Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 109 (8803 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 11-23-2017 9:34 AM
412 online now:
halibut, NoNukes, PaulK, Percy (Admin), Phat (AdminPhat), Tangle (6 members, 406 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: jaufre
Post Volume:
Total: 822,879 Year: 27,485/21,208 Month: 1,398/1,714 Week: 241/365 Day: 10/73 Hour: 0/1

Announcements: Reporting debate problems OR discussing moderation actions/inactions


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
RewPrev1
...
2930
31
3233
...
60NextFF
Author Topic:   Evidence of the flood
Faith
Member
Posts: 26611
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 451 of 894 (819654)
09-13-2017 7:03 PM
Reply to: Message 445 by Percy
09-13-2017 6:40 PM


A charming fat fish proves radiometic dating is false cuz the varves aren't annual
As I keep trying to say I want my arguments discussed because they are the ones I understand the best, and I'm willing to shelve some on the other side under "Support for OE" for now. But I just spent a bit of time reading up on the Green River Formation and I have to admit I had the wrong idea of what it is. I see now that it is part of the strata I am talking about and not something apart from the Flood after all. Mea culpa, I am sorry for the mistake.

But as I started reading up on it, reading about these very very fine alternating layers of sediments with different amounts of organic matter in them. I encountered a discussion of the fossils preserved in them. Fossils of big fat fish for instance, much bigger than any supposedly annual pair of varves could cover up to their knees as it were. I pondered this for half a second and laughed out loud. These fish all by themselves prove that the varve pairs are not annual because the fish would have rotted away or been eaten within days, weeks or months of being "buried" by this minuscule amount of sediment. It would take at least ten years to cover them to a depth sufficient to provide the environment for fossilization, which of course is way too late.

I also found an article claiming to prove that the varves are indeed annual. Well, the fish fossils prove they aren't. The article proves it by, guess what, radiometric dating. The fish therefore prove that RADIOMETRIC DATING IS FALSE.

GREEN RIVER VARVES JUST MOVED FROM THE OE EVIDENTIARY SUPPORT COLUMN TO THE YEC SUPPORT COLUMN.

Put that in your pipe and smoke it.

Or trot out your next ridiciulous sophistry to explain this away. I can't wait.

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 445 by Percy, posted 09-13-2017 6:40 PM Percy has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 456 by Coragyps, posted 09-13-2017 7:41 PM Faith has responded
 Message 500 by Percy, posted 09-14-2017 7:36 AM Faith has responded
 Message 505 by RAZD, posted 09-14-2017 8:21 AM Faith has not yet responded
 Message 512 by edge, posted 09-14-2017 11:42 AM Faith has responded
 Message 868 by RAZD, posted 09-20-2017 3:03 PM Faith has not yet responded
 Message 891 by RAZD, posted 09-24-2017 3:13 PM Faith has not yet responded

    
Percy
Member
Posts: 16170
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 3.1


(1)
Message 452 of 894 (819655)
09-13-2017 7:14 PM
Reply to: Message 402 by Faith
09-13-2017 7:56 AM


Re: Again, the Geo Column shows the absurdity of the OE/ToE
Faith writes:

Hardly. Funny how you assert that over and over and don't even give one reason to think anything I've said is false.

Don't be ridiculous. You must have blacked out there for a few hundred posts.

You are the one in denial ignoring my evidence, which is quite extensive and quite clear.

What is the matter with you that you think your own opinion of your own ideas have any value. The value in your ideas is what others think of them. The contribution of debate is to hone your ideas into things of value. Instead you just keep repeating the same ideas over and over again. You don't even listen to the rebuttals. You ignore them and just repeat the same failed ideas again and again.

The strata were all laid down continuously before there was any appreciable erosion or other disturbance; this is evidences in the Grand Canyon through the entire depth of the geological column and it proves the falseness of the supposed "time periods" of millions of years.

I already rebutted this in a previous post, see Message 435.

The trilobite and coelacanth fossils further support my argument by showing only microevolutionary changes on the typical order of varieties and races over what the standard theory says are hundreds of millions of years. These are the only fossils that occur in so many different strata up the geological column and they do not support the OE/ToE at all, which is fabricated out of the great "leaps" supposed between major groups such as reptiles and mammals. They support ordinary microevolution of the sort we see happening before our eyes in our own human time frame. They show millions of years to be ridiculous.

