Seashells on tops of mountains.

Welcome to the fray TheWay. type [qs]quotes are easy[/qs] and it becomes: type [qs=tom]quotes are easy[/qs] and it becomes: or type [quote]quotes are easy[/quote] and it becomes:

quote:

---

quotes are easy

---

Not the multiple layers of clamshells (from different ages). Not the difference between shellfish in different areas (from different ages). You're assuming that there is a "diluvial geology" that is consistent and that is more than ad hoc answers (and that it explains all the evidence). If you feel there is please present the evidence of it.Enjoy.

---

Join the effort to unravel AIDS/HIV, unfold Proteomes, fight Cancer,
compare Fiocruz Genome and fight Muscular Dystrophy with Team EvC! (click)

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmericanOZen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

Like most of creationism, that's totally unBiblical.

quote:

---

Gen 7:19 And the waters prevailed exceedingly upon the earth; and all the high hills, that were under the whole heaven, were covered.
Gen 7:20 Fifteen cubits upward did the waters prevail; and the mountains were covered.

---

There were mountains before the flood. The question would be: How did seashells get to the tops of those mountains (in multiple layers)?

---

“Faith moves mountains, but only knowledge moves them to the right place” -- Joseph Goebbels
-------------
Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC

Hello, TheWay. Welcome to EvC. Actually, there isn't any the flood doctrine. There have been lots of "theories" about where the water came from and where it went: vapor canopies, ice rings, giant water-filled caverns under the earth. The "mountains formed right after the flood" is one idea among many.- No, because like the other ideas I mentions, and other creationist ideas like accelerated radioactive decay, changing speed of light, Grand Canyon carved when it was soft sediment, and so forth, it is pretty easily shown to not have happened. Sudden mountain building would look very different than what we actually do see in the mountains, and, besides, it ends up having to invent totally new physics not to account for evidence, but to try to save a preferred creation myth from the evidence.

---

In many respects, the Bible was the world's first Wikipedia article. -- Doug Brown (quoted by Carlin Romano in The Chronicle Review)

wow, fast replies! thanks for the help, i found the codes page, i will be studying up on them, so bear with me. (Bear, is that the right spelling for the context?) Aren't you assuming that conventional uniformitarian philosophy of geology is true? Yes, I am assuming diluvial geology. I think that diluvial geology explains most of the evidence quite nicely. Would the topic be a bit broad to start or is there a specific area that would be fitting? Perhaps a review of a flood model?

http://EvC Forum: Was there a worldwide flood? -->EvC Forum: Was there a worldwide flood?Might be a good place to start, if the thread is exhausted a new one could be started.-x

No, it assumes first that the evidence is true, all the evidence, and then looks at how that evidence is best explained. So far the best consistent explanation found is in the science of geology.Tell me, have you ever heard of a flood making a mountain? Can you explain how water could do this?btw - what do you think "uniformitarianism" means?Enjoy.

---

Join the effort to unravel AIDS/HIV, unfold Proteomes, fight Cancer,
compare Fiocruz Genome and fight Muscular Dystrophy with Team EvC! (click)

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmericanOZen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

I don't have a geology degree so this is only the layman talking in me.From what I understand, fossils are not only found on mountain tops but also IN them. Furthermore, they're also found IN mountains, not just mountain tops. And not every mountain top has fossils of sea shells.A violent world wide flood that covered even the highest mountain top we would expect to distribute things very evenly (that is if it's possible for a flood to bring up sea shells to some thousands and thousands of feet high). These same fossils are found on the sides of some mountains while are found on tops of other mountains. These locations are some thousands of feet high in variation.Make sense? Or am I babbling here?

---

Disclaimer:

​

Occasionally, owing to the deficiency of the English language, I have used he/him/his meaning he or she/him or her/his or her in order to avoid awkwardness of style.

​

He, him, and his are not intended as exclusively masculine pronouns. They may refer to either sex or to both sexes!

First the text says that the waters prevailed upon the "high hills." Then the "mountains" were covered.Moving on to Psalms 104:6,7 we read that the earth was covered with "the deep" and "the waters stood above the mountains." Psalms 104:7 the waters go away. Thunder is mentioned here, likely a first as was the rainbow (as per Genesis) In Psalms 108 we read of the mountains rising up (likely to much higher elevations and the valleys sinking down. So the lower mountains (hills) rose up after being covered by the deep and the valleys sank down, likely forming the deeper oceans which now cover some 70% of the earth's surface. This all likely after the rains stopped. As the valleys/oceans etc sank the mountain ranges rose giving the effect of waters receeding and dry land appearing. Likely evaporation was only one of the means causing the waters to receed and dry land to appear. They likely rose up with the mountains since the above series of texts indicates lower mountains/hills before the flood, taking less water to cover the earth than by the elevation of mountains which we observe. Perhaps (I say 'perhaps) the massive faulting, sliding and movement of terrain via breaking natural dams and so forth layered fossil beds.I'm applying logic and reason to the Biblical historical record and applying it to what is observed as well for what it's worth. To me all of the varied manifestations of corroborating evidence relative to the Biblical record renders it of significant worth. To you, most assuredly not from what we read of you. Edited by Buzsaw, : Rephrase for clarity

---

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The immeasurable present is forever consuming the eternal future and extending the infinite past.

please quote the exact text Buz. Thanks.The mountains raising does not, in any case, explain what we see. If you think it does explain, first, your understanding of the facts about the seashells and then, in some detail, how they got there.

Have we forgotten that not only was the vapor canopy torn asunder causing torrential catastrophic rain, but the fountains of the deep were released pushing upward.Ray

Imo, since the ocean crusts average much thinner than the continental crusts by about 6 or 7 times thinner, likely the massive flood waters flowing to the lower thinner crust valleys caused a great amount of tectonic movement of both the larger 7 plates and the more numerous smaller plates causing tectonic plate collisions and uplift etc. This activity would no doubt do a great deal of mountain forming including the larger ranges which tend to be near the coastlines of the oceans, imo making flood sense.

---

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The immeasurable present is forever consuming the eternal future and extending the infinite past.

Psalms 104:6-9

---

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The immeasurable present is forever consuming the eternal future and extending the infinite past.

http://EvC Forum: Seashells on tops of mountains. -->EvC Forum: Seashells on tops of mountains. Since any amount of torrential rain for forty days and forty nights could not flood the Earth above mountain tops, the unmeasureable force of water gushing upward at the same time explains water levels at catastrophic heights and the objects found thereon.Ray

As I said about all I can offer is logic and reasoning which I have done regarding the seashell.Other than that, I remember finding petrified sea squib at my dad's ranch back in the 1950s (at about the 6000' elevation) on the Shoshoni Indian Reservation near Lander Wyo where I grew up in the foothills of the Wind River Range. The U of Missouri also had a geology fossil camp at about the 10,000' elevation just above where my dad's ranch was. I don't know what all they found in those fossil beds. The reason I know the things on the ranch were petrified sea squib is because I took some samples into Lander and was informed so by a trained geologist. These were shaped like the tip of a deer antler and about an inch and a half to two inches long as I recall. There were a lot of them to be found on the ranch acerage there. Back then a white could lease Indian land if no Indians opted for the lease.

---

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The immeasurable present is forever consuming the eternal future and extending the infinite past.

I'm not sure what effect the releasing of the subterranian waters would have. Logically, perhaps the sinking of the valleys by the massive weight of the flood water exerted pressure on the earth's surface in the lower areas to effect this.Yes, I agree also about the disintegration of the vapor canopy. Thus the first rains, rainbow and thunder etc.

---

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The immeasurable present is forever consuming the eternal future and extending the infinite past.