|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
Member Posts: 3945 From: Duluth, Minnesota, U.S. (West end of Lake Superior) Joined: Member Rating: 10.0 |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Back to the fundamentals | |||||||||||||||||||||||
Minnemooseus Member Posts: 3945 From: Duluth, Minnesota, U.S. (West end of Lake Superior) Joined: Member Rating: 10.0 |
Disclaimer: I, minnemooseus, am one who has fallen under the influence of a college education in geology.
As I see it, the most fundimental exponent of the evidence of evolution (inorganic and organic) is the geologic column. It is a record of what happened through the long passage of time. The rocks at the bottom, and any contained fossils, are the earliest available record of what happened at that location. The rocks at the top, and any contained fossils, are the latest available record of what happened at that location. There are also methodologies for sequencing other events, such as faulting and folding. This is the conventional wisdom. Conventional geologic and related study weaves a complex, interlocking story of the processes that resulted in the geologic record. Fundamental to this study is the idea (theory?) of uniformitarianism, which says that the processes we see happening today, are the same processes that happened in the past. This uniformitarianism certainly dosn't exclude the occasional catastrophic event. It does say that most of what we see is a result of ordinary, common processes. This kicker of this discussion, of course, is the reality of the "great flood" of Noah's time. At least some believers in this event think that much of the geologic column is a result of that short term (few years?) event. As such, the geologic column is not a record of the happenings during the passage of time. Rather, the geologic column is the result of some sort of sorting process. My personal opinion mirrors that of the vast majority of those trained in geology. That is, that a vast part of the geologic column could be from a short time period, single flood event, is plainly absurd. Now this statement, in itself, is (as I understand it) called "an arguement of authority (AOA)", or something like that. An AOA is considered to be a not valid method of debate. Thus, I get challenged to supply specific data to support the idea that the geologic column is indeed a result of uniformitarianistic processes. Now, offhand, doing this should be easy. I have the entire history of conventional geologic study at my disposal. All I need do is post a significant portion (with references) of this history. And then further defend the details of that history. As I see it, an at least equal burdon in on the "flood geology" advocate, to supply a history of geologic study, demonstrating how a single flood process can acount for the rocks of the geologic column. What we need to come up with, is an example geologic column, or even better, a related set of columns (real world raw data), and then have both the conventional geologist and the "flood" geologist offer up their versions of how it happened. It would perhaps be nice if the column included some coal horizons. I am, of course, confident that the "flood" geologist would be unable to come up with a plausable explanation. So, can anyone out there come up with an internet version of a geologic column? Maybe we need to track down that Grand Canyon section. The problem is finding a description that is detailed enough to study in depth. Comments? Moose ------------------Old Earth evolution - Yes Godly creation - Maybe
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Minnemooseus Member Posts: 3945 From: Duluth, Minnesota, U.S. (West end of Lake Superior) Joined: Member Rating: 10.0 |
quote: The Bible relates a story of a great flood. At the Is the Global Flood Feasible? Discussion Q&A thread, a mechanism for this flood is being debated. The Bible, however, makes no comment (am I wrong?) about anything beyond that "great flood", so thoughts of continents splitting and crashing, and mountains being built, in conjunction with the "great flood" is pure speculation.
quote: I'm no expert, and I havn't done any special research to confirm it, but I believe that the Himalaya Mountains are still rising at a measureable rate. As far as impact rates - Remember, the forces driving the collision didn't cease after the initial contact. Think of a car being slowly pushed into a solid object by a strong force. It may crumple slowly, but ultimately it will still get very crumpled. I would prefer that a discussion of this nature be instead at that other string: Is the Global Flood Feasible? Discussion Q&A What I was trying for in this string, was to get back to the rocks themselves (or the best possible internet version of the rocks themselves). Then to try to interpretate those rock to see what origins model they fit. Or something like that. Best regards,Moose ------------------Old Earth evolution - Yes Godly creation - Maybe
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Minnemooseus Member Posts: 3945 From: Duluth, Minnesota, U.S. (West end of Lake Superior) Joined: Member Rating: 10.0 |
Re: Assessing Creationist Stratigraphy with Evidence from the Gulf of Mexico
I skimmed through it, and I am under the impression that the main point of it it that the "flood geologists" are having an internal debate over which rocks to include as "great flood" deposits, and which to exclude. They are also seemingly showing a greater honesty in recognizing the problems of getting the real world data to fit in a "great flood" model. In a way, I must commend the paper as being better than most of the "flood geology" papers I have encountered. I have bookmarked it, for further study. Best regards,Moose ------------------Old Earth evolution - Yes Godly creation - Maybe
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Minnemooseus Member Posts: 3945 From: Duluth, Minnesota, U.S. (West end of Lake Superior) Joined: Member Rating: 10.0 |
quote: Upon re-reading the first part of "Assessing Creationist Stratigraphy with Evidence from the Gulf of Mexico" at:
http://www.trueorigin.org/cfjrgulf.asp I find that it contains some interesting comments about the relationships between the creationsist camp and the science of geology. I give my personal encouragement to members on both sides, to give this paper a fairly careful reading, at least the first part. The later part of the paper gets rather "mucky", and can be given a lighter reading. Cheers,Moose ------------------Old Earth evolution - Yes Godly creation - Maybe
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Minnemooseus Member Posts: 3945 From: Duluth, Minnesota, U.S. (West end of Lake Superior) Joined: Member Rating: 10.0 |
Upon re-re-reading "Assessing Creationist Stratigraphy with Evidence from the Gulf of Mexico" at:
http://www.trueorigin.org/cfjrgulf.asp : I'm not really following some of their thought processes, but this paper seems to be more of a support for the "great flood" having not happened. By their own admission, they have not found evidence to support the "great flood" event. Moose
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Minnemooseus Member Posts: 3945 From: Duluth, Minnesota, U.S. (West end of Lake Superior) Joined: Member Rating: 10.0 |
To the "flood geologists": Where is the evidence that the "great flood" happened?
