EvC Forum: Polystrata fossils

Email This Thread

Newer Topic | Older Topic

Author

Topic: Polystrata fossils

bdfoster

Member (Idle past 4900 days)

Posts: 60

From: Riverside, CA

Joined: 05-09-2007

Normal Thread Display

Message 5 of 50 (420131)
09-06-2007 11:31 AM

Reply to: Message 4 by iceage
09-05-2007 8:51 PM

Re: Rapid Burial

Like most YEC arguments, polystrate fossils are a big so what. Like Iceage said rapid sedimentation happens. So what?

You want, rapid sedimentation, you got it!

Yes it happened in a flood. No it wasn't a global flood.

Polystrate fossils, and other examples of rapid sedimentation don't explain lake varves, pelagic ooze deposits (deep-water limestone and chert), evaporites etc.

Brent

This message is a reply to:
	Message 4 by iceage, posted 09-05-2007 8:51 PM		iceage has not replied

bdfoster

Member (Idle past 4900 days)

Posts: 60

From: Riverside, CA

Joined: 05-09-2007

Normal Thread Display

Message 36 of 50 (421001)
09-10-2007 4:38 PM

Reply to: Message 34 by Dr Adequate
09-10-2007 2:39 PM

Re: starting over? or a review

But as I've pointed out once or twice already, this "assumption" is testable. If scientists saw something in the geological record which could not be explained by the laws of nature, then they would notice.

Ooo, I don't know about this. Science is obliged to find natural explanations. If God decided to throw a miracle out there, truly break the natural chain of cause and effect, how could science distinguish this event from a natural event that simply can't be explained by our current understanding of natural laws? If something happens that science can't explain, then the only valid conclusion from a scientific standpoint is to say that it is unexplained. Unexplained phenomena have a way of becoming explained after rigorous scientific inquiry. But if the explanation remains elusive, explanation by miracle is illegal for the scientist.

But it is ridiculous to suggest that the basics of geology change because of a flood.

Edited by bdfoster, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
	Message 34 by Dr Adequate, posted 09-10-2007 2:39 PM		Dr Adequate has replied

Replies to this message:
	Message 37 by Dr Adequate, posted 09-10-2007 4:53 PM		bdfoster has replied

bdfoster

Member (Idle past 4900 days)

Posts: 60

From: Riverside, CA

Joined: 05-09-2007

Normal Thread Display

Message 38 of 50 (421006)
09-10-2007 5:15 PM

Reply to: Message 37 by Dr Adequate
09-10-2007 4:53 PM

Okay, let's phrase this more carefully.
If there was evidence of a universal flood 4000 years ago, inexplicable by the laws of nature as they are presently known to geologists, then geologists would notice.

My point is merely that they would notice if something violated their "assumptions", whether this anomaly was supernatural or inexplicable yet natural.

Absolutely. Virtually all of the YEC objections I have seen are easily explainable by presently understood geologic principles. Like any other science there is plenty that is poorly understood. In fact a great way to find research topics in geology or anyother subject is to Google the phrase "poorly understood".

Sorry for the nit-picky response on my part. I am involved with a discussion with somebody else on the concept of being able to identify a miricle.

This message is a reply to:
	Message 37 by Dr Adequate, posted 09-10-2007 4:53 PM		Dr Adequate has not replied

bdfoster

Member (Idle past 4900 days)

Posts: 60

From: Riverside, CA

Joined: 05-09-2007

Normal Thread Display

Message 44 of 50 (421614)
09-13-2007 11:53 AM

Reply to: Message 40 by Ihategod
09-12-2007 6:45 PM

Re: DOUBT THAT

If geologists ran into something supernatural they would use ways to naturally explain it, or they would deny it. You think these scientists are objective truth telling machines who are massively equipped with the highest state of morals and ethics. If they ain't getting no grant money fo' day work cuz uncle bob thinks Godidit, well hell, theys goin' ta find nother way of splainin' things.

They would use use ways to naturally explain it, or leave it unexplained. Denying it s not an option, nor is offering a supernatural explanation. Although both of these are YEC standard proceedure, in science they would incur the wrath of peers. Science is very competitive. Occasionally individuals do try to deny eveidence or offer conclusions that violate the bounds of science. Science as an institution is intolerant of such individuals, although they do persist.

Brent

This message is a reply to:
	Message 40 by Ihategod, posted 09-12-2007 6:45 PM		Ihategod has not replied

Date format: mm-dd-yyyy

Timezone: ET (US)

Newer Topic | Older Topic

Do Nothing Button

4 online now:	AZPaul3, LamarkNewAge, PaulK, Theodoric
Newest Member:	ChatGPT
Post Volume:	Total: 916,455 Year: 3,712/9,624 Month: 583/974 Week: 196/276 Day: 36/34 Hour: 2/14