Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 76 (8908 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 05-22-2019 1:43 PM
34 online now:
Diomedes, DrJones*, dwise1, Faith, JonF, PaulK, ringo, Tanypteryx (8 members, 26 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: WeloTemo
Post Volume:
Total: 851,844 Year: 6,881/19,786 Month: 1,422/1,581 Week: 244/393 Day: 67/110 Hour: 3/14


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Was there a worldwide flood?
anglagard
Member
Posts: 2185
From: Socorro, New Mexico USA
Joined: 03-18-2006


Message 46 of 372 (411300)
07-19-2007 10:49 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Repzion
07-18-2007 2:59 PM


Please Explain the Following Evidence From Geology
Repzion writes:

Evidence from Geology.

Naturally, the only true flood account is recorded in the Bible. Yet, legends among different cultures worldwide provide convincing evidence that there was some kids of accident flood. But legends passed down from generation to generation aren’t as convincing as evidence we can see.

Here is my evidence from geology you are dead wrong.

1. Angular unconformities – Angular unconformities are where sediments are laid down in layers, then tilted and eroded, then new sediments are deposited on top. How does a global flood simultaneously deposit, tilt, and erode in the same exact place?

2. Radiometric dating – All common forms of radiometric dating, including C14, K-Ar, Ar-Ar, Rb-Sr, Th-Pb, U-Pb, and fission track. The dates derived from these diverse methods, when properly interpreted rather than intentionally misapplied, show that all but the very most recent deposits in the geologic column is vastly older than any postulated flood.

3. Fossil Sorting – The sorting of fossils in the geologic record is consistent with evolution and geology across all formations worldwide. There are basically no fossils of dinosaurs found with modern mammals, even when such dinosaurs could fly. There are no flowering plants in the Cambrian, no grasses, no mammals, and no birds. The overall sorting does not show any evidence consistent with a flood or settling in water.

4. Varves – How does one create 20 million annual layers, each layer which would have taken at least a month to settle due to hydrodynamics as is observed in the Green River Formation? How does one explain seasonal pollen grains found in the layers?

5. Sedimentation rates – Why would there be Precambrian rocks below ones feet in the Canadian Shield area, yet the entire geologic column in the Williston Basin in North Dakota? Why would a global flood scour down to the Precambrian in one place yet at the same time deposit tens of thousands of feet of sediment in another when it is exactly the same process? Giant post-pyramid ice ages are not an explanation as there is no written record or other evidence of increased historical glaciation to the extent needed to scour the Canadian Shield down in the last 4500 years, not to mention such Precambrian rocks elsewhere on Earth like South Africa.

6. Lava layers with ancient soils between flows – How could lava forms which only exist with a land surface interface create interbedded deposits with paleosoils?

7. Ice sheets – Ice caps can’t reform in the time allotted since any global flood of 4500 years ago.

8. Ice core data with correlated known volcanic events – Ice cores can be dated back by multiple methods nearly a million years, yet show no evidence of a global flood.

9. Ocean core data – Ocean cores would show unsorted piles of terrestrial life and different distributions in grain sizes than observed. They would also show little difference in thickness between the mid Atlantic ridge and near subduction zones, which is not what is observed.

10. Paleomagnetism – Because the Earth’s magnetic field has reversed polarity and has wandered over the globe in the past, certain igneous rocks show such preferred magnetic orientations when sufficiently cooled. By mapping these directions and reversals, which correlate with radioisotope dating and stratigraphy, it is easily shown that the vast majority of seafloor sediments, along with most volcanic rock, are way too old to have been deposited by any flood. In fact such measurements are one of the great evidences for plate tectonics, which alone invalidate a global flood.

11. Volcanism – According to ‘flood geology’ every igneous rock layer that overlays sedimentary rock would have to be less than 4500 years old. Yet, historical records indicate this tremendous amount of simultaneous volcanic activity could not have occurred in recent times because someone would have noticed, becoming extinct and all when the atmosphere becomes unbreathable. Such a position directly contradicts the existence of the Deccan Traps which are up to 2 km thick and 500,000 square km in extent, yet supposedly erupted in India despite any historic evidence, after such a flood.

12. Ore deposit formation rates – Most ore deposits require a longer period of time to separate their constituent elements and then cool to create an economically viable source of minerals.

