Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 123 (8774 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 07-23-2017 8:51 AM
401 online now:
AZPaul3, Faith, frako, Phat (AdminPhat), RAZD (5 members, 396 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: Tom Larkin
Happy Birthday: anglagard
Post Volume:
Total: 814,436 Year: 19,042/21,208 Month: 1,801/3,111 Week: 22/574 Day: 22/38 Hour: 5/3

Announcements: Reporting debate problems OR discussing moderation actions/inactions


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
RewPrev1
...
5556
57
5859
...
91NextFF
Author Topic:   The TRVE history of the Flood...
Taq
Member
Posts: 6799
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 3.9


(2)
Message 841 of 1352 (808432)
05-10-2017 4:53 PM
Reply to: Message 831 by Faith
05-10-2017 11:06 AM


Re: The Flood Explains ... most things geological
Faith writes:

It's just wonderful how good you are at ignoring the obvious fact that a stack of sedimentary rocks is the highly unlikely outcome of time periods in which creatures supposedly lived.

There are places right now that are producing layered sediments. Is all life on the Earth perishing because there is a lake putting down layered sediments?

Also, if I showed you a picture of graveyards from around the world, would you think their worldwide extent is evidence that all of these people died in the same year from the same catastrophic event?

Or would you think, like the rest of us, that they died at different times from different events, even though they are found worldwide?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 831 by Faith, posted 05-10-2017 11:06 AM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 842 by Faith, posted 05-10-2017 7:02 PM Taq has responded

  
Faith
Member
Posts: 25598
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.0


Message 842 of 1352 (808437)
05-10-2017 7:02 PM
Reply to: Message 841 by Taq
05-10-2017 4:53 PM


Re: The Flood Explains ... most things geological
Siiiiiiiiiiiigh.

The strata that make up what is traditionally called the Geological Column, that also is the basis of the Geological Time Scale, covers HUGE amounts of territory, huge, some of them whole continents -- such as the layer called St. Peter Sandstone -- climbing two miles in some cases. I've posted HBD's illustrations of the enormous extent of four of the strata, and I've said it umpteen million times already, and you talk about lakes and graveyards?

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 841 by Taq, posted 05-10-2017 4:53 PM Taq has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 865 by Taq, posted 05-11-2017 10:35 AM Faith has responded

    
Faith
Member
Posts: 25598
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.0


Message 843 of 1352 (808438)
05-10-2017 7:25 PM
Reply to: Message 840 by PaulK
05-10-2017 2:48 PM


Re: The Flood Explains ... most things geological
That wasn't a parody, that was the plain truth.

I have no need to "ignore" what you call "buried terrain features since I've amply explained them.

You should assume that THE Flood (not A flood) deposited that limestone because 1) it's a layer among layers stacked to a great depth and covering a great area, 2) it's not shallow it's humongous in most cases 3) some of those layers are interpreted as time periods in which land creatures lived, all of which supposedly collapsed down in the end to vast slabs of rock, in this case limestone, which is impossible; 3) The Flood would certainly have killed a lot of sea creatures and buried them in limestone; and 4) such a stack of layers is excellent evidence for a spectacularly huge worldwide water catastrophe and very BAD evidence for the standard interpretation.

The evidence from Spirit Lake is excellent reason to reinterpret the Yellowstone petrified forest as formed in water as the trees in Spirit Lake were. That was brought about by a volcano too, which stripped the trees and deposited them upright in the lake, where they formed layers as they ran out of space. It's a remarkable situation that perfectly parallels the Yellowstone "forest." Being full of volcanic ash is evidence that it was a volcano that caused the whole scenario, not evidence that the trees are growing in the stuff. And the trees are obviously dead, dead before they got stacked that way. Lots of good evidence to rethink the usual explanation. Reality, PK, Reality.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 840 by PaulK, posted 05-10-2017 2:48 PM PaulK has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 848 by edge, posted 05-10-2017 8:58 PM Faith has not yet responded
 Message 852 by ICANT, posted 05-10-2017 10:23 PM Faith has responded
 Message 858 by PaulK, posted 05-11-2017 12:43 AM Faith has not yet responded

    
edge
Member
Posts: 3903
From: Colorado, USA
Joined: 01-09-2002
Member Rating: 4.1


(1)
Message 844 of 1352 (808443)
05-10-2017 8:30 PM
Reply to: Message 831 by Faith
05-10-2017 11:06 AM


Re: The Flood Explains ... most things geological
It's just wonderful how good you are at ignoring the obvious fact that a stack of sedimentary rocks is the highly unlikely outcome of time periods in which creatures supposedly lived.

