|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
|
Author | Topic: The Flood = many coincidences | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Robert Byers Member (Idle past 4397 days) Posts: 640 From: Toronto,canada Joined:
|
By observation and reasoning one can see there is enough water to have covered the whole earth.
First one should see not the present high mts, themselves from the flood year crashes of the continents, but instead much lower mts or hills. So covering them is not demanding of so much water as it would now. Second there would not of been the great depths of the seas as now. the seas were dug out by the action of the flood year and so after the flood there was room for the water to drain off the land. Then there is all the water contained in the pores of rock beneath the ground. i once read that if it was taken out the earh would be drowned by tens of feet or so. then there is other concentrations of water in areas under the earth. then there is the underground water. Then the water in the atmosphere, ice, surface . So in fact there is plenty of water to have flooded the earth for about half of the flood year. Then it drained away. Edited by Adminnemooseus, : Add blank lines between "paragraphs".
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Robert Byers Member (Idle past 4397 days) Posts: 640 From: Toronto,canada Joined: |
All sedimentary rock below the k-t line is from the flood year. nOt just mere soils.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Robert Byers Member (Idle past 4397 days) Posts: 640 From: Toronto,canada Joined: |
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.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Robert Byers Member (Idle past 4397 days) Posts: 640 From: Toronto,canada Joined: |
These are endless questions. i was answering about the k-t line from this creationist view.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Robert Byers Member (Idle past 4397 days) Posts: 640 From: Toronto,canada Joined: |
Another question that is beside my main point.
Anyways iridium need only be seen as a last act of volcanoes during the flood year and some minor sorting or rather as simply material in front of the overlying sediment. It probably is from volcanoes and simply was sorted ahead of the material that is not seen as sedimentary or volcanic rock formations above the k-t line.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Robert Byers Member (Idle past 4397 days) Posts: 640 From: Toronto,canada Joined: |
I did do this. I explained that the formations found in the field are to be interpretated as I did. I explained the k-t line as the flood line from a creationist view. Fauna and flora and geology follows this reasoning.
The evidence is the same for everyone but the interpretation is different. The bible is the boundaries and the reasonings start from here and deal with the well known field evidence. I provided everything for my case. its up to the opposition to show why its wrong. anyways the whole point really was about why some creationists pick the k-t line and not another line.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Robert Byers Member (Idle past 4397 days) Posts: 640 From: Toronto,canada Joined: |
Well i'm asked again my evidence for the k-t line being the flood line.
In geology there are in the field layers of rock strata. tHese are laid be different events in deposition. a great break in the rock strata is the k-t line. this line segregates a great change in fauna and flora. to explain it they say a comet hit the planet and wiped out the fauna/flora at the time. after a new fauna/flora became dominant. Well this creationist says this k-t line is in fact the flood line of the bible. so the great fauna/flora change was simply from the flood. After the flood there was new dominances of fauna/flora. so the geology/biology is my evidence for the biblical story.The great fauna/flora change suddenly in time being the clue. other creationists pick other times but are wrong. So the evidence is the same for everyone but i interpretate it different.Everything above the line is very much like the world we live in now. So biblical boundaries fit well with the evidence in the field.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Robert Byers Member (Idle past 4397 days) Posts: 640 From: Toronto,canada Joined: |
ringo writes: Why are there no human remains below the flood line? We would say very little remains relative to that world actually survive as fossils. in fact its mostly areas that were in the middle of the land masses and so received less damage . sSo less depth of sediment but still a great deal.The population would of been in certain areas on earth and nothing would remain of them or their society. Its just the wilderness areas that are found in fossil form.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Robert Byers Member (Idle past 4397 days) Posts: 640 From: Toronto,canada Joined: |
Admin writes: Hi Robert, That you can't provide what I'm asking for tells me that you either don't understand the request, or you have no answer but are responding anyway. Either way, the net result is that you're repeating your unsupported claims over and over again, which is disallowed by the Forum Guidelines:
What you need to do is describe evidence of at least an arguably scientific nature that causes you to conclude that the K-T boundary is a flood layer from around 4400 years ago. That it exists, which is the only evidence you've cited so far, is not evidence for a flood or for any particular age. Perhaps it would help if a stepwise approach were taken by posing one specific question at a time for you, for example: What evidence leads you to conclude that the K-T boundary is around 4400 years old? For those of a countervailing opinion I ask the opposite question: What evidence leads you to conclude that the K-T boundary is around 65 million years old? I think I gave a excellent answer to the whole matter.Your the boss. Since all must understand sedimentary rock is from laid sediment by water and this is what is found on earth then your complaint must be why I assert its from 4500 years ago!We do start from biblical boundaries . Then we look at the field evidence of what is sitting there. I guess all I can say is there is no reason to know when the sediment was laid in and of itself. its all about other associations. Its just water layered sediment and so a creationist interpretates it as the big flood that laid it. It still is about interpretation of stuff in the ground. I am having trouble understanding the complaint here. Nobody witnessed it being laid. its only from other ideas and associations that conclusions are drawn.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Robert Byers Member (Idle past 4397 days) Posts: 640 From: Toronto,canada Joined: |
ringo writes: Robert Byers writes:
