Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 86 (8943 total)
29 online now:
DrJones*, Thugpreacha (AdminPhat) (2 members, 27 visitors)
Newest Member: LaLa dawn
Post Volume: Total: 863,983 Year: 19,019/19,786 Month: 1,439/1,705 Week: 245/446 Day: 43/98 Hour: 1/3


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   YEC Geologic Column - Created with apparent age?
edge
Member
Posts: 4696
From: Colorado, USA
Joined: 01-09-2002


Message 46 of 82 (19896)
10-14-2002 11:06 PM
Reply to: Message 45 by Tranquility Base
10-14-2002 9:46 PM


quote:
Originally posted by Tranquility Base:
In our model there still could have been a process that generated the differentiation of continental crust from oceanic crust during the 'day 3' uplift of land out of water.

What process is that and what is your evidence that it happened?

quote:
The Precambiran strata are strongly suggestive of process and hence, due to the minimum time involved, is suggestive of the scriptually hinted '1000 year day' view of Biblical creationism .

What particular features of Precambrian strata suggest what process? You really need to get away from these generalized statements.

[This message has been edited by edge, 10-14-2002]


This message is a reply to:
 Message 45 by Tranquility Base, posted 10-14-2002 9:46 PM Tranquility Base has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 47 by Minnemooseus, posted 10-16-2002 12:58 PM edge has not yet responded

  
Minnemooseus
Member
Posts: 3766
From: Duluth, Minnesota, U.S. (West end of Lake Superior)
Joined: 11-11-2001
Member Rating: 3.6


Message 47 of 82 (20033)
10-16-2002 12:58 PM
Reply to: Message 46 by edge
10-14-2002 11:06 PM


I think TC is trying to compress preCambrian crustal evolution into the time frame of one or more "long" creation days. But even thousand year creation days are unrealistic time frames for the "processes" that we see evidences of, in the geologic record.

I still see 3 possibilities for what we see in the gologic record:

1) God created with a false appearance of age.

2) God created, and then evolved the earth at rates totally out of touch with any scientific reality, as we understand it (which is actually a variation of number 1).

3) Old earth creationism and/or (atheistic and/or theistic) evolution.

Moose

------------------
BS degree, geology, '83; Professor, geology, Whatsamatta U; Old Earth evolution - Yes; Godly creation - Maybe
My big page of Creation/Evolution Links

[This message has been edited by minnemooseus, 10-16-2002]


This message is a reply to:
 Message 46 by edge, posted 10-14-2002 11:06 PM edge has not yet responded

    
Minnemooseus
Member
Posts: 3766
From: Duluth, Minnesota, U.S. (West end of Lake Superior)
Joined: 11-11-2001
Member Rating: 3.6


Message 48 of 82 (41037)
05-22-2003 3:00 PM
Reply to: Message 44 by Minnemooseus
10-14-2002 3:28 PM


Quoting myself, from message 44:
quote:
I've just developed an image of what I think the earth's geology might have looked like a the end of the week of creation, had God incorporated minimal apparent age.

The earth's geology would be extremely simple. There would be four components - core, mantle, oceanic crust, and continental crust.

The oceanic crust would be homogenous. All the basalt would be the same composition, both vertically and horizontally. There would be no sediments, and no indications of plate tectonic activity. There could be variations in thickness and topography.

The continental crust would also be homogenous, with perhaps some exceptions where God saw fit. But no sedimentary layering, no volcanics, no folding or faulting. Like the oceanic crust, there could be variations in thickness and topography. Also, God would have needed to add certain resources. A soil horizon, and perhaps somehow the various products that man would come to mine from the earth.


Quoting buzsaw, from message 52 of "For Inquisitor, et al: What is Evolution?":

quote:
It seems that the complete column should be prevelant all over with deviations here and there the exceptions.

Quoting Edge (in reference to "the geologic column" - see that topic for more discussion), from message 65 of the now closed "Mt. Saint Helens now has it's own topic!":

quote:
It is basically a time scale. There is no geological axiom that says rocks of all ages must be present at any given location. Having said that, there are some places where the column is remarkably complete.

Buzsaw's comment is further indication to me, that the YEC image of what the earth's geology is, is much simpler than reality.

Just wanted to get something posted, before I totally lost the train of thought.