13. Evaporites – The existence of evaporate deposits thousands of feet thick are incompatible with any global flood as they are formed through evaporation rather than through the addition of fresh water.

14. Carbonates – The huge amount of CO2 in the atmosphere prior to being locked into carbonate rock would have made the planet resemble Venus. There would have been no life to drown.

15. Microfossil deposits - Thick deposits of microfossils in limestone, diatomaceous chert, and chalk that could not settle to such a degree of thickness in the time allotted for any global flood.

16. Thick deposits of sand - Sand is the result of weathering and working of formally solid formations, requiring long long times to form and accumulate.

17. Aeolian sand deposits – Wind deposited sandstone is found above and below water deposited limestone. One example is the Cococino formation which is both overlain and overlies limestone.

18. Overthrust formations – the time and pressure required to cause overthrust formations is far greater than can occur in any post-flood historic time.

19. Formation of geologic features such as mountains and valleys – How did something like the Himalaya Mountains form without anyone noticing all those earthquakes? How were valleys cut between such mountains in less than 4500 years?

20. Heat of formation – I can’t explain this topic any better than has already been done.
From http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-noahs-ark.html
quote:
________________________________________

• If the geologic record was deposited in a year, then the events it records must also have occurred within a year. Some of these events release significant amounts of heat.
• Magma. The geologic record includes roughly 8 x 10E24 grams of lava flows and igneous intrusions. Assuming (conservatively) a specific heat of 0.15, this magma would release 5.4 x 10E27 joules while cooling 1100 degrees C. In addition, the heat of crystallization as the magma solidifies would release a great deal more heat.
• Limestone formation. There are roughly 5 x 10E23 grams of limestone in the earth's sediments [Poldervaart, 1955], and the formation of calcite releases about 11,290 joules/gram [Weast, 1974, p. D63]. If only 10% of the limestone were formed during the Flood, the 5.6 x 10E26 joules of heat released would be enough to boil the flood waters.
• Meteorite impacts. Erosion and crustal movements have erased an unknown number of impact craters on earth, but Creationists Whitcomb and DeYoung suggest that cratering to the extent seen on the Moon and Mercury occurred on earth during the year of Noah's Flood. The heat from just one of the largest lunar impacts released an estimated 3 x 10E26 joules; the same sized object falling to earth would release even more energy. [Fezer, pp. 45-46]
• Other. Other possibly significant heat sources are radioactive decay (some Creationists claim that radioactive decay rates were much higher during the Flood to account for consistently old radiometric dates); biological decay (think of the heat released in compost piles); and compression of sediments.
5.6 x 1026 joules is enough to heat the oceans to boiling. 3.7 x 10E27 joules will vaporize them completely. Since steam and air have a lower heat capacity than water, the steam released will quickly raise the temperature of the atmosphere over 1000 C. At these temperatures, much of the atmosphere would boil off the Earth.
Aside from losing its atmosphere, Earth can only get rid of heat by radiating it to space, and it can't radiate significantly more heat than it gets from the sun unless it is a great deal hotter than it is now. (It is very nearly at thermal equilibrium now.) If there weren't many millions of years to radiate the heat from the above processes, the earth would still be unlivably hot.
________________________________________

21. River meanders – River meanders incised in rock can only be caused by gradual uplift, not through a year’s worth of soft sediment deposition.

22. Large and extensive river potholes – As this is one of Iceage’s, I will defer the explanation to him, although I wouldn’t mind his input on others he brought up as well.

23. Glacial weathering – glacial deposits and weathering such as U-shaped valleys require longer than 4500 years to form.

24. Independent dating correlations – See Correlations Correlations Correlations (Message 1 of Thread Age Correlations and An Old Earth, Version 2 No 1 in Forum Proposed New Topics) enjoy!

25. Batholith formation – Why isn’t the Sierra Nevada granitic batholith still hot as it would have taken several million years to cool?

26. Differential weathering – How could the Sierra Nevada and the Appalachians show such different weathering if each are the exact same age of only 4500 years old?

27. Banded iron formations and red beds – Banded iron formations can’t form in the presence of significant oxygen. Yet they were supposedly deposited in a flood which supposedly allowed animals to breathe both before and after.