Again, this is just an assertion.

What do you mean by rocks being the 'outcome of time periods'? That makes no sense.

Do you really expect our own "time period," with all its mountains and valleys and so on, to ultimately reduce down to a few flat 0layers of sediment spread over hundreds or thousands of square miles, just like all the others supposedly did?

For the parts that are currently under water on the continental shelves and in river deltas etc., yes. And I believe they would be datable by the trash that we put in the oceans.

I don't know why this isn't screamingly obvious to you or anybody else. Perhaps it is but you can't give up the status quo? All that intellectual stimulation and so on? So much for scientific objectivity.

When a YEC says something is obvious, it means that they don't need to provide evidence.

And the idea that the sediments would mix together, natural and commonsensical though the idea would seem to be, is contradicted by all kinds of experiments: even water at high velocity sorts out sediments into layers, as Berthault's flume experiments show, plus his observation of a high stack of layers produced by a flooding river; and when water is simply standing sediments also precipitate out into layers.

First, those were not mudflows. We have examples of volcanic mudflows such as those from Mount Saint Helens that show mixed lithologies and lack of bedding.

Second, I am talking about mixing fine graind clastic sediments with carbonate to produce impure limestone. This is actually quite common, but we also get large amounts of pure limestone. That would not be possible in a turbulent environment that moves sediments on to the continents as you suggest.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 831 by Faith, posted 05-10-2017 11:06 AM Faith has not yet responded

  
edge
Member
Posts: 3903
From: Colorado, USA
Joined: 01-09-2002
Member Rating: 4.1


(1)
Message 845 of 1352 (808444)
05-10-2017 8:36 PM
Reply to: Message 834 by Faith
05-10-2017 1:48 PM


Re: The Flood Explains ... most things geological
This is really hilarious the way this obvious denial of reality is clung to by everybody here. The strata full of dead things are IN-YOUR-FACE EVIDENCE both for a worldwide Flood and against the preposterous idea that they represent time periods that then all collapsed down into stratified rock.

Why is that?

Why couldn't it be fossils forming over millions of years?

I know it would cost all the sophisticated evos here enormously to just pry open one eye to a slit and take a squint at this obvious fact because it could threaten your whole worldview, your livelihood, and especially your egos to consider it for half a second.

Ever notice how things become 'obvious' where a YEC cannot provide evidence?

I sympathize, I really do because it happened to me when I became a Christian, and later a creationist as well, that I lost most of my friends, all really in the end, have to tolerate from nonChristian family and even some Christian friends a pretty total void in acknowledgement of all the things that matter most to me, all for the sake of continuing to have any kind of relationship at all, and then of course I also have to put up with being treated like the village idiot at EvC and so on. Who wants it?

Did you ever think that it might be you who is the intolerant one?

But the strata/fossils is such obvious evidence for the Flood and against the Geo Time Scale I have to imagine some such reason for refusing to recognize it. Paradigmosis will do up to a point but I think we're beyond that point.

Once again, "it's obvious"... to a YEC.

Why does that not make me feel confident that it is correct?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 834 by Faith, posted 05-10-2017 1:48 PM Faith has not yet responded

  
edge
Member
Posts: 3903
From: Colorado, USA
Joined: 01-09-2002
Member Rating: 4.1


Message 846 of 1352 (808445)
05-10-2017 8:38 PM
Reply to: Message 836 by Faith
05-10-2017 2:02 PM


Re: The Flood Explains ... most things geological
The reality of the strata and fossils trumps all of that.

So then you can ignore them, right?
This message is a reply to:
 Message 836 by Faith, posted 05-10-2017 2:02 PM Faith has not yet responded

  
ringo
Member
Posts: 13315
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 3.0


Message 847 of 1352 (808446)
05-10-2017 8:55 PM
Reply to: Message 821 by Faith
05-09-2017 8:41 PM


Re: The Flood Explains ... most things geological
Faith writes:

Well there are places with no geological column, but you do seem to be forgetting the oceans, where there is also no geological column.


