|
Author
|
Topic: The Flood = many coincidences
|
Coyote
Member (Idle past 2136 days) Posts: 6117 Joined: 01-12-2008
|
Nonsense start to finish
This creationist sees the k-t line as the flood line. That is that all sedimentary rock and fossils therein are from the collection and deposition of the flood year. The rocks and fossils above this from events a few centuries after the flood.
In fact the acceptance of the k-t line in modern geology and biology has been a great gain to yec creationism or many of us. they did the work to demonstrate a great sudden change in fauna and flora on earth from a disaster.
We just know it was a flood disaster and not a rock from space.
How do you explain the dating? The K-T is about 65.5 million years ago and biblical scholars place the flood ca. 4,350 years ago. That's a pretty large boo-boo to explain away. Second, where is your evidence for modern fossils in those pre K-T deposits? We find a lot of dinosaurs and such, but we don't find all the species that have existed during the past several thousand (or even million) years. Until you can explain the progression of fossils, both fauna and flora, in the geological strata since the K-T event, and reconcile that with the dating, you have a disproved hypothesis. Add: Here is a reference to an article detailing the geologic column.
The Geologic Column and its Implications for the Flood, by Glenn Morton. This will help with the dating as well. Edited by Coyote, : Add link
Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.
|
fearandloathing
Member (Idle past 4175 days) Posts: 990 From: Burlington, NC, USA Joined: 02-24-2011
|
Robert Byers writes: it was just a side comment. Anyways. This creationist sees the k-t line as the flood line. That is that all sedimentary rock and fossils therein are from the collection and deposition of the flood year., The rocks and fossils above this from events a few centuries after the flood. In fact the acceptance of the k-t line in modern geology and biology has been a great gain to yec creationism or many of us. they did the work to demonstrate a great sudden change in fauna and flora on earth from a disaster. We just know it was a flood disaster and not a rock from space.
I would love to see some evidence to support what you Know to be true. Please provide me with some links or site something I can look into for myself, instead of sounding like a broken record. Also see msg 313
|
fearandloathing
Member (Idle past 4175 days) Posts: 990 From: Burlington, NC, USA Joined: 02-24-2011
|
Robert Byers writes: it was just a side comment. Anyways. This creationist sees the k-t line as the flood line. That is that all sedimentary rock and fossils therein are from the collection and deposition of the flood year., The rocks and fossils above this from events a few centuries after the flood. In fact the acceptance of the k-t line in modern geology and biology has been a great gain to yec creationism or many of us. they did the work to demonstrate a great sudden change in fauna and flora on earth from a disaster. We just know it was a flood disaster and not a rock from space.
I would love to see some evidence to support what you Know to be true. Please provide me with some links or site something I can look into for myself, instead of sounding like a broken record. Also see msg 313
|
Admin
Director Posts: 13045 From: EvC Forum Joined: 06-14-2002 Member Rating: 2.6
|
Robert, please begin supporting your conclusions with the evidence leading to those conclusions. Right now this means providing the evidence that leads to the conclusion that the k-t line represents Noah's flood.
| -- | Percy | | | EvC Forum Director |
|
jar
Member (Idle past 424 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: 04-20-2004
|
Robert Byers writes: it was just a side comment. Anyways. This creationist sees the k-t line as the flood line. That is that all sedimentary rock and fossils therein are from the collection and deposition of the flood year., The rocks and fossils above this from events a few centuries after the flood. In fact the acceptance of the k-t line in modern geology and biology has been a great gain to yec creationism or many of us. they did the work to demonstrate a great sudden change in fauna and flora on earth from a disaster. We just know it was a flood disaster and not a rock from space.
Please explain how the Biblical Flood isolated and deposited iridium. Please explain why no other flood isolates and selectively deposits iridium. Edited by jar, : appalin spallin
Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
|
Coyote
Member (Idle past 2136 days) Posts: 6117 Joined: 01-12-2008
|
|
Message 321 of 445 (610119)
03-26-2011 2:24 PM
|
Reply to: Message 319 by Admin
03-26-2011 1:54 PM
|
|
Another problem
Another problem that needs to be addressed: A lot of creationists place the flood not at the K-T boundary but at the Cambrian. Hmmmmm. Maybe they should get their story straight before trying to tell scientists what is going on, eh? One example:
Young age creationists have had a very logical explanation of the Cambrian fossils for a long time, that they are creatures buried in Noah's Flood. Review of Darwin's Dilemma (DVD), by Wayne Spencer (creationanswers.net).
Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 319 by Admin, posted 03-26-2011 1:54 PM | | Admin has seen this message but not replied |
|
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 314 days) Posts: 16113 Joined: 07-20-2006
|
|
|
Message 322 of 445 (610150)
03-26-2011 10:15 PM
|
Reply to: Message 321 by Coyote
03-26-2011 2:24 PM
|
|
Re: Another problem
Well, see they have a problem. If they put the flood at a particular geological horizon, then we can divide sedimentary rocks into pre- and post-flood, the pre-flood rocks either being deposited by normal processes before the flood or magicked into existence In The Beginning. But then they'd face the awkward question of why pre-flood rocks have the same sedimentology as rocks produced by a magic flood; also why the pre-flood rocks contain fossils when so many creationists insist that fossils require a magical catastrophe for their formation. Though I'm not sure that all that many of them have thought about it that carefully.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 321 by Coyote, posted 03-26-2011 2:24 PM | | Coyote has not replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 324 by bluescat48, posted 03-26-2011 10:42 PM | | Dr Adequate has not replied |
|
bluescat48
Member (Idle past 4219 days) Posts: 2347 From: United States Joined: 10-06-2007
|
|
|
Message 323 of 445 (610153)
03-26-2011 10:40 PM
|
Reply to: Message 321 by Coyote
03-26-2011 2:24 PM
|
|
Re: Another problem
Evidently to the YECs, the Cambrian, Ordovician, Silurian, Devonian, Carboniferous, Permian, Triassic, Jurassic & Cretaceous are all the same thing.
There is no better love between 2 people than mutual respect for each other WT Young, 2002 Who gave anyone the authority to call me an authority on anything. WT Young, 1969 Since Evolution is only ~90% correct it should be thrown out and replaced by Creation which has even a lower % of correctness. W T Young, 2008
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 321 by Coyote, posted 03-26-2011 2:24 PM | | Coyote has not replied |
|
bluescat48
Member (Idle past 4219 days) Posts: 2347 From: United States Joined: 10-06-2007
|
Re: Another problem
Do they ever think things out? They come up with one idea to answer one problem and create several other problems in the process. Edited by bluescat48, : ytpo
There is no better love between 2 people than mutual respect for each other WT Young, 2002 Who gave anyone the authority to call me an authority on anything. WT Young, 1969 Since Evolution is only ~90% correct it should be thrown out and replaced by Creation which has even a lower % of correctness. W T Young, 2008
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 322 by Dr Adequate, posted 03-26-2011 10:15 PM | | Dr Adequate has not replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 325 by Coyote, posted 03-26-2011 11:10 PM | | bluescat48 has replied |
|
Coyote
Member (Idle past 2136 days) Posts: 6117 Joined: 01-12-2008
|
Re: Another problem
Do they ever think things out? They come up with one idea to answer one problem and create several other problems in the process. The problem is that creationists KNOW THE ANSWER! The details what we scientists concern ourselves with don't matter much, as no matter what details we come up with the ANSWER remains the same. Accordingly, creationists aren't much concerned with those details. 4,350 years ago? K-T boundary? Cambrian? What's 500+ million years, anyway? Five orders of magnitude? Who cares? But this nonsense has no business trying to pass itself off as science. It is the exact opposite!
Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.
|
bluescat48
Member (Idle past 4219 days) Posts: 2347 From: United States Joined: 10-06-2007
|
|
|
Message 326 of 445 (610159)
03-26-2011 11:29 PM
|
Reply to: Message 325 by Coyote
03-26-2011 11:10 PM
|
|
Re: Another problem
The problem is that creationists KNOW THE ANSWER! Unfortunately, when one asks them what the answer is, one gets gobbledigook.
There is no better love between 2 people than mutual respect for each other WT Young, 2002 Who gave anyone the authority to call me an authority on anything. WT Young, 1969 Since Evolution is only ~90% correct it should be thrown out and replaced by Creation which has even a lower % of correctness. W T Young, 2008
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 325 by Coyote, posted 03-26-2011 11:10 PM | | Coyote has not replied |
|
b.r. bloomberg 
Suspended Member (Idle past 4773 days) Posts: 14 Joined: 03-13-2011
|
Re: Flood geology
obviously you do not understand the continuity of the scriptuers
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 344 by bluescat48, posted 03-30-2011 12:18 AM | | b.r. bloomberg has not replied |
|
b.r. bloomberg
Suspended Member (Idle past 4773 days) Posts: 14 Joined: 03-13-2011
|
|
|
Message 328 of 445 (610432)
03-29-2011 10:08 PM
|
Reply to: Message 302 by Coyote
03-15-2011 8:45 PM
|
|
Re: Flood geology
your concept of time and what god means in genesis with respect to time are at odds,i suggest you devote yourself to trying to understand just what does god mean
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 302 by Coyote, posted 03-15-2011 8:45 PM | | Coyote has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 333 by Coyote, posted 03-29-2011 10:36 PM | | b.r. bloomberg has replied |
|
b.r. bloomberg
Suspended Member (Idle past 4773 days) Posts: 14 Joined: 03-13-2011
|
Re: Flood geology
if that is what you want,but what is the truth about your life
|
b.r. bloomberg
Suspended Member (Idle past 4773 days) Posts: 14 Joined: 03-13-2011
|
the question is what does god mean when the scriptures use the word "water",not what you think!
|
™ Version 4.2