|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: The Great Creationist Fossil Failure | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Pressie Member Posts: 2103 From: Pretoria, SA Joined: |
I can see many 'layers' there. So, according to your own photo the Jurassic is not a "layer", then?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Pressie Member Posts: 2103 From: Pretoria, SA Joined: |
This one was funny.
Faith writes: It's easy Faith. Some dinosaurs lived in mountains. Others didn't. Is that your theory then, they lived in the mountains? Just like the big cats, today, Faith. Some live in mountainous areas, some live on the great plains. Some live in America. Some live in Africa. Some live in the Andes. Some live in the Himalayas, some live in the deserts of and also the jungles of plains of India on the same sub continent. All at the same time.! Edited by Pressie, : No reason given. Edited by Pressie, : No reason given. Edited by Pressie, : No reason given. Edited by Pressie, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Pressie Member Posts: 2103 From: Pretoria, SA Joined: |
This one was funny, too.
Faith writes: Can one person be so uneducated? Have you ever looked at the teeth some dino's had? Also, aren't dinosauria supposed to need lots of vegetation to eat Edited by Pressie, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Pressie Member Posts: 2103 From: Pretoria, SA Joined:
|
Faith writes: Yes, we sure can and we do. Lake Erie for, example.
Today, yes, but the strata could not possibly have been formed in such small bodies of water with such distinctive boundaries. Faith writes: You mean like we find being deposited in the Kalahari and Mozambique Channel today? The strata are commonly enormous, huge, flat flat flat thick thick thick blocks of rock Edited by Pressie, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Pressie Member Posts: 2103 From: Pretoria, SA Joined: |
Faith writes: Geological time periods are not "strata" or "layers" or anything like that, Faith.
THE strata is of course a different thing from strata formed in a peanut butter jar.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Pressie Member Posts: 2103 From: Pretoria, SA Joined: |
Faith writes: Geological time periods are not strata or "layers" or anything like that, Faith. THE strata is of course a different thing from strata formed in a peanut butter jar. Edited by Pressie, : Please erase this duplicate of the previous comment.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Pressie Member Posts: 2103 From: Pretoria, SA Joined: |
Actually, there's no such thing as 'The' Geological Column.
There can be 'A' Geological Column under your house or 'A' Geological Column of an area or 'A' Geological Column for a region. And those Geological Columns are different all over the world. Geological Columns refer to rocks. The Geological time scale refers to Systems or Eons or Eras or Periods or Epochs. Not rocks. Edited by Pressie, : No reason given. Edited by Pressie, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Pressie Member Posts: 2103 From: Pretoria, SA Joined:
|
Is that correct? Perhaps the question is one of semantics. Not really. It's a question of how the term is used or not used by those hundreds of thousands of persons doing the natural science called geology for a living. Creationists never tell the truth about what the natural science of geology entails. They make up their own definition and then pretend that it is "scientific". For geologists it's very easy, though. The Cambrian is not a layer. The Ordovician is not a layer. The Silurian is not a layer. Same with all those other Periods. For geologists in every country it's actually very easy to figure out that the Cambrian happened before the Ordovician and that the Ordovician occurred before the Silurian did. Those are Periods. Not rock layers. Oh, and contrary to what the creationists call "science', rocks dating from the Cambrian are found in lots of locations all over the world. And rocks from the Ordovician are found on the surface in lots of locations all over the world. And rocks from the Silurian outcrop in lots of locations all over the world. Edited by Pressie, : No reason given. Edited by Pressie, : No reason given. Edited by Pressie, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Pressie Member Posts: 2103 From: Pretoria, SA Joined:
|
Faith is convinced that the Cambrian is a 'slab' of rock, the Ordovician is a 'slab' of rock, the Silurian is a 'slab' of rock, etc. That's it for Faith. I don't think that it is worth even trying to have a rational conversation with Faith.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Pressie Member Posts: 2103 From: Pretoria, SA Joined: |
Thanks for reminding me. But, the audience sometimes can be shown that someone could have absolutely stupid, ridiculous ideas.
Edited by Pressie, : No reason given. Edited by Pressie, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Pressie Member Posts: 2103 From: Pretoria, SA Joined: |
Faith writes: So you think that all the plants fled the flood, along with all the fish and snails and elephants and lions and aardvarks and humans when the Barberton Sequence was deposited? The plants ran away?
I have the usual guesses about the original location of the various creatures and their different abilities to flee the Flood, and that may explain some of it, but that's it.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Pressie Member Posts: 2103 From: Pretoria, SA Joined: |
mindspawn writes: Nope. You suffer the same disease all creationists suffer from. Not knowing enough. In science, those relevant scientists have evidence for their assumptions. That argument is from evolutionary assumption... Also, biological evolution is not an assumption. It's a fact-based conclusion. Edited by Pressie, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Pressie Member Posts: 2103 From: Pretoria, SA Joined: |
mindspawn writes: Nope. It's not assumption. Seeing the header of this threat, have a look at http://www.stratigraphy.org/...t/ChronostratChart2016-10.pdf. Fossils. That argument is from evolutionary assumption.... Those different colours you see are not rock "layers" at all. They are time periods. What different organisms lived together at the same time. Read the whole website. It's from the International Committee on Stratigraphy. Read exactly how the international geological commutiny get to their conclusions. In there you'll read what the Cambrian System/Period is. In there you will also read about the Cambrian. You can read about what the fossils found in the Fortunian, Stages 2, 3, 4, 5, the Drumian, Guzhangian, Paibian, Jiangshan, and Stage 10 Stages/ Ages are. Together with the absolute dates. You will also read about stratigraphy, Biozones, etc. Evolution is not an assumption. It's a conclusion. Edited by Pressie, : No reason given. Edited by Pressie, : No reason given. Edited by Pressie, : No reason given. Edited by Pressie, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Pressie Member Posts: 2103 From: Pretoria, SA Joined: |
This one is funny, too.
mindspawn writes: ... you say evolution has been proved it, but there exists no core evidence for the theory of evolution He-he-he. "Core evidence". It's like a "Golden Bullet". It seems as if mindspawn really is not too bright when it comes to how science works.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Pressie Member Posts: 2103 From: Pretoria, SA Joined: |
minspawn writes: Wrong in your first sentence. Those are not layers. Looking at your chart, yes there are geological layers. Edited by Pressie, : No reason given. Edited by Pressie, : No reason given.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024