Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,807 Year: 3,064/9,624 Month: 909/1,588 Week: 92/223 Day: 3/17 Hour: 1/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Seashells on tops of mountains.
jar
Member (Idle past 393 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 76 of 343 (426292)
10-05-2007 10:23 PM
Reply to: Message 74 by Buzsaw
10-05-2007 10:16 PM


Re: Mountains lower
Unless, of course, there was a Biblical flood to do the major uplifting relative suddenly, subsequently gradually slowing as time passes. There again though that's applying reason and logic to what we observe and that's not recognized by conventional science.
I'm sorry Buz but your simple assertion is worthless.
Pretending there was some imaginary flood is worthless. You need evidence and a model.
Where is the evidence that the mountains were lower?
Where is the evidence the mountains were raised rapidly?
Where is the model.
Just throwing out fantasies is not building a model.
First you need evidence that the mountains were lower.
Start with just that.
Where is your evidence that the mountains were lower?

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 74 by Buzsaw, posted 10-05-2007 10:16 PM Buzsaw has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 77 by TheWay, posted 10-05-2007 10:44 PM jar has replied

  
TheWay
Junior Member (Idle past 5844 days)
Posts: 27
From: Oklahoma City, Ok
Joined: 08-21-2007


Message 77 of 343 (426296)
10-05-2007 10:44 PM
Reply to: Message 76 by jar
10-05-2007 10:23 PM


Re: Mountains lower
Jar writes:
Where is your evidence that the mountains were lower?
Seashells on tops of mountains! It's even the topic heading!

"Sometimes one pays most for the things one gets for nothing." --Albert Einstein

This message is a reply to:
 Message 76 by jar, posted 10-05-2007 10:23 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 78 by jar, posted 10-05-2007 10:46 PM TheWay has not replied
 Message 90 by RAZD, posted 10-06-2007 3:23 PM TheWay has not replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 393 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 78 of 343 (426297)
10-05-2007 10:46 PM
Reply to: Message 77 by TheWay
10-05-2007 10:44 PM


Re: Mountains lower
Seashells on tops of mountains! It's even the topic heading!
Okay, so you are asserting that the places we see sea shells was at one time at sea level.
Is that correct?

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 77 by TheWay, posted 10-05-2007 10:44 PM TheWay has not replied

  
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 79 of 343 (426300)
10-05-2007 11:49 PM
Reply to: Message 67 by Nuggin
10-05-2007 9:50 PM


Re: "Flood sense"
Nuggins writes:
And, why is your quote from a link which has "piltdown" in the name?
I cited the Galley Hill Skeleton segment which addresses the contamination factor best which was sufficient to make my point so far as I can see. What has your question got to do with anything?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 67 by Nuggin, posted 10-05-2007 9:50 PM Nuggin has not replied

  
iceage 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5914 days)
Posts: 1024
From: Pacific Northwest
Joined: 09-08-2003


Message 80 of 343 (426306)
10-06-2007 12:51 AM
Reply to: Message 63 by Buzsaw
10-05-2007 8:27 PM


Re: Mountains lower
buz writes:
Ringo, if the mountains rose as per Psalms 108
I sorta wished this thread would remained more technical but statements like the above need to addressed.
Psalms 108 doesn't say the mountain rose... It would take an overactive imagination to twist that from the below
KJV=The Psalms 108 writes:
A Prayer for Help against the Foe
1 O God, my heart is fixed;
I will sing and give praise,
even with my glory.
2 Awake, psaltery and harp:
I myself will awake early.
3 I will praise thee, O LORD, among the people:
and I will sing praises unto thee among the nations.
4 For thy mercy is great above the heavens:
and thy truth reacheth unto the clouds.
5 Be thou exalted, O God, above the heavens:
and thy glory above all the earth;
6 that thy beloved may be delivered:
save with thy right hand, and answer me.
7 God hath spoken in his holiness;
I will rejoice, I will divide Shechem,
and mete out the valley of Succoth.
8 Gil'e-ad is mine; Manas'seh is mine;
E'phra-im also is the strength of mine head;
Judah is my lawgiver;
9 Moab is my washpot;
over Edom will I cast out my shoe;
over Philis'ti-a will I triumph.
10 Who will bring me into the strong city?
Who will lead me into Edom?
11 Wilt not thou, O God, who hast cast us off?
And wilt not thou, O God, go forth with our hosts?
12 Give us help from trouble:
for vain is the help of man.
13 Through God we shall do valiantly:
for he it is that shall tread down our enemies.
Edited by iceage, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 63 by Buzsaw, posted 10-05-2007 8:27 PM Buzsaw has not replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 81 of 343 (426336)
10-06-2007 5:39 AM
Reply to: Message 62 by Buzsaw
10-05-2007 8:17 PM