I already rebutted this in a previous post, see Message 423.

And there is also the absurdity of associating a time period with a huge flat sedimentary rock, let alone ALL the time periods. The very idea of a time period so clearly demarcated from others is absurd to begin with, and having them marked by sedimentary deposits is eyerolling absurdity.

This has been rebutted innumerable times. It is time to start responding to the rebuttals and stop mindlessly repeating yourself.

And the other absurdity of trying to claim the Geoloigical Column is continuing in lakebeds and seafloor. I've explained this sufficiently in my previous post on this subject.

You haven't explained a thing, not sufficiently nor to any other degree. The geologic column continues to grow everywhere there is net sedimentation. Nothing else is possible. Simple definition demands it.

So what is that, four separate arguments based on observable facts that show millions of years to be absurd and rapid deposition to be the only reasonable interpretation of the actual form of the strata.

That number would be zero.

--Percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 402 by Faith, posted 09-13-2017 7:56 AM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 453 by Faith, posted 09-13-2017 7:20 PM Percy has responded

    
Faith
Member
Posts: 26611
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 453 of 894 (819656)
09-13-2017 7:20 PM
Reply to: Message 452 by Percy
09-13-2017 7:14 PM


Re: Again, the Geo Column shows the absurdity of the OE/ToE
Oooooo hivvens to bitsy, a YEC's thoughts can only be validated by a gaggle of evolutionists? Ha de ha ha ha.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 452 by Percy, posted 09-13-2017 7:14 PM Percy has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 474 by Percy, posted 09-13-2017 8:51 PM Faith has responded

    
Percy
Member
Posts: 16170
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 3.1


(1)
Message 454 of 894 (819657)
09-13-2017 7:26 PM
Reply to: Message 421 by Faith
09-13-2017 1:24 PM


Re: Again, the Geo Column shows the absurdity of the OE/ToE
Faith writes:

The problem here is that all you guys do is repeat the establishment point of view, but as a YEC I'm operating from a different paradigm:...

You are not operating from a different paradigm. You're doing religion. That's why you keep mentioning the Bible (15 posts) and Jesus (4 posts).

...there are no millions of years, the observed facts are the forms of the trilobites and the coelacanths which are not hard to find, and they demonstrate change on the order of microevolution within the species genome.

I've rebutted this already a couple times today.

You seem to be confusing the argument from varves with the geological column.

No, you seem to have misunderstood what PaulK was saying. He did indicate that may not have realized the implications of your position, but the basic point is that it makes no sense to hold that the varves of the Green River formation are part of the geologic column while those of more recent origin are not.

Paradigm clash turns out to mean basically that nobody can ever argue from a different paradigm because the established paradigm is treated as sacrosanct and there is no tolerance for the other.

Again, what you're doing is religion, not shifting paradigms.

--Percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 421 by Faith, posted 09-13-2017 1:24 PM Faith has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 471 by Phat, posted 09-13-2017 8:38 PM Percy has acknowledged this reply

    
Percy
Member
Posts: 16170
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 3.1


(1)
Message 455 of 894 (819658)
09-13-2017 7:34 PM
Reply to: Message 422 by Faith
09-13-2017 1:30 PM


Re: evidence
Faith writes:

Evidence is facts that support a particular interpretation or conclusion. Strata and fossils are facts that exist, and they support the interpretation of the Flood, a lot better than they support the interpretation of the Geological Time Scale, which is what they are currently used for. Yes, evidence CAN be interpreted in different ways to support different conclusions. I think the Geological Column with its strata and fossils supports the Flood far better than the current interpretation.

No one is denying that facts and evidence can lead to different interpretations, but in the case of this discussion all your arguments reflect a profound ignorance of the laws of the physical universe. You keep trying to invoke natural processes for the Biblical Flood, but what you really need is miracles. If the Flood was really an act of God then why not let it be and let all the miracles that are needed take place. No one would object if you expressed the belief that the Flood and all that sprang from it was a miracle of God that obey the physical laws of the universe. It would be a religious belief and we would respect that, as long as you didn't insist on teaching it in science class.

--Percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 422 by Faith, posted 09-13-2017 1:30 PM Faith has not yet responded

    
Coragyps
Member
Posts: 5295
From: Snyder, Texas, USA
Joined: 11-12-2002
Member Rating: 3.6


(3)
Message 456 of 894 (819660)
09-13-2017 7:41 PM
Reply to: Message 451 by Faith
09-13-2017 7:03 PM


Re: A charming fat fish proves radiometic dating is false cuz the varves aren't annual
An oxygen-free (anoxic) layer of water near the seafloor keeps predators/scavengers off the bottom. They can't survive there. The Black Sea is one example. The "dead zone" off Louisana is another. If scavengers can't get to fish remains, they can't eat them.
There are ancient Greek shipwrecks on the bottom of the Black Sea that are nearly perfectly preserved. Preservation depends on local conditions. Anoxia at the bottom of a body of water is a pretty common condition, today or 500,000,000 years ago.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 451 by Faith, posted 09-13-2017 7:03 PM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 457 by jar, posted 09-13-2017 7:46 PM Coragyps has not yet responded
 Message 458 by Faith, posted 09-13-2017 7:50 PM Coragyps has responded
 Message 459 by Faith, posted 09-13-2017 8:07 PM Coragyps has not yet responded

    
jar
Member
Posts: 29622
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 2.1


Message 457 of 894 (819662)
09-13-2017 7:46 PM
Reply to: Message 456 by Coragyps
09-13-2017 7:41 PM


Re: A charming fat fish proves radiometic dating is false cuz the varves aren't annual
Once again, what is happening today is what happened in the past.

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

This message is a reply to:
 Message 456 by Coragyps, posted 09-13-2017 7:41 PM Coragyps has not yet responded

  
Faith
Member
Posts: 26611
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 458 of 894 (819664)
09-13-2017 7:50 PM
Reply to: Message 456 by Coragyps
09-13-2017 7:41 PM


Re: A charming fat fish proves radiometic dating is false cuz the varves aren't annual
Aha, of course. Very plausible. So you've got ancient shipwrecks with perfectly preserved human corpses in them? Can you show pictures of lakebeds littered with perfectly preserved corpses of fish and other creatures that must be rather abundant if your claim is true?:

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 456 by Coragyps, posted 09-13-2017 7:41 PM Coragyps has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 460 by Coragyps, posted 09-13-2017 8:08 PM Faith has responded

    
Faith
Member
Posts: 26611
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 459 of 894 (819665)
09-13-2017 8:07 PM
Reply to: Message 456 by Coragyps
09-13-2017 7:41 PM


Re: A charming fat fish proves radiometic dating is false cuz the varves aren't annual
A lot of fat fish (as well as all kinds of other water dwellers) should be caught on camera since I gather there are quite a few fossils of same in the Green River formation, and of course they should be seen in various stages of burial by these minuscule layers, right? I mean, why would this layering have stopped anyway?
This message is a reply to:
 Message 456 by Coragyps, posted 09-13-2017 7:41 PM Coragyps has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 465 by jar, posted 09-13-2017 8:17 PM Faith has not yet responded
 Message 511 by edge, posted 09-14-2017 10:52 AM Faith has not yet responded

    
Coragyps
Member
Posts: 5295
From: Snyder, Texas, USA
Joined: 11-12-2002
Member Rating: 3.6


Message 460 of 894 (819666)
09-13-2017 8:08 PM
Reply to: Message 458 by Faith
09-13-2017 7:50 PM


Re: A charming fat fish proves radiometic dating is false cuz the varves aren't annual
Google is your friend, Faith. "Black Sea shipwrecks" will get you started. And "littered with fish corpses" needn't be a requirement: you showed one fat fish fossil.
Preserved ropes from a thousand years ago sound like pretty good preservation to me - and those aren't buried in muck.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 458 by Faith, posted 09-13-2017 7:50 PM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 462 by Faith, posted 09-13-2017 8:10 PM Coragyps has responded
 Message 467 by Percy, posted 09-13-2017 8:29 PM Coragyps has not yet responded

    
Percy
Member
Posts: 16170
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 3.1


Message 461 of 894 (819667)
09-13-2017 8:09 PM
Reply to: Message 440 by Faith
09-13-2017 6:18 PM


Re: Millions of aternating layers Faith
Faith writes:

You are the one who is always saying things that are physically impossible as I well remember from a couple of classic headbutts with you in years past....etc...

