Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 107 (8806 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 12-18-2017 12:09 AM
341 online now:
Dr Adequate, Dredge, dwise1, Minnemooseus (Adminnemooseus) (4 members, 337 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: jaufre
Post Volume:
Total: 824,532 Year: 29,138/21,208 Month: 1,204/1,847 Week: 127/452 Day: 1/126 Hour: 1/2

Announcements: Reporting debate problems OR discussing moderation actions/inactions


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
RewPrev1
...
5556
57
585960Next
Author Topic:   Evidence of the flood
Faith
Member
Posts: 26789
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 841 of 894 (820302)
09-18-2017 9:53 PM
Reply to: Message 840 by edge
09-18-2017 9:37 PM


Re: physical impossibiity
Without leaving any evidence of deformation in the overlying rocks.

Sure.

There probably is some evidence but it's not exposed.

Besides the sediments were wet so they'd just settle back to their condition before being disturbed.

Why should it look like stripped gears if the sediments were still wet? And again, there may be evidence that just happens to be out of sight.

The evidence of the whole stack's being lifted is quite clear on the cross section as I've many times pointed out. The strata would not deposit over a hill like that, they had to have been pushed up.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 840 by edge, posted 09-18-2017 9:37 PM edge has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 842 by edge, posted 09-18-2017 10:33 PM Faith has responded
 Message 845 by Percy, posted 09-19-2017 7:46 AM Faith has not yet responded

    
edge
Member
Posts: 4002
From: Colorado, USA
Joined: 01-09-2002
Member Rating: 3.0


Message 842 of 894 (820304)
09-18-2017 10:33 PM
Reply to: Message 841 by Faith
09-18-2017 9:53 PM


Re: physical impossibiity
There probably is some evidence but it's not exposed.

As I said, how very convenient for you.

Does this also mean that you don't have to look for it?

Besides the sediments were wet so they'd just settle back to their condition before being disturbed.

So they moved and then they moved back.

Your evidence has a strange way of disappearing.

Why should it look like stripped gears if the sediments were still wet? And again, there may be evidence that just happens to be out of sight.

Good. That way you can make up whatever you want.

I thought you said that the Shinumo Quartzite was resistant to deformation.

Do you have any idea what happens to wet sediments when they flow?

The evidence of the whole stack's being lifted is quite clear on the cross section as I've many times pointed out. The strata would not deposit over a hill like that, they had to have been pushed up.

Or not. The point is that this is irrelevant as evidence for your scenario as in opposition to the mainstream conclusions.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 841 by Faith, posted 09-18-2017 9:53 PM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 843 by Faith, posted 09-19-2017 2:01 AM edge has responded

  
Faith
Member
Posts: 26789
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 843 of 894 (820305)
09-19-2017 2:01 AM
Reply to: Message 842 by edge
09-18-2017 10:33 PM


Re: physical impossibiity
What is the need for the snarky tone? Really. I'm trying to build on my model or hypothesis or whatever, and I'm making use of the evidence I have available, and I'm not trying to hide anything, I'm just trying to get it all to work together based on the evidence I have. I know it's galling to you that I don't accept standard geological interpretations and I'm truly sorry that everything I say is so offensive to you.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 842 by edge, posted 09-18-2017 10:33 PM edge has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 844 by Pressie, posted 09-19-2017 6:38 AM Faith has not yet responded
 Message 847 by Percy, posted 09-19-2017 7:57 AM Faith has not yet responded
 Message 849 by PaulK, posted 09-19-2017 8:09 AM Faith has not yet responded
 Message 852 by edge, posted 09-19-2017 8:35 AM Faith has not yet responded
 Message 856 by Phat, posted 09-19-2017 3:08 PM Faith has not yet responded

    
Pressie
Member
Posts: 1858
From: Pretoria, SA
Joined: 06-18-2010
Member Rating: 2.1


Message 844 of 894 (820310)
09-19-2017 6:38 AM
Reply to: Message 843 by Faith
09-19-2017 2:01 AM


Re: physical impossibiity
Faith writes:

What is the need for the snarky tone? Really. I'm trying to build on my model or hypothesis or whatever, and I'm making use of the evidence I have available, and I'm not trying to hide anything...

Have you ever logged a core, Faith? Do you actually know what an aureole is?
This message is a reply to:
 Message 843 by Faith, posted 09-19-2017 2:01 AM Faith has not yet responded

    
Percy
Member
Posts: 16343
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 2.4


(1)
Message 845 of 894 (820312)
09-19-2017 7:46 AM
Reply to: Message 841 by Faith
09-18-2017 9:53 PM


Re: physical impossibiity
Faith writes:

Without leaving any evidence of deformation in the overlying rocks.
Sure.

There probably is some evidence but it's not exposed.

You can't know what happened before you find the evidence. You only know what happened after you find the evidence. Evidence first, then conclusions. You're working backwards from unevidenced conclusions.

Besides the sediments were wet so they'd just settle back to their condition before being disturbed.

So your evidence completely disappeared. How convenient for you. How do you know what happened if you have no evidence?