Re: Dating Methodology
quote:
Using logic and reasoning all I can offer as a layman is that a greenhouse canopy type atmosphere would have had different properties than ours which would likely affect the whole ecosystem of the planet which in turn would likely render modern dating methodoly inaccurate. This would likely be the reason that humans lived multiple century lives as per the Biblical record.
So basically your idea of "logic and reasoning" does not require you to have any understanding of what you are talking about. You think that a "greenhouse canopy type atmosphere" is the sort of difference there might be in your assumed "pre-flood" world and therefore you assume that it would also affect the decay rates of radioactive elements and all the other dating methods that give results you don't like.
Well it won't The idea is complete nonsense. If you really employed logic and reasoning you would actually look at the underlying science to see if your idea had any plausiblity at all. Radioactive decay rates are part of basic physics - not significantly affected by temperature rises that would be more than sufficient to wipe out all life on Earth, or by chemistry (which would be reflected in the rocks anyway) and it would be even more laughable to suggest that the ecosysytem is likely to do it.
You're not using logic and reason. All you're doing is groping after excuses that look good to you.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 62 by Buzsaw, posted 10-05-2007 8:17 PM Buzsaw has not replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 284 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 82 of 343 (426342)
10-06-2007 6:56 AM
Reply to: Message 62 by Buzsaw
10-05-2007 8:17 PM


Re: Dating Methodology
Using logic and reasoning all I can offer as a layman is that a greenhouse canopy type atmosphere would have had different properties than ours which would likely affect the whole ecosystem of the planet which in turn would likely render modern dating methodoly inaccurate.
Making stuff up, based on no evidence, about subjects of which you are ignorant is not the same as "using logic and reasoning".
Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 62 by Buzsaw, posted 10-05-2007 8:17 PM Buzsaw has not replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 284 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 83 of 343 (426343)
10-06-2007 7:01 AM
Reply to: Message 74 by Buzsaw
10-05-2007 10:16 PM


Re: Mountains lower
Unless, of course, there was a Biblical flood to do the major uplifting relative suddenly, subsequently gradually slowing as time passes.
Why a Biblical flood, rather than a team of winged pigs or a geological uplift fairy?
Or, hey, why not real processes which exist, which we can observe, and the action of which is confirmed by the evidence.
There again though that's applying reason and logic to what we observe and that's not recognized by conventional science.
Scientists certainly never apply what you call reason and logic. This is because they use actual reason and logic. Oh, and evidence. Remember evidence? It's that stuff people can supply for claims which are actually true.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 74 by Buzsaw, posted 10-05-2007 10:16 PM Buzsaw has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 84 by Archer Opteryx, posted 10-06-2007 7:35 AM Dr Adequate has not replied
 Message 85 by Buzsaw, posted 10-06-2007 9:09 AM Dr Adequate has replied

  
Archer Opteryx
Member (Idle past 3597 days)
Posts: 1811
From: East Asia
Joined: 08-16-2006


Message 84 of 343 (426349)
10-06-2007 7:35 AM
Reply to: Message 83 by Dr Adequate
10-06-2007 7:01 AM


geological uplift
Dr A: a geological uplift fairy?
I like it.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 83 by Dr Adequate, posted 10-06-2007 7:01 AM Dr Adequate has not replied

  
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 85 of 343 (426364)
10-06-2007 9:09 AM
Reply to: Message 83 by Dr Adequate
10-06-2007 7:01 AM


Re: Mountains lower
DA writes:
Why a Biblical flood, rather than a team of winged pigs or a geological uplift fairy?
1. What is your soarce of winged pigs and/or an uplift fairy.
2. If even have a source, what corroborating evidence do you have that your source has any credibility?
3. Is there any geological observable evidence that something other than tectonic activity caused the uplift?
DA writes:
Scientists certainly never apply what you call reason and logic. This is because they use actual reason and logic. Oh, and evidence. Remember evidence? It's that stuff people can supply for claims which are actually true.
What do you do with the corroborative evidence of the credibility of the Biblical historical record? Perhaps if you took the time to assimilate and assemble it all, you would think about reconsideration.

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

This message is a reply to:
 Message 83 by Dr Adequate, posted 10-06-2007 7:01 AM Dr Adequate has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 86 by jar, posted 10-06-2007 9:31 AM Buzsaw has not replied
 Message 88 by Dr Adequate, posted 10-06-2007 12:11 PM Buzsaw has replied
 Message 107 by Archer Opteryx, posted 10-07-2007 11:08 AM Buzsaw has not replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 393 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 86 of 343 (426366)
10-06-2007 9:31 AM
Reply to: Message 85 by Buzsaw
10-06-2007 9:09 AM


Re: Mountains lower
Still waiting for you to provide the material requestion in Message 64, Message 65, Message 69 and Message 72.
Or, as usual, do you simply have nothing to support your position?