Well, now you're just striking out and trying to distract attention from the topic. When my understanding of how the world works is faulty then people are always sure to bring it to my attention.

Across a number of posts today I've identified a number of things that you have wrong about the physical world. If you actually believe you are correct then I suggest you respond to those posts.

So far on this thread unless I've missed something not one person here has even addressed my arguments at all.

Well this is a bald-faced lie. I don't understand how you live with yourself. Here's the list of my messages just from today addressing your arguments, a number of them of substantial length:

The number you've replied to that actually addressed even a tiny fraction of the subject matter? Two.

Nobody will even consider the problem of paradigm clash...

What paradigm clash? You're a person almost completely ignorant of the natural world who is doing religion.

--Percy

Edited by Percy, : Grammar.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 440 by Faith, posted 09-13-2017 6:18 PM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 463 by Faith, posted 09-13-2017 8:11 PM Percy has responded

    
Faith
Member
Posts: 26611
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 462 of 894 (819668)
09-13-2017 8:10 PM
Reply to: Message 460 by Coragyps
09-13-2017 8:08 PM


Re: A charming fat fish proves radiometic dating is false cuz the varves aren't annual
Ropes aren't bad for evidence though something recently alive would be far more convincing. Perhaps there's something about the ropes that contributed to their preservation?
This message is a reply to:
 Message 460 by Coragyps, posted 09-13-2017 8:08 PM Coragyps has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 466 by Coragyps, posted 09-13-2017 8:21 PM Faith has responded

    
Faith
Member
Posts: 26611
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 463 of 894 (819669)
09-13-2017 8:11 PM
Reply to: Message 461 by Percy
09-13-2017 8:09 PM


Re: Millions of aternating layers Faith
Sorry, perhaps I just skip your insulting messages too often.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 461 by Percy, posted 09-13-2017 8:09 PM Percy has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 501 by Percy, posted 09-14-2017 7:43 AM Faith has responded

    
NoNukes
Member
Posts: 10068
From: Central NC USA
Joined: 08-13-2010
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 464 of 894 (819670)
09-13-2017 8:14 PM
Reply to: Message 143 by riVeRraT
09-05-2017 4:27 PM


Re: On topic
In other observances, animals ran for shelter before the flood.

Right, so why are you citing this animal instead of those. The complaint you are given is that this animal is not showing signs of behaving like the animals in the Noahic flood because those animals actually showed up well in pairs, sometimes in larger groups of pairs, before there was any flood. Here we have one bird showing up by itself because he was flooded out.


Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)

I was thinking as long as I have my hands up … they’re not going to shoot me. This is what I’m thinking — they’re not going to shoot me. Wow, was I wrong. -- Charles Kinsey

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 143 by riVeRraT, posted 09-05-2017 4:27 PM riVeRraT has not yet responded

    
jar
Member
Posts: 29622
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 2.1


Message 465 of 894 (819671)
09-13-2017 8:17 PM
Reply to: Message 459 by Faith
09-13-2017 8:07 PM


"The why" Faith
Faith writes:

I mean, why would this layering have stopped anyway?

For exactly the same reasons as things start and stop today.

The processes in the past are exactly the same processes that are happening today. Mountains are pushed up and lowland become highlands. Weathering and erosion wear the high spots down and fill the low spots.

This is really pretty basic obvious stuff Faith.

BUT you still miss the point.

You claim that the Earth is young.

One, just one example like the Green River Varves proves the Earth is NOT young.

You claim there was a world-wide flood.

One, just one example of a place or tree or technology or culture that was not destroyed in the flood proves the Biblical flood never happened.


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

This message is a reply to:
 Message 459 by Faith, posted 09-13-2017 8:07 PM Faith has not yet responded

  
RewPrev1
...
2930
31
3233
...
60NextFF
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2015 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2017