28. Water in confined aquifers – The chemistry of water may be measured as to its constituents, as any municipal water authority already knows. Under flood conditions, the water chemistry in a confined aquifer would have changed as lower elevation aquifers would contain more salt than higher aquifers as the flood waters diluted the salt content in the recharge zone. Not only is this behavior not shown by any known confined aquifer, but the age of such water according to the laws of physics is vastly older than any flood may have deposited.

29. Worldwide iridium layer – Although any worldwide flood evidence is lacking, there is a worldwide iridium layer at the K-T boundary where it exists. How could this iridium layer have been deposited among all those swirling waters in a flood?

30. Deformed structures in metamorphosed sediments – There are areas in metamorphic rock where pebbles and even fossils have been stretched and deformed in processes that would have taken several times any 4500 years since a global flood.

31. Compression of all fossil life into too short a time period – If all species represented by fossils, coal, and petroleum from throughout the geologic record lived simultaneously, they would have been standing on each other, an ecological impossibility.

32. Differential mineralization of fossils – Remains of buried humans in historic times show minimal mineralization. This increases overall with extinct mammals, then extinct dinosaurs, then extinct trilobites and ammonites.

33. Surface features buried throughout geologic column – Examples include: rain drops, river channels, wind-blown dunes, beaches, glacial deposits, burrows, in-place trees, soils, desiccation cracks, footprints.

34. Pollen sorting – Why is pollen sorted according to evolutionary principles instead of hydrodynamic principles in the geologic record?

35. Inconsistent worldwide geologic formations – Any flood would have left a single layer of similar sediment worldwide, not the tremendous amount and variety of layers that exist in each of the thousands of boreholes and outcrops in geology.

36. Existence of soil after flood – Soil is a delicate mixture of organic and inorganic materials. How could any soil exist after an environment that was supposedly turbulent enough to destroy all the earth’s crust?

37. Tectonic spreading rates – Observed tectonic spreading rates indicate that there is no evidence of any disturbance due to any global flood 4500 years ago.

38. Tar pits – If all petroleum was caused by some global flood, how can there be tar pits filled with land fossils that have not become coal or oil?

39. Caverns – Caverns carved from dolomite such as exist in West Texas can’t form in as little as 4500 years.

40. Oklo and other natural reactors – Such natural reactors could not have been formed a mere 4500 years ago unless the laws of physics involving radioactive decay are violated.

41. Multiple glaciations – There are at least four major separate evidences of glaciations in the geologic record separated by eons. How could all four occur during a flood while supposedly underwater?

42. Meteoric impacts – For the evidence of meteoric impacts to be buried under sediments indicate that such impacts all occurred in the span of one year. Such a bombardment would allow for no life due to a lack of sun.

43. Hydrocarbon formation – The amount of hydrocarbon deposits in the ground from organic causes represent a greater biomass than is possible to have formed within 4500 years.

44. Conglomerates within conglomerates within conglomerates within conglomerates – Conglomerates are made up of diverse weathered rock that is eroded then recemented. In order to have a 4th level conglomerate there needs to be four episodes of weathering and recementation of rocks which are often impossible to form and erode in 4500 years such as when some within the conglomerate matrix are igneous or metamorphic rock.

45. Change in physical properties of rock correlated with age and fossil content – The older the sedimentary rock under current scientific models, in most cases the greater its compaction. How would near-simultaneous deposition explain this observation?

46. Delicate structures preserved in supposed turbulence – Delicate structures such as insect wings and feathers are preserved in rock. How could a turbulence that supposedly weathers miles of consolidated rock simultaneously preserve delicate structures?

47. Coprolites – Coprolites, which are fossilized turds, are preserved throughout the fossil record. How does a flood have animals constantly crapping in the midst of a flood after they are exterminated?

48. Meteoric dust accumulation – Both ice cores and evaporates indicate meteoric dust accumulates at a roughly steady rate over time. How can this dust remain constant under contracted meteoric bombardment?

49. Desert varnish – Desert varnish is created by microorganisms in arid conditions over a period of hundreds of years. How could such varnish be created throughout the geologic record in flood conditions?

50. Multiple layers of fossil forests – How can a single flood explain multiple fossil forest layers such as can be seen at Joggins, Nova Scotia or Yellowstone?

51. Detailed layering – How could a global flood create thousands of layers seen in several geologic formations, each of which requires a different depositional environment?