And what makes you think that sediments deposited by a flood (which the Tapeats does not resemble, but continuing the counterargument anyway) would look the same as sediments that have settled back down after having a 700 foot monadnock thrust through them. What would have happened to the imprint trails of trilobites and brachiopods when these wet sediments "settled back to their condition" after the the monadnock of Shinumo Quartzite disturbed them? Wouldn't they have been erased?

Our evidence has the advantage of being out in the open where anyone can examine it (well, anyone willing to hike for miles in the hot sun and scramble over very difficult terrain)

Why should it look like stripped gears if the sediments were still wet? And again, there may be evidence that just happens to be out of sight.

Just a hint: you can tell when you might actually be arguing scientifically when you refer to evidence that exists instead of to evidence that doesn't exist.

The evidence of the whole stack's being lifted is quite clear on the cross section as I've many times pointed out. The strata would not deposit over a hill like that, they had to have been pushed up.

Edge wasn't arguing that the "whole stack" (presumably you mean all the layers of the Grand Canyon, including the Grand Canyon Supergroup) was not uplifted. That it was uplifted is obvious. Gradual uplift is fundamental to the formation of the canyon. The Colorado flowed along eroding downward as the surrounding landscape was uplifted, forming the canyon.

What Edge actually said in Message 840 was this:

Edge in Message 840 writes:

And your scenario of undisturbed upper plate rocks is absurd. The only rocks that have anywhere to really move are the ones at the surface of the earth.

He was arguing that the layers of the Grand Canyon Supergroup could not have been pushed up into the layers of the Tapeats and above without disturbing them. He was pointing out that the rocks have to have somewhere to move, which is only true at the surface.

--Percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 841 by Faith, posted 09-18-2017 9:53 PM Faith has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 846 by Pressie, posted 09-19-2017 7:55 AM Percy has acknowledged this reply

    
Pressie
Member
Posts: 1858
From: Pretoria, SA
Joined: 06-18-2010
Member Rating: 2.1


Message 846 of 894 (820313)
09-19-2017 7:55 AM
Reply to: Message 845 by Percy
09-19-2017 7:46 AM


Re: physical impossibiity
I'm still trying to figure out why Faith thinks the Grand Canyon is evidence for some magic global fluddie.

Edited by Pressie, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 845 by Percy, posted 09-19-2017 7:46 AM Percy has acknowledged this reply

Replies to this message:
 Message 850 by JonF, posted 09-19-2017 8:22 AM Pressie has responded

    
Percy
Member
Posts: 16343
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 2.4


Message 847 of 894 (820314)
09-19-2017 7:57 AM
Reply to: Message 843 by Faith
09-19-2017 2:01 AM


Re: physical impossibiity
Faith writes:

What is the need for the snarky tone?

You're complaining about a snarky tone after wasting people's time arguing with no evidence or with evidence that has conveniently disappeared?

I'm trying to build on my model or hypothesis or whatever, and I'm making use of the evidence I have available,...

You have no evidence. What you have is a set of strategies that involve ignoring evidence, ignoring arguments, repeating your original unevidenced positions unchanged over and over again, and distracting attention from the topic by picking fights with other participants.

...and I'm not trying to hide anything,...

Sure. See list in previous paragraph.

...I'm just trying to get it all to work together based on the evidence I have.

You have no evidence. Getting a whole world to work together when there's no evidence to tie you down is what writers like Tolkein did. You've composed a geological equivalent of The Hobbit.

--Percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 843 by Faith, posted 09-19-2017 2:01 AM Faith has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 848 by Pressie, posted 09-19-2017 8:03 AM Percy has acknowledged this reply

    
Pressie
Member
Posts: 1858
From: Pretoria, SA
Joined: 06-18-2010
Member Rating: 2.1


Message 848 of 894 (820318)
09-19-2017 8:03 AM
Reply to: Message 847 by Percy
09-19-2017 7:57 AM


Re: physical impossibiity
Hey, JRR Tolkien was born in Bloemfontein. So, please don't do that!

Edited by Pressie, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 847 by Percy, posted 09-19-2017 7:57 AM Percy has acknowledged this reply

    
PaulK
Member
Posts: 13391
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 1.7


(1)
Message 849 of 894 (820319)
09-19-2017 8:09 AM
Reply to: Message 843 by Faith
09-19-2017 2:01 AM


Re: physical impossibiity
quote:

What is the need for the snarky tone?

To the extent there is one - and it is considerably less snarky than your reply it is probably due to your attempts to shoehorn everything into the scenario you made up without really caring about the evidence.

Now if you want some nasty snark, here is an example:

quote:

know it's galling to you that I don't accept standard geological interpretations and I'm truly sorry that everything I say is so offensive to you.