Moose

------------------
Professor, geology, Whatsamatta U
Evolution - Changes in the environment, caused by the interactions of the components of the environment.
My big page of Creation/Evolution Links


This message is a reply to:
 Message 44 by Minnemooseus, posted 10-14-2002 3:28 PM Minnemooseus has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 54 by Minnemooseus, posted 11-10-2003 4:26 AM Minnemooseus has not yet responded

    
Minnemooseus
Member
Posts: 3766
From: Duluth, Minnesota, U.S. (West end of Lake Superior)
Joined: 11-11-2001
Member Rating: 3.6


Message 49 of 82 (55345)
09-14-2003 2:39 AM


There seems to be a supply of higher quality YEC's at the moment, so I thought I'd give this topic a bump.

Quoting myself from message 4:

quote:
THE RECORD OF THE CREATED EARTH, IS THE EARTH!

Moose


    
Minnemooseus
Member
Posts: 3766
From: Duluth, Minnesota, U.S. (West end of Lake Superior)
Joined: 11-11-2001
Member Rating: 3.6


Message 50 of 82 (65025)
11-07-2003 7:11 PM


A bump of sorts
A side comment made by NosyNed, at holmes' "Come and Get me" topic,
message 13.

quote:
E.g., if someone disagrees that evolution happened there is limited value in discussing the fossil record if they think the earth is 6,000 years old and the whole record was piled up in one year. If someone doesn't agree that evolution happened then there is not much good in disussing any theories of how it happened.

The age of the earth is a most fundimental question in the debate.

Moose


Replies to this message:
 Message 51 by NosyNed, posted 11-09-2003 10:32 PM Minnemooseus has responded

    
NosyNed
Member
Posts: 8863
From: Canada
Joined: 04-04-2003
Member Rating: 5.3


Message 51 of 82 (65486)
11-09-2003 10:32 PM
Reply to: Message 50 by Minnemooseus
11-07-2003 7:11 PM


Re: A bump of sorts
Yes, have we run out of YEC'ers? If not why isn't anyone willing to defend their young earth position?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 50 by Minnemooseus, posted 11-07-2003 7:11 PM Minnemooseus has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 52 by Minnemooseus, posted 11-09-2003 11:36 PM NosyNed has responded

  
Minnemooseus
Member
Posts: 3766
From: Duluth, Minnesota, U.S. (West end of Lake Superior)
Joined: 11-11-2001
Member Rating: 3.6


Message 52 of 82 (65500)
11-09-2003 11:36 PM
Reply to: Message 51 by NosyNed
11-09-2003 10:32 PM


Re: A bump of sorts
Perhaps I recall wrong, but it seems that Buzsaw sometimes seems to take both a "old earth" geology position, while maintaining a "young earth" life position.

But the age of the fossil record is directly tied to the age of the enclosing rocks. Thus, old earth also means old life.

Moose


This message is a reply to:
 Message 51 by NosyNed, posted 11-09-2003 10:32 PM NosyNed has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 53 by NosyNed, posted 11-10-2003 12:57 AM Minnemooseus has not yet responded

    
NosyNed
Member
Posts: 8863
From: Canada
Joined: 04-04-2003
Member Rating: 5.3


Message 53 of 82 (65514)
11-10-2003 12:57 AM
Reply to: Message 52 by Minnemooseus
11-09-2003 11:36 PM


Re: A bump of sorts
I'd be surprised if Buz was the only old something or other around here if he is one.

OK, any YECs care to comment? Do we all agree, at least, that this is one of the 2 or 3 major points of the debate?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 52 by Minnemooseus, posted 11-09-2003 11:36 PM Minnemooseus has not yet responded

  
Minnemooseus
Member
Posts: 3766
From: Duluth, Minnesota, U.S. (West end of Lake Superior)
Joined: 11-11-2001
Member Rating: 3.6


Message 54 of 82 (65524)
11-10-2003 4:26 AM
Reply to: Message 48 by Minnemooseus
05-22-2003 3:00 PM


I was just reviewing my message 48 (above), and I went back to the source topic from which I had quoted Buzsaw.

I (re)discovered Zephyr's reply to that very quote:

quote:
quote:
It seems that the complete column should be prevelant all over with deviations here and there the exceptions.
I saw a really good answer here, which I can't locate, so I'll paraphrase. (Apologies to the author, feel free to identify yourself and/or clarify) The older the earth is, the more likely that sections of the column will be missing in some places, because of long-term erosion or other effects. A young earth with rapidly formed strata would likely have a complete column in most or all areas; therefore, the complicated geologic record with its myriad distinct catastrophes and discontinuities, verifies that our world has been around a long time and subject to many long-term variations in environment.

Zephyr also goes on to say more.