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 85 by Buzsaw, posted 10-06-2007 9:09 AM Buzsaw has not replied

  
sidelined
Member (Idle past 5907 days)
Posts: 3435
From: Edmonton Alberta Canada
Joined: 08-30-2003


Message 87 of 343 (426371)
10-06-2007 9:53 AM
Reply to: Message 62 by Buzsaw
10-05-2007 8:17 PM


Re: Dating Methodology
buzsaw
Using logic and reasoning all I can offer as a layman is that a greenhouse canopy type atmosphere would have had different properties than ours which would likely affect the whole ecosystem of the planet which in turn would likely render modern dating methodoly inaccurate.
That is the trouble with layman logic and reasoning buz. It tends to miss out on a lot of information that would allow it to not make mistakes concerning such issues in the first place.This is currently off topic to the thread, however, I will point out to you that radiometric dating is not affected by environment nor chemistry and temperature. You're natural skepticism is, in this case, mistaken.
Half-life effects are a result of events occurring to the nucleus as a result of disintegration of the nucleus through different types of decay. The events you describe deal with events that occur through the electromagnetic force and do not affect the radioactive half life.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 62 by Buzsaw, posted 10-05-2007 8:17 PM Buzsaw has not replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 284 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 88 of 343 (426378)
10-06-2007 12:11 PM
Reply to: Message 85 by Buzsaw
10-06-2007 9:09 AM


Re: Mountains lower
1. What is your soarce of winged pigs and/or an uplift fairy.
They're impossible myths contrary to the law of nature for which there is no evidence.
Like the magic flood.
2. If even have a source, what corroborating evidence do you have that your source has any credibility?
Same as you. Stuff I made up.
3. Is there any geological observable evidence that something other than tectonic activity caused the uplift?
None whatsoever, hence my rejection of claims that it was caused by a magic flood.
What do you do with the corroborative evidence of the credibility of the Biblical historical record?
Ask to see it. Since there is no corroborative evidence for the bits of the Bible I'm disputing, this conversation is usually quite short.
Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.
Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 85 by Buzsaw, posted 10-06-2007 9:09 AM Buzsaw has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 94 by Buzsaw, posted 10-06-2007 11:33 PM Dr Adequate has not replied

  
Discreet Label
Member (Idle past 5063 days)
Posts: 272
Joined: 11-17-2005


Message 89 of 343 (426408)
10-06-2007 2:11 PM
Reply to: Message 62 by Buzsaw
10-05-2007 8:17 PM


Re: Dating Methodology
Using logic and reasoning all I can offer as a layman is that a greenhouse canopy type atmosphere would have had different properties than ours which would likely affect the whole ecosystem of the planet which in turn would likely render modern dating methodoly inaccurate. This would likely be the reason that humans lived multiple century lives as per the Biblical record.
Not to put words into your mouth but what does a greenhouse canopy atmosphere look like? Are you talking a variance in the composition of the atmosphere like say higher concentrations of carbon dioxide and changes in the concentrations of other gases in the atmosphere?
And at this point you go one step further and you start asking questions like how do gases interact with the human body? And at a physiological level what do they do? How would variance in atmospheric gas concentrations affect the human body? How does this translate into contributions of life expectancy?
Some helping info:
Oxygen Toxcicity
Arterial Blood Gas
Hemoglobin
Carbon Dioxide Poisoning
Edited by Discreet Label, : Added Links
Edited by Discreet Label, : Cleaned up link typos

This message is a reply to:
 Message 62 by Buzsaw, posted 10-05-2007 8:17 PM Buzsaw has not replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1404 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 90 of 343 (426418)
10-06-2007 3:23 PM
Reply to: Message 77 by TheWay
10-05-2007 10:44 PM


Re: Mountains lower
Jar writes:
Where is your evidence that the mountains were lower?
Seashells on tops of mountains! It's even the topic heading!
Buzz had talked about hills becoming mountains. As far as I know clams do not grow on hills.
Instead what we have is evidence that there was a mature marine ecosystem with clams and worms and plants of various kinds ... clams that ranged in age from a few years to 20 or 30 years and plants that had roots and fully formed stalks, there were burrows and roots.
Do you agree that this is evidence that the sedimentary deposit involved shows that the marine life lived and thrived underwater for 20 to 30 years in that location?
Just a question.
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.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 77 by TheWay, posted 10-05-2007 10:44 PM TheWay has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024