Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 78 (8905 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 04-22-2019 8:42 PM
20 online now:
JonF, Percy (Admin), Theodoric (3 members, 17 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: WookieeB
Post Volume:
Total: 850,099 Year: 5,136/19,786 Month: 1,258/873 Week: 154/460 Day: 96/58 Hour: 1/7


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Prev123
4
Author Topic:   Flood sorting
Peter
Member (Idle past 2031 days)
Posts: 2160
From: Cambridgeshire, UK.
Joined: 02-05-2002


Message 46 of 53 (16464)
09-03-2002 3:38 AM
Reply to: Message 31 by Tranquility Base
08-29-2002 8:42 PM


quote:
Originally posted by Tranquility Base:
Peter

The flood occurred in surges based on geo-data (if there was a flood) so that is why it is not as simple as you are suggesting. Show me the links to the tank data. The amount of work done in this area would be incredibly minimal.


http://www-personal.umich.edu/~jtrapani/jas.pdf
http://www.ngdc.noaa.gov/mgg/sepm/palaios/9704/blob.htm

Both deal with the transport of animal remains.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 31 by Tranquility Base, posted 08-29-2002 8:42 PM Tranquility Base has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 47 by John, posted 09-20-2002 10:11 PM Peter has responded

    
John
Inactive Member


Message 47 of 53 (17911)
09-20-2002 10:11 PM
Reply to: Message 46 by Peter
09-03-2002 3:38 AM


bump...

I not quite convinced yet, TB.

------------------
www.hells-handmaiden.com


This message is a reply to:
 Message 46 by Peter, posted 09-03-2002 3:38 AM Peter has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 49 by Peter, posted 09-26-2002 7:07 AM John has not yet responded

  
edge
Member
Posts: 4518
From: Colorado, USA
Joined: 01-09-2002
Member Rating: 7.1


Message 48 of 53 (17933)
09-21-2002 10:56 AM
Reply to: Message 39 by Tranquility Base
08-30-2002 1:13 AM


quote:
Originally posted by Tranquility Base:
I read in a mainstream source that turbidite deposits make up half of the geo-column.

So, have you found this reference yet? I'd really be interested in seeing the data.

quote:
Huge sand waves and rapid correlated paleocurrents are the norm in the Paleozoic for example.

I also question whether 'huge sand waves' are the norm for the Paleozoic. Could you give us some kind of evidence to this effect?

quote:
Lyell was wrong about most of the geo-column.

Well, perhaps in some of the details, but heck, that was hundreds of years ago. Kind of a cheap shot to sit here with that much research behind you and criticize someone who really had little to go on but some observations and common sense.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 39 by Tranquility Base, posted 08-30-2002 1:13 AM Tranquility Base has not yet responded

  
Peter
Member (Idle past 2031 days)
Posts: 2160
From: Cambridgeshire, UK.
Joined: 02-05-2002


Message 49 of 53 (18337)
09-26-2002 7:07 AM
Reply to: Message 47 by John
09-20-2002 10:11 PM


Bump, indeed ........
This message is a reply to:
 Message 47 by John, posted 09-20-2002 10:11 PM John has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 50 by Randy, posted 10-14-2002 10:58 AM Peter has not yet responded

    
Randy
Member (Idle past 4355 days)
Posts: 420
From: Cincinnati OH USA
Joined: 07-19-2002


Message 50 of 53 (19852)
10-14-2002 10:58 AM
Reply to: Message 49 by Peter
09-26-2002 7:07 AM


On the other page TB wrote
quote:
The primary unanswered point here, and near punctuated equilibrium, let alone evoltuion, killer, is that we can see beautiful gradual evolution in the fossil record up a geological column covering million of years in shell-fish paleontology for example. We can track the morphology change - the shape changes, the swirls increase in helicity.

Now TB please tell us again how this beautiful sorting occured during your surging, swirling worldwide flood.

Randy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 49 by Peter, posted 09-26-2002 7:07 AM Peter has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 51 by Tranquility Base, posted 10-14-2002 9:57 PM Randy has responded

    
Tranquility Base
Inactive Member


Message 51 of 53 (19892)
10-14-2002 9:57 PM
Reply to: Message 50 by Randy
10-14-2002 10:58 AM


^ This gradual morphology up the geo-col is definetly not everywhere as you know! If the flood occurred it must have been a flood of surges and there would have been times/places of constant current )(as suggested by the paleocurrents) that could very easily have sorted shell shapes approximately just as one gets graded pebble sizes (which is suggestive of the flood too). But it was a process and it had cyclical stages.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 50 by Randy, posted 10-14-2002 10:58 AM Randy has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 52 by Randy, posted 10-14-2002 11:10 PM Tranquility Base has not yet responded
 Message 53 by Peter, posted 10-17-2002 8:01 AM Tranquility Base has not yet responded

  
Randy
Member (Idle past 4355 days)
Posts: 420
From: Cincinnati OH USA
Joined: 07-19-2002


Message 52 of 53 (19897)
10-14-2002 11:10 PM
Reply to: Message 51 by Tranquility Base
10-14-2002 9:57 PM


quote:
Originally posted by Tranquility Base:
^ This gradual morphology up the geo-col is definetly not everywhere as you know! If the flood occurred it must have been a flood of surges and there would have been times/places of constant current )(as suggested by the paleocurrents) that could very easily have sorted shell shapes approximately just as one gets graded pebble sizes (which is suggestive of the flood too). But it was a process and it had cyclical stages.

So you are claiming that these "flood surges" sorted ammonites of appoximately the same size and shape by the complexity of their shell sutures. How did that work? Were these the same surges that carried trillions of tons of sand hundreds of miles?

Randy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 51 by Tranquility Base, posted 10-14-2002 9:57 PM Tranquility Base has not yet responded

    
Peter
Member (Idle past 2031 days)
Posts: 2160
From: Cambridgeshire, UK.
Joined: 02-05-2002


Message 53 of 53 (20092)
10-17-2002 8:01 AM
Reply to: Message 51 by Tranquility Base
10-14-2002 9:57 PM


The problem I have always had with this 'sorting'
argument is the complexity of the process. Experiments
on chicken bones reveal such vast complexity that the 'sorting'
is considered random.

IF a flood (or flood surges) were responsible for the fossil
record (or a large proportion of it) wouldn't one expect
to see so many 'anomalies' (in evolutionary terms) that the
fossil record would never have been used to support the ToE
or may even have cast doubt upon it?

Instead we have a situation where in order to attempt an undermining
of ToE's explanation for the fossil ordering we find an
elaborate, implausible concoction.

I have tended to find that the simplest explanations for observations
are the most accurate.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 51 by Tranquility Base, posted 10-14-2002 9:57 PM Tranquility Base has not yet responded

    
Prev123
4
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019