Cite some real physical evidence. Show me the sediments. Moose ps. could the creationist side please be a clear as possible to whether they are old earth or young earth ------------------Old Earth evolution - Yes Godly creation - Maybe |
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Minnemooseus Member Posts: 3945 From: Duluth, Minnesota, U.S. (West end of Lake Superior) Joined: Member Rating: 10.0 |
Come on creationists:
If the seven days of creation, the young earth, and the great flood are real - Why did God leave such a detailed worldly record to the contrary? The worldly record that so many scientists have carefully studied and find so convincing. Have they been deceived? Why would God do this deception? Moose ------------------Old Earth evolution - Yes Godly creation - Maybe [This message has been edited by minnemooseus, 01-15-2002]
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Minnemooseus Member Posts: 3945 From: Duluth, Minnesota, U.S. (West end of Lake Superior) Joined: Member Rating: 10.0 |
quote: John Paul - Do you have any comments on the above cited? You were the one to originally present the link. I did find it interesting. See the "uniformitarianism" spin off topic also. "Talk to the rocks - they have the answers",Moose ------------------Old Earth evolution - Yes Godly creation - Maybe Edited c. 8:30 pm ET, 1/20/01, to fix UBB code [This message has been edited by minnemooseus, 01-20-2002]
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Minnemooseus Member Posts: 3945 From: Duluth, Minnesota, U.S. (West end of Lake Superior) Joined: Member Rating: 10.0 |
quote: Hey, I'm having to find my own answers to the above questions. From http://www.theistic-evolution.com/ And more specificly, the authors "Essay in Favor of Theistic Evolution"
http://www.theistic-evolution.com/theisticevolution.html From The Possibilities of Genesis
quote: And
quote: Moose ------------------BS degree, geology, '83 Professor, geology, Whatsamatta U Old Earth evolution - Yes Godly creation - Maybe
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Minnemooseus Member Posts: 3945 From: Duluth, Minnesota, U.S. (West end of Lake Superior) Joined: Member Rating: 10.0 |
The Geologic Column
and its Implications for the Flood Copyright 2001 by Glenn Morton [Last Update: February 17, 2001] http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/geocolumn/ Glenn Morton discusses a section of sedimentary rock in North Dakota, which span the periods of the Phanerazoic. Moose ------------------BS degree, geology, '83 Professor, geology, Whatsamatta U Old Earth evolution - Yes Godly creation - Maybe |
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Minnemooseus Member Posts: 3945 From: Duluth, Minnesota, U.S. (West end of Lake Superior) Joined: Member Rating: 10.0 |
quote: As I type this, this topic has fallen to 73rd place on the list of active topics - time to revive it. Creationists - any comments on the above quoted, or any of the messages between the source of the quote and this here message? I'm looking for the physical evidence of the flood, and in the bigger picture, how the entire geologic record fits into the creation story. Moose ------------------BS degree, geology, '83 Professor, geology, Whatsamatta U Old Earth evolution - Yes Godly creation - Maybe
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Minnemooseus Member Posts: 3945 From: Duluth, Minnesota, U.S. (West end of Lake Superior) Joined: Member Rating: 10.0 |
The area of "Great Flood" discussion, that I'm trying to push in this topic, has started to show up in another topic.
From http://www.evcforum.net/cgi-bin/dm.cgi?action=msg&f=2&t=38&m=63#63 , is the following:
quote: So... BUMP! Moose
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Minnemooseus Member Posts: 3945 From: Duluth, Minnesota, U.S. (West end of Lake Superior) Joined: Member Rating: 10.0 |
quote: Figure it was time to replay the initial post of this topic. So creationists, which rocks were a result of "the flood"? All of them? Much of them? A small portion of them? I would think that a small portion of them is the only plausible possibility, but which rocks were they? John Paul posted this, way back:
http://www.trueorigin.org/cfjrgulf.asp They didn't come up with an answer. Indeed, they specificly stated that they didn't come up with an answer. Moose ------------------BS degree, geology, '83 Professor, geology, Whatsamatta U Old Earth evolution - Yes Godly creation - Maybe
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Minnemooseus Member Posts: 3945 From: Duluth, Minnesota, U.S. (West end of Lake Superior) Joined: Member Rating: 10.0 |
Joe, do you have any comments on:
http://www.trueorigin.org/cfjrgulf.asp They don't really seem to accomplish much, but I am impressed with their facing up to the real problems of fitting the Noahtic flood into the "big picture". In all, probably the best creationist flood geology web page I have encountered (IMO). Moose ------------------BS degree, geology, '83 Professor, geology, Whatsamatta U Old Earth evolution - Yes Godly creation - Maybe
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Minnemooseus Member Posts: 3945 From: Duluth, Minnesota, U.S. (West end of Lake Superior) Joined: Member Rating: 10.0 |
quote: Quoting myself, from message 10:
quote: I am rather amazed that such honesty would appear at True Origins. Moose ------------------BS degree, geology, '83 Professor, geology, Whatsamatta U Old Earth evolution - Yes Godly creation - Maybe
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024