But of course there IS a geological column under the oceans, as Admin has pointed out. There ARE layers of sediment under the oceans - which should not be there if there was no sediment in the water.

Faith writes:

OK fine but ringo was talking about whales swimming over the land as if he'd forgotten there was an ocean.


No I was not. I was pointing out that the idea of clear water in the oceans doesn't work.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 821 by Faith, posted 05-09-2017 8:41 PM Faith has not yet responded

  
edge
Member
Posts: 3903
From: Colorado, USA
Joined: 01-09-2002
Member Rating: 4.1


(1)
Message 848 of 1352 (808448)
05-10-2017 8:58 PM
Reply to: Message 843 by Faith
05-10-2017 7:25 PM


Re: The Flood Explains ... most things geological
I have no need to "ignore" what you call "buried terrain features since I've amply explained them.

If you did, you didn't do very well.

You should assume that THE Flood (not A flood) deposited that limestone because 1) it's a layer among layers stacked to a great depth and covering a great area,

Why? According the Walter's Law that is explained by rising or declining sea level. No flood necessary.

2) it's not shallow it's humongous in most cases

And we have explained that by subsidence. The fact that thicker parts of the formations are in the deeper parts of the basin support this.

3) some of those layers are interpreted as time periods in which land creatures lived, all of which supposedly collapsed down in the end to vast slabs of rock, in this case limestone, which is impossible;

Actually, this isn't true.

I had hoped not to get into this (because I'm sure you won't understand it and will simply deny the facts), but most major formations are time-transgressive. This is a necessary outgrowth of Walther's Law. As a sand layer propagates along the surface of the land, time passes. Consequently, the farther inland a beach sand (for instance) is, the younger it is. This is born out by biostratigraphy wherein the Tapeats Sandstone will see two indicator fossils of trilobite depending on where you are.

If you are interested, I will look up the details, but if you are just going into your ususal denial rant, I'm not going to bother.

3) The Flood would certainly have killed a lot of sea creatures and buried them in limestone; ...

And?

and 4) such a stack of layers is excellent evidence for a spectacularly huge worldwide water catastrophe and very BAD evidence for the standard interpretation.

If you are under the impression that saying something is evidence is, in itself evidence, you are sadly mistaken.

So, you've given us 4 lines of evidence which are not evidence for a global flood.

That's nice.

The evidence from Spirit Lake is excellent reason to reinterpret the Yellowstone petrified forest as formed in water as the trees in Spirit Lake were.

Did you just ignore the conversation we had on this?

That was brought about by a volcano too, which stripped the trees and deposited them upright in the lake, where they formed layers as they ran out of space. It's a remarkable situation that perfectly parallels the Yellowstone "forest." Being full of volcanic ash is evidence that it was a volcano that caused the whole scenario, not evidence that the trees are growing in the stuff.

But they were growing in it. Did you not read my link? One by a real geologist and not the Sarfati poseur?

And the trees are obviously dead, dead before they got stacked that way. Lots of good evidence to rethink the usual explanation. Reality, PK, Reality.

Not really.

Once again, your choice is to ignore data that you do not like.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 843 by Faith, posted 05-10-2017 7:25 PM Faith has not yet responded

  
ringo
Member
Posts: 13315
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 3.0


Message 849 of 1352 (808449)
05-10-2017 9:01 PM
Reply to: Message 834 by Faith
05-10-2017 1:48 PM


Re: The Flood Explains ... most things geological
Faith writes:

The strata full of dead things are IN-YOUR-FACE EVIDENCE both for a worldwide Flood....


Why are strata full of dead things not evidence for a lot of small floods?
This message is a reply to:
 Message 834 by Faith, posted 05-10-2017 1:48 PM Faith has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 850 by jar, posted 05-10-2017 9:53 PM ringo has acknowledged this reply

  
jar
Member
Posts: 29141
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 2.8


(1)
Message 850 of 1352 (808450)
05-10-2017 9:53 PM
Reply to: Message 849 by ringo
05-10-2017 9:01 PM


Re: The Flood Explains ... most things geological
ringo writes:

Why are strata full of dead things not evidence for a lot of small floods?