It's not your rejection of geology that is galling at all. It's your arrogance and pride and intellectual dishonesty. And you really ought to know that by now.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 843 by Faith, posted 09-19-2017 2:01 AM Faith has not yet responded

    
JonF
Member
Posts: 4001
Joined: 06-23-2003
Member Rating: 3.0


Message 850 of 894 (820321)
09-19-2017 8:22 AM
Reply to: Message 846 by Pressie
09-19-2017 7:55 AM


Re: physical impossibiity
Everything is evidence of a magic global fludde.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 846 by Pressie, posted 09-19-2017 7:55 AM Pressie has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 851 by Pressie, posted 09-19-2017 8:29 AM JonF has not yet responded

  
Pressie
Member
Posts: 1858
From: Pretoria, SA
Joined: 06-18-2010
Member Rating: 2.1


Message 851 of 894 (820322)
09-19-2017 8:29 AM
Reply to: Message 850 by JonF
09-19-2017 8:22 AM


Re: physical impossibiity
Yeah, not only that. In our local newspaper some preacher has a column every day. He wrote about some person and everyone else praying for a miracle for a person with cancer.

It didn't work. The person died.

Then he wrote that the death of that person is also a miracle and somehow Jesus.

Edited by Pressie, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 850 by JonF, posted 09-19-2017 8:22 AM JonF has not yet responded

    
edge
Member
Posts: 4002
From: Colorado, USA
Joined: 01-09-2002
Member Rating: 3.0


(3)
Message 852 of 894 (820323)
09-19-2017 8:35 AM
Reply to: Message 843 by Faith
09-19-2017 2:01 AM


Re: physical impossibiity
What is the need for the snarky tone?

To show the absurdity of your position. And I dare say that I am less 'snarky' than you. I have to say that I tend to take willful ignorance and downright arrogance as an insult.

Really. I'm trying to build on my model or hypothesis or whatever, and I'm making use of the evidence I have available, and I'm not trying to hide anything, I'm just trying to get it all to work together based on the evidence I have.

First of all, you have not provided any kind of evidence that supports your 'hypothesis'.

Furthermore, you are not building a model, nor getting it to work together. You are simply trying to prop up a preconceived idea with ad hoc explanations and assertions.

I know it's galling to you that I don't accept standard geological interpretations and I'm truly sorry that everything I say is so offensive to you.

Mainly, I am puzzled by the YEC tendency to glibly disregard evidence and deny facts, all the while making up fantastic stories as though they have some relationship to reality. I cannot fathom why people fail to use the faculties that they say were given to them.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 843 by Faith, posted 09-19-2017 2:01 AM Faith has not yet responded

  
Aussie
Member
Posts: 143
From: Sanford, FL USA
Joined: 10-02-2006
Member Rating: 2.0


Message 853 of 894 (820355)
09-19-2017 1:21 PM
Reply to: Message 390 by PaulK
09-13-2017 2:54 AM


Re: Millions of aternating layers Faith
quote:

Faith: Eh whut? Whoever said these varves formed DURING THE FLOOD? What an utterly ridiculous idea.

PaulK: So you are saying that the strata containing the varves, and the fossils within them were NOT formed by the Flood? That's an interesting admission.

It drives me crazy when she just Faith has not yet responded to messages that absolutely sink her magical ship.

Can you please respond to this Faith?
This is a significant point! These were NOT formed during the flood?

Can I tag her in this message, similar to Facebook?


"...heck is a small price to pay for the truth"

This message is a reply to:
 Message 390 by PaulK, posted 09-13-2017 2:54 AM PaulK has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 854 by Percy, posted 09-19-2017 1:57 PM Aussie has not yet responded

    
Percy
Member
Posts: 16343
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 2.4


(3)
Message 854 of 894 (820360)
09-19-2017 1:57 PM
Reply to: Message 853 by Aussie
09-19-2017 1:21 PM


Re: Millions of aternating layers Faith
As of this moment in this thread:

  • Faith has ignored 57% of the messages posted to her.

  • 22% of Faith's messages are one line or one sentence.

  • 13% of Faith's messages are all caps.

  • Faith has threatened to abandon the thread three times. Or was it four?

  • Faith thinks she's doing great.

--Percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 853 by Aussie, posted 09-19-2017 1:21 PM Aussie has not yet responded

    
Aussie
Member
Posts: 143
From: Sanford, FL USA
Joined: 10-02-2006
Member Rating: 2.0


Message 855 of 894 (820363)
09-19-2017 3:05 PM
Reply to: Message 420 by Faith
09-13-2017 1:15 PM


Re: evidence of God
The Bible gives evidence galore throughout [itself], historical accounts of God's doings in the world, as witnessed by many people who are named, and much of the gospels describes Jesus' miraculous doings to verify His deity; but the Koran just assumes the existence of Allah and doesn't give one iota of evidence.

What of the Bible did you just say that could not be said of the Koran by a Muslim?
Think about this.

The Koran gives evidence galore throughout, historical accounts of Allah's doings in the world, as witnessed by many people who are named, and much of the Koran describes Allah's miraculous doings to verify His deity; but the Bible just assumes the existence of Yahweh and doesn't give one iota of evidence.

Your arguments are middle school Faith.


"...heck is a small price to pay for the truth"

This message is a reply to:
 Message 420 by Faith, posted 09-13-2017 1:15 PM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 858 by Faith, posted 09-19-2017 5:04 PM Aussie has not yet responded

    
RewPrev1
...
5556
57
585960Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2015 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2017