You haven't thought this through. There are fossils below the K-T boundary, which you call the flood line. That's where the dinosaurs are - and they're not all big dinosaurs. Some of them are similar in size to humans, or smaller. We would say very little remains relative to that world actually survive as fossils. The question, again, is: Why are there dinosaur fossils only before the flood and human fossils only after? Where are the fossils of the humans who died before the flood? I don't expect to find human remains from before the flood. the areas humans lived in would of been covered by hundreds of feet of sediment. again they would of lived in areas covering a small part of earth and in fact possibly are not under the sea in some areas.The world was shattered by the flood in many ways. Dinos are only a collective term for some kinds of creatures.i only expect to find them below the k-t line. I see them as part of the unclean creatures. so the ark took on a ratio of 14:2 of clean to unclean which suggests the post flood world would be unlike the pre flood one. So dinos were the losers in numbers and these types went extinct before the post flood fossilization events happening a few centuries after the flood. Remember also only the most sedate areas , relative, would have remains of creatures. so in the middle of great land masses.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Robert Byers Member (Idle past 4397 days) Posts: 640 From: Toronto,canada Joined: |
bluescat48 writes: The population would of been in certain areas on earth and nothing would remain of them or their society. Its just the wilderness areas that are found in fossil form. So then explain why there are no large mammals of any kind below the K-T line? No Giant Ground sloths, no mammoths, no camels, no saber tooth cats, not even one bone whereas whole skeletons of dinosaurs are found. Many answers.First i don't except the classification systems used. tHere were no dinos. They are just kinds of creatures. There are no mammals. just creatures with a few like details. Some dinos could simply be the later creatures found in the fossil record, above the k-t line, or living today. Since i see few kinds i don't need to see camels , for example, on the ark. Then many creatures could of been very segregated on earth. So whole areas might not be represented in the fossil record below the k-t line.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Robert Byers Member (Idle past 4397 days) Posts: 640 From: Toronto,canada Joined: |
Admin writes: Hi Robert, You continue to describe what you believe without providing any real world evidence for why you believe it. If someone with an opposing viewpoint were to say, "The radiometric evidence for the K-T boundary says that it was deposited 65 million years ago," what could you offer in rebuttal? Others of your statements that require evidence:
Robert Byers writes: Since all must understand sedimentary rock is from laid sediment by water...Its just water layered sediment... What evidence leads you to conclude that the K-T boundary layer was a sedimentary layer deposited by water?
It still is about interpretation of stuff in the ground. Please describe the details of the "stuff in the ground" that you are interpreting (appearance, context, compositiion, results of chemical and radiometric analysis, etc.) and the details of your method of interpretation.
Nobody witnessed it being laid. its only from other ideas and associations that conclusions are drawn. If this is an argument that "No one was there therefore no one could know," that means you couldn't know either and should not be arguing that you do know from your interpretation (still undescribed) of the evidence you're looking at (still undescribed). Say you were conducting a science class in how to interpret geological layers, and your example was the K-T boundary. Please explain how you would teach the class to analyze and interpret this layer in order to reach the conclusion that it is a sedimentary layer around 4500 years old. dating methods are not actually geology but about more atomic matters. They need to prove their case first. i don't mean the boundary level was laid by water.I only mean, what everyone agrees, that water laid the sediment stratas. The line is other peoples idea. I just use it. Both sides agree the sedimentary rock strata were laid by water. slow or fast. they say over great time different episodes. We say over one year time with great segregated flow events. This creationist says the k-t line is the difference in the flood year and the later centuries. I only use the common knowledge. Then reinterpretate it. I invent nothing. i use the important points they use. Fauna/flora difference at the boundary line. The line doesn;t exist. Just the great difference in rock type and flora/fauna within in it. I would say to any class look at the field evidence. look at what the non creationist side says about its deposition processes and time and look at the creationist ones. it is just about interpretation of practical rocks in the field. Our evidence is the same on both sides.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Robert Byers Member (Idle past 4397 days) Posts: 640 From: Toronto,canada Joined: |
No. Cooling of rocks etc is not geology. Its concepts of atomic mechanisms. Geology is the processes that create and form materials of the earth.
Your dating stuff is speculative. The thread seems to be cooling here. The evidence for creationist ideas here is simply interpretation of practical field results. yes thers a biblical foundation but still the point is that nothing contradicts and indeed suggests greatly the biblical flood story by the rock strata and the k-t line. All there is IS stuff in the field. Then thinking about it. the rocks make a creationist case or at least a creationist case fits with what is found. Rock solid.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Robert Byers Member (Idle past 4397 days) Posts: 640 From: Toronto,canada Joined: |
Well I say atomic parts of sediment or rocks is not about the real processes of forces moving sediment or rock or larger pieces of earth.
yes they would include everything that deals with dirt but naw. Chemicals are for chemists . Geology is about earth formations and not intimate formations within earth formations. Show me the rocks if your claiming to understand the past from the rocks.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Robert Byers Member (Idle past 4397 days) Posts: 640 From: Toronto,canada Joined: |
Geology to me is about process pushing dirt or heavier earth material about. Cooling mechanisms are not a geological study but only become geology after the cooling is over.
One can always break everything into its atomic structure. however geology is about finished products and rearranging these products.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024