52. Lack of any geologic evidence for a global flood – While there are dozens of categories representing millions of data points of evidence against Noah’s Flood, I know of no single piece of geologic evidence in favor of Noah’s Flood.

Go ahead, explain them all, haven't run across anyone that can explain even just one.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Repzion, posted 07-18-2007 2:59 PM Repzion has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 47 by Repzion, posted 07-19-2007 11:25 PM anglagard has not yet responded
 Message 53 by Repzion, posted 07-20-2007 1:20 PM anglagard has not yet responded

  
anglagard
Member
Posts: 2185
From: Socorro, New Mexico USA
Joined: 03-18-2006


Message 94 of 372 (411703)
07-22-2007 12:02 AM
Reply to: Message 89 by Repzion
07-21-2007 9:11 PM


Re: Here's more Stuff.
I read the entirety of both and all I see is a combination of PRATTs (points refuted a thousand times), absurdities, and bald face lies. Please feel free to try to support any one claim concerning science from these lists and see how rapidly it evaporates under scrutiny. Repeat for the next claim and the next and perhaps you may eventually discover why YECs are currently the laughingstock of comedians on Comedy Central, and just tonight, by Bill Maher.

You have a lot to learn if you think the sources of these PRATTs such as Morris, Gish, or Bowdin (who demands the universe rotates around the earth), are exemplary scientists or even for that matter, exemplary Christians.


Read not to contradict and confute, not to believe and take for granted, not to find talk and discourse, but to weigh and consider - Francis Bacon

The more we understand particular things, the more we understand God - Spinoza


This message is a reply to:
 Message 89 by Repzion, posted 07-21-2007 9:11 PM Repzion has not yet responded

  
anglagard
Member
Posts: 2185
From: Socorro, New Mexico USA
Joined: 03-18-2006


Message 101 of 372 (411717)
07-22-2007 1:34 AM
Reply to: Message 96 by Repzion
07-22-2007 12:19 AM


It's Business Not Personal
Repzion writes:

You guys keep saying everything I present are lies. I'd like to see them as lies, but you haven't shown me that they're all wrong yet.

Let's start with a few for now.

From the first site you listed: http://www.calvaryag.org/apologetics/apologetics_11-evidence_flood.htm

quote:
The random order of the fossils. The fossils within the sediments do not exhibit strong evidence of a record of evolution with simple animals at the bottom, progressing type by type up to more and more complex animals. The order is often random or completely upside down or out of order for evolution. But this would be expected in a global flood catastrophe. Fossils from the supposed different 'ages' are often found mixed together. This indicates a huge mixing of animal bones that is not consistent with a local flood.

The statement "fossils from the supposed different 'ages' are often found mixed together" and "The order is often random or completely upside down or out of order for evolution" is essentially a bald face lie. The source is Morris, quoting another source I would have to look up who refused to take overturned layers into account and just made the blanket statement that "the fossil layers are all mixed up" when in reality the 600,000 categorized fossils are virtually universally consistent with geology, so much so they are part of dating correlations.

quote:
Also, if the sediment did not harden fairly soon after entombing the fish, oxygen and bacteria could still get at the specimens, causing decay and ruining the features.

Do you know what an anaerobic environment is? It means without oxygen. The statement above is a lie because it says oxygen would get to all dead matter, that is not true under anaerobic conditions, which is the condition under which many, if not most, aquatic fossils form.

That makes two lies therefore the term lies as plural is justified. To me two lies in so short a space would be enough to discredit the entire site. Are your standards for YEC claims so low as to have to show every statement made in each site is untrue according to evidence?

Please don't take this discussion personally. As best I can tell you have not been exposed to either the pertinent science or the refutation of YEC claims until you stumbled upon this site. It is not your personal fault that you or the people you know have been misled and even lied to by some pretty disreputable individuals.

At least you haven't run away once challenged as so many have before and that shows character. Stick around, we (just about) all learn a lot from each other.


Read not to contradict and confute, not to believe and take for granted, not to find talk and discourse, but to weigh and consider - Francis Bacon

The more we understand particular things, the more we understand God - Spinoza


This message is a reply to:
 Message 96 by Repzion, posted 07-22-2007 12:19 AM Repzion has not yet responded

  
anglagard
Member
Posts: 2185
From: Socorro, New Mexico USA
Joined: 03-18-2006


Message 102 of 372 (411727)
07-22-2007 5:01 AM
Reply to: Message 96 by Repzion
07-22-2007 12:19 AM


A Suggestion
OK, I read your suggested websites, would you consider returning the favor?