Moose

[This message has been edited by minnemooseus, 11-10-2003]


This message is a reply to:
 Message 48 by Minnemooseus, posted 05-22-2003 3:00 PM Minnemooseus has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 55 by NosyNed, posted 11-10-2003 9:59 AM Minnemooseus has not yet responded

    
NosyNed
Member
Posts: 8863
From: Canada
Joined: 04-04-2003
Member Rating: 5.3


Message 55 of 82 (65555)
11-10-2003 9:59 AM
Reply to: Message 54 by Minnemooseus
11-10-2003 4:26 AM


Thanks, that is a very good point I haven't seen noted before. I'll keep this nearer the top so some of our resident creation scientists can answer it.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 54 by Minnemooseus, posted 11-10-2003 4:26 AM Minnemooseus has not yet responded

  
JIM
Inactive Member


Message 56 of 82 (65891)
11-11-2003 5:57 PM


To me, the most egregious examples of bad science are concentrated in the ICR museum's explanations of the geologic column, radiometric dating, and the Flood. Is this the type of science that their graduate students learn?

Missing strata? No problem. Lehi Hintze's Geologic History of Utah describes about 100 local geologic columns for that state -- all differ at least slightly from each other. The beauty is that they correlate from location to location, and one can build a history of the larger area from a number of local columns. The geologic columns of Utah are rich in Mesozoic strata and dinosaur fossils, unlike the state of Wisconsin (where I reside), which has neither Mesozoic age rocks nor dinosaur fossils in most of its local columns. An incomplete local geologic column is typical, and this means only that no sedimentary rock was being deposited during that geologic time period.

No mention is made that in lower strata, no multicellular life is found at all, although fossils of eukaryotic and then prokaryotic cells are found.


Replies to this message:
 Message 57 by edge, posted 11-12-2003 12:31 PM JIM has not yet responded

  
edge
Member
Posts: 4696
From: Colorado, USA
Joined: 01-09-2002


Message 57 of 82 (66036)
11-12-2003 12:31 PM
Reply to: Message 56 by JIM
11-11-2003 5:57 PM


quote:
An incomplete local geologic column is typical, and this means only that no sedimentary rock was being deposited during that geologic time period.

... Or that it has been eroded or structurally removed. Otherwise, exactly true. I think we can pretty much rely on YECs not understanding unconformities, however.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 56 by JIM, posted 11-11-2003 5:57 PM JIM has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 58 by NosyNed, posted 11-14-2003 7:47 PM edge has not yet responded

  
NosyNed
Member
Posts: 8863
From: Canada
Joined: 04-04-2003
Member Rating: 5.3


Message 58 of 82 (66550)
11-14-2003 7:47 PM
Reply to: Message 57 by edge
11-12-2003 12:31 PM


I'll just bump again to see what happens.

The general idea of this forum, I thought, was a debate on the issues around evolutionary theory and "creation science". It seems the creationists (YEC type) don't want to actually debate the issue. I presume that means that none of them actually support creation science. But instead support faith based creationism without any reference to science.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 57 by edge, posted 11-12-2003 12:31 PM edge has not yet responded

  
Minnemooseus
Member
Posts: 3766
From: Duluth, Minnesota, U.S. (West end of Lake Superior)
Joined: 11-11-2001
Member Rating: 3.6


Message 59 of 82 (217220)
06-15-2005 4:02 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Minnemooseus
06-02-2002 12:53 PM


Bump
Moose, in message 1 writes:

Now, obviously, God didn't plant the various land life forms onto a barren slab of rock. As such, God did create a "prepared" earth, ie one with at least some appearance of age.

So the big question is, IN THE BEGINNING, when God first created the earth, what was the nature of the earth's geology? Did it appear that a lot of time and natural processes had already happened?

Moose


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Minnemooseus, posted 06-02-2002 12:53 PM Minnemooseus has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 60 by Tranquility Base, posted 06-15-2005 8:57 PM Minnemooseus has not yet responded
 Message 66 by Philip, posted 06-22-2005 6:27 PM Minnemooseus has not yet responded

    
Tranquility Base
Inactive Member


Message 60 of 82 (217269)
06-15-2005 8:57 PM
Reply to: Message 59 by Minnemooseus
06-15-2005 4:02 PM


Re: Bump
Hi Moose!

In a YEC context, I don't believe God used any 'apaprent age' tricks. He did everything he did for a reason.

So, I beleive all layering occurred as . . layering. And this occurred during creation day 3, the Flood, the break-up of Pangea and the ice-ages.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 59 by Minnemooseus, posted 06-15-2005 4:02 PM Minnemooseus has not yet responded

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019