Or dying of old age?

Or dying from the cold?

Or dying from thirst.

Or dying from disease.

or ...


My Sister's Website: Rose Hill Studios     My Website: My Website

This message is a reply to:
 Message 849 by ringo, posted 05-10-2017 9:01 PM ringo has acknowledged this reply

Replies to this message:
 Message 851 by Faith, posted 05-10-2017 10:04 PM jar has not yet responded

  
Faith
Member
Posts: 25598
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.0


Message 851 of 1352 (808452)
05-10-2017 10:04 PM
Reply to: Message 850 by jar
05-10-2017 9:53 PM


Re: The Flood Explains ... most things geological
Beecuzz they are buried usually in families within very thick flat sedimentary rocks stacked very very neatly and very deep under ideal conditions for fossilization, and not buried willy nilly.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 850 by jar, posted 05-10-2017 9:53 PM jar has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 853 by ringo, posted 05-10-2017 10:24 PM Faith has not yet responded
 Message 866 by Taq, posted 05-11-2017 10:36 AM Faith has not yet responded

    
ICANT
Member
Posts: 5625
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007


Message 852 of 1352 (808453)
05-10-2017 10:23 PM
Reply to: Message 843 by Faith
05-10-2017 7:25 PM


Re: The Flood Explains ... most things geological
Hi Faith,

I believe you sincerely believe what you post but you are sincerely wrong. The universe and earth are not young and Ellen G. White's visions after a 3 week coma is not how the flood of the Bible took place.

faith writes:

The Flood would certainly have killed a lot of sea creatures and buried them in limestone;

Just why do you think a lot of the sea creatures would have died during the flood?

What would have killed them?

There was no mention by God of any water creatures dying. Genesis 6:17 The air breathing critters and the flying critters were doomed to die unless they were in the ark. Maybe I am missing something here.

God Bless,


"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 843 by Faith, posted 05-10-2017 7:25 PM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 854 by ringo, posted 05-10-2017 10:31 PM ICANT has not yet responded
 Message 855 by Faith, posted 05-10-2017 11:10 PM ICANT has responded

    
ringo
Member
Posts: 13315
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 3.0


Message 853 of 1352 (808454)
05-10-2017 10:24 PM
Reply to: Message 851 by Faith
05-10-2017 10:04 PM


Re: The Flood Explains ... most things geological
Faith writes:

Beecuzz they are buried usually in families within very thick flat sedimentary rocks stacked very very neatly and very deep under ideal conditions for fossilization, and not buried willy nilly.


But "willy-nilly" would suggest a big flood - lots of dead animals in lots of water with no mechanism to sort them out. What we see is reality is a neatness that has the appearance of happening in small steps.

So try again: Why does the evidence suggest one big flood instead of a lot of little ones?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 851 by Faith, posted 05-10-2017 10:04 PM Faith has not yet responded

  
ringo
Member
Posts: 13315
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 3.0


Message 854 of 1352 (808456)
05-10-2017 10:31 PM
Reply to: Message 852 by ICANT
05-10-2017 10:23 PM


Re: The Flood Explains ... most things geological
ICANT writes:

The air breathing critters and the flying critters were doomed to die unless they were in the ark. Maybe I am missing something here.


Whales breathe air.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 852 by ICANT, posted 05-10-2017 10:23 PM ICANT has not yet responded

  
Faith
Member
Posts: 25598
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.0


Message 855 of 1352 (808457)
05-10-2017 11:10 PM
Reply to: Message 852 by ICANT
05-10-2017 10:23 PM


Re: The Flood Explains ... most things geological
Totally disagree, ICANT, I think there's tons of evidence for the worldwide Flood. I don't know much about Ellen G White, I wouldn't read a cultist.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 852 by ICANT, posted 05-10-2017 10:23 PM ICANT has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 856 by edge, posted 05-11-2017 12:11 AM Faith has responded
 Message 861 by ICANT, posted 05-11-2017 1:34 AM Faith has responded

    
RewPrev1
...
5556
57
5859
...
91NextFF
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2015 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2017