Read this first:

http://home.entouch.net/dmd/gstory.htm

This one addresses most the PRATTs that have come up:

http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/list.html

Here is another one that deals more specifically with geology from the same source as the first:

http://home.entouch.net/dmd/dmd.htm

Read these and you may be able to better understand the other side of the issues. It's common practice to study the enemy, I did when I was in intelligence and I do so today in regard to AIG, ICR, and the general history of the YEC movement.

As has been pointed out, we don't debate by using links to websites here because one is expected to put their arguments in their own words. I simply offer these links as a bit of background to the debate topic.

Never give up on your desire to acquire more knowledge :)


Read not to contradict and confute, not to believe and take for granted, not to find talk and discourse, but to weigh and consider - Francis Bacon

The more we understand particular things, the more we understand God - Spinoza


This message is a reply to:
 Message 96 by Repzion, posted 07-22-2007 12:19 AM Repzion has not yet responded

  
anglagard
Member
Posts: 2185
From: Socorro, New Mexico USA
Joined: 03-18-2006


Message 170 of 372 (418698)
08-29-2007 9:20 PM
Reply to: Message 168 by Chiroptera
08-29-2007 8:32 PM


Re: *sniff sniff* -- ew!
Chiroptera writes:

I smell a troll. Does anyone else smell it?

I think rigor mortis set in several weeks ago, and the stench has been quite overwhelming ever since.

The statement "There were no Neanderthals" was the clincher.


Read not to contradict and confute, not to believe and take for granted, not to find talk and discourse, but to weigh and consider - Francis Bacon

The more we understand particular things, the more we understand God - Spinoza


This message is a reply to:
 Message 168 by Chiroptera, posted 08-29-2007 8:32 PM Chiroptera has not yet responded

  
anglagard
Member
Posts: 2185
From: Socorro, New Mexico USA
Joined: 03-18-2006


Message 197 of 372 (420444)
09-07-2007 9:06 PM
Reply to: Message 196 by Repzion
09-07-2007 8:12 PM


So When Was this Flood?
From yours truly:

quote:
89. Sargon and the Akkadian Empire – How could Sargon conquer Sumeria and create the Akkadian Empire either underwater or immediately after a global flood with no troops?

Repzion writes:

He didn't - this was after the flood. According to wikipedia Sargon of Akkadia ruled from 2333 -2279 B.C. Genesis 10:10-12 says the first centers of Nimrod's kingdom were Babylon, Erech, Akkad and Calneh, in Shinar and from there he went to Assyria, where he built Nineveh, Rehoboth Ir, Calah and Resen. There are different theories to identify Nimrod in other civilizations and was Sargon. One theory is that Nimrod was the inspiration for the Gilgamesh written centuries after the flood. The author makes an interesting argument although I question his translation of Genesis 10:9

OK, Wikipedia says "Sargon of Akkadia ruled from 2333 -2279 B.C."

Here is what else Wikipedia says: from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noah's_Ark

quote:
For the date of the Flood, literalists rely on interpretation of the genealogies contained in Genesis 5 and 11. Archbishop Ussher, using this method in the 17th century, arrived at 2349 BC, and this date still has acceptance among many. A more recent Christian fundamentalist scholar, Gerhard F. Hasel, however, summarising the current state of thought in the light of the various Biblical manuscripts (the Masoretic text in Hebrew, various manuscripts of the Greek Septuagint), and differences of opinion over their correct interpretation, demonstrated that this method of analysis can date the flood only within a range between 3402 and 2462 BC.[24] Other opinions, based on other sources and methodologies, lead to dates outside even this bracket—the deuterocanonical Book of Jubilees, for example, providing a date equivalent to 2309 BC.

Let's do some math. Let's see, Book of Jubilees places the flood at 2309 BC, which is between 2333 and 2279 BC, which places Sargon underwater. Ussher places the flood at 2349 BC, which is 16 years from Sargon's rule which started in 2333 BC according to your own source. This means that Sargon's military machine conquered his own close relations who by definition had to be less than 17 years old, unless of course he was conquering that 600 year old geezer Noah and his few adult compatriots. Notice also that Sargon would have also been less than 17 years old. Personally I feel sorry for those poor women on the Ark who would have had to pop out entire armies of teenagers and kids in less than 17 years.

