-24-2018 1:18 PM 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