Since according to fundamentalists, the Bible is completely internally consistent and easily interpreted, or should I say actually requires no interpretation whatsoever, It should be easy for you to provide an exact date for the Flood. Without this exact date, not only is further discussion of this exact point futile, but you will have also shown that Biblical literalism, infallibility, and perfect internal consistency is either a false assertion or you don't know how to literally comprehend the text.

I can defend the entire list just like this. Please feel free to start a thread on each individual point and we will see how good you, and anyone else you can use for support, is at making a convincing argument when challenged by those who disagree due to overwhelming evidence to the contrary.


Read not to contradict and confute, not to believe and take for granted, not to find talk and discourse, but to weigh and consider - Francis Bacon

The more we understand particular things, the more we understand God - Spinoza


This message is a reply to:
 Message 196 by Repzion, posted 09-07-2007 8:12 PM Repzion has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 198 by Repzion, posted 09-08-2007 5:31 PM anglagard has responded

  
anglagard
Member
Posts: 2185
From: Socorro, New Mexico USA
Joined: 03-18-2006


Message 200 of 372 (420657)
09-08-2007 10:39 PM
Reply to: Message 198 by Repzion
09-08-2007 5:31 PM


Re: So When Was this Flood?
You are the one arguing that Noah's flood happened. Can't you and your supporters even come up with a simple date since it is supposedly based on the inerrant and literal interpretation of the Bible? If you have trouble providing an answer, ask the self-proclaimed infallible scholars at AIG, ICR and all the other people who say they know more about Geology and Biology than the 99.85% of those actually working in those fields in the USA that think any global flood is a myth.

So when did it happen? You can even provide a 95% confidence interval in your error brackets like real scientists do (hey that's less demanding than 99.85%).

Answer with a number first please.

Edited by anglagard, : clarity


Read not to contradict and confute, not to believe and take for granted, not to find talk and discourse, but to weigh and consider - Francis Bacon

The more we understand particular things, the more we understand God - Spinoza


This message is a reply to:
 Message 198 by Repzion, posted 09-08-2007 5:31 PM Repzion has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 202 by Dr Adequate, posted 09-10-2007 1:02 PM anglagard has not yet responded
 Message 203 by Repzion, posted 09-10-2007 9:29 PM anglagard has responded

  
anglagard
Member
Posts: 2185
From: Socorro, New Mexico USA
Joined: 03-18-2006


Message 206 of 372 (421298)
09-11-2007 10:06 PM
Reply to: Message 203 by Repzion
09-10-2007 9:29 PM


Re: So When Was this Flood?
Repzion writes:

Anglagard I cannot give you a exact date of when this flood happended.

Obviously you disagree with Ussher who dates the flood at 2348 BC and AIG which says 2304 BC. See: http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v4/i1/noahs_flood.asp

If you don't know despite Ussher and AIG, the word of which many YECs take as gospel, then try a range of dates. Like sometime between 4,550,000,000 BC and yesterday.

Also, if you don't trust AIG, then in the future, don't ask anyone else to either.

I notice the other main organization of YECism, ICR, refuses to provide a date for any global flood, preferring to avoid taking any position involving assertions of fact and instead limiting its 'intellectual' content to unsupported criticism of anyone who does make a testable and/or verifiable statement or prediction.

IMO if you don't have a clue as to when it happened, it is just more evidence it never happened at all. Think how an "I don't have the slightest idea when, but I know it happened" statement would go over in a court of law.

Think about how well it has gone over in a court of law lately, like in Arkansas or Dover.


Read not to contradict and confute, not to believe and take for granted, not to find talk and discourse, but to weigh and consider - Francis Bacon

The more we understand particular things, the more we understand God - Spinoza


This message is a reply to:
 Message 203 by Repzion, posted 09-10-2007 9:29 PM Repzion has not yet responded

  
anglagard
Member
Posts: 2185
From: Socorro, New Mexico USA
Joined: 03-18-2006


Message 271 of 372 (510293)
05-29-2009 3:29 PM
Reply to: Message 269 by Repzion
05-28-2009 5:41 PM


Re: Please Explain the Following Evidence From Geology
Repzion writes:

I did what you asked Molbiogirl, I responded to anglagard. Hopefully you read my posts.

Your response (concerning incised river meanders) was found wanting in the logic and evidence departments, as subsequent posts revealed.

If you would like to discuss any of my assertions concerning the 100 categories of evidence against a worldwide flood since the Precambrian, please feel free to start a thread covering any single point.


Read not to contradict and confute, not to believe and take for granted, not to find talk and discourse, but to weigh and consider - Francis Bacon

The more we understand particular things, the more we understand God - Spinoza


This message is a reply to:
 Message 269 by Repzion, posted 05-28-2009 5:41 PM Repzion has not yet responded

  
anglagard
Member
Posts: 2185
From: Socorro, New Mexico USA
Joined: 03-18-2006


Message 290 of 372 (510981)
06-05-2009 8:46 AM
Reply to: Message 284 by Peg
06-05-2009 5:45 AM


Re: Worldwide flood -- not
Peg writes:

the sediment layers are not always consistent. In view of inconsistencies, how can sedimentary layers be considered 100% accurate?

Sediment layers are always consistent with the laws of physics, chemistry, and geology. If you can show just one counterexample, then please feel free to elaborate as there would be a Nobel prize waiting.

What is not consistent is the concept that evolution never occurred in the past or at present, except right after those 'kinds' super-evolved at a super-dooper rate right after any flood when housecats gave birth to lions.

What is not consistent is the uninterrupted history of humanity, be it in Egypt, India, China, the Americas or even Mesopotamia where Sargon supposedly created the Akkadian Empire with an army of scuba diving preteens in the very midst or immediately after some purported worldwide flood.

What is not consistent is to derive benefits from science such as gasoline, electricity, and agriculture, which depend upon an understanding of geologic, physical, and evolutionary processes to discover and manage all the while cursing all honest scientists as heretics because of (at best) some puny cult misrepresentation of God and Christianity.

What is consistent is your refusal to admit when you are wrong, such as when you demanded that oxygen and hydrogen required immense amounts of energy to create water.

You are just as wrong about sedimentary processes being inconsistent with natural laws, but IMO you would far prefer playing the fool as opposed to learning anything from anyone who actually and honestly studied any subject, be it religion, science or logic.

Why can't you go to a public library and make the slightest attempt to learn about the natural sciences at an elementary level? What are you so afraid of?


Read not to contradict and confute, not to believe and take for granted, not to find talk and discourse, but to weigh and consider - Francis Bacon

The more we understand particular things, the more we understand God - Spinoza


This message is a reply to:
 Message 284 by Peg, posted 06-05-2009 5:45 AM Peg has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 303 by Peg, posted 06-05-2009 11:29 PM anglagard has not yet responded

  
anglagard
Member
Posts: 2185
From: Socorro, New Mexico USA
Joined: 03-18-2006


Message 293 of 372 (510984)
06-05-2009 9:04 AM
Reply to: Message 287 by Peg
06-05-2009 8:24 AM


Re: Worldwide flood -- not
Peg writes:

what i mean by it is that sediment layers are not always consistent so using sediment layers as a proof of anything is flawed.
one example is at Africa's Lake Rudolph and the Omo Valley (200kms away) where sediment layers were not consistent with each other. They were dated to the same period, but the pig fossils they found at each location were not the same type of pig fossil.

So what im questioning is how sediment layers can be used so affirmatively when they are not always consistent. Would you use a calculator which occasionally produced an incorrect answer?

Well, did it ever occur to you or your uncited 'source' that there were different species of the same date 200km away in a different type of sediment because they represent a different environment? Is the world today all desert or all river estuary?

Is this what your concept of geologic consistency demands? That the entire earth had a single environment worldwide? Have you ever considered that the processes from the past may actually be consistent with processes seen today such as variability in environments?

The library Peg, the library. Why are you afraid of learning?


Read not to contradict and confute, not to believe and take for granted, not to find talk and discourse, but to weigh and consider - Francis Bacon

The more we understand particular things, the more we understand God - Spinoza


This message is a reply to:
 Message 287 by Peg, posted 06-05-2009 8:24 AM Peg has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 301 by JonF, posted 06-05-2009 12:54 PM anglagard has not yet responded
 Message 302 by Peg, posted 06-05-2009 11:08 PM anglagard 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