|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 66 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,477 Year: 3,734/9,624 Month: 605/974 Week: 218/276 Day: 58/34 Hour: 1/3 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
|
Author | Topic: The Flood, fossils, & the geologic evidence | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Minnemooseus Member Posts: 3945 From: Duluth, Minnesota, U.S. (West end of Lake Superior) Joined: Member Rating: 10.0 |
Obvious Child writes: All your ripple marks suggest (especially since that rock is limestone or other sedimentary rock) is that such rock was at the bottom of the ocean. It takes exceptionally long times to produce that kind of wear and tear on hard rock. You can try this yourself. Get an aquarium, take smooth rock, set up an agitator and let it run for a year. You will not get the same results as the pictures you show. But if you let that rock sit for millions of years, you will. Someone rated this message to be a 5. WRONG WRONG WRONG! Those ripples are from a current moving the sediments, not a current carving solid rock. It may be a water current or it may be the wind. Moose Professor, geology, Whatsamatta U Evolution - Changes in the environment, caused by the interactions of the components of the environment. "Do not meddle in the affairs of cats, for they are subtle and will piss on your computer." - Bruce Graham "The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness." - John Kenneth Galbraith "Yesterday on Fox News, commentator Glenn Beck said that he believes President Obama is a racist. To be fair, every time you watch Glenn Beck, it does get a little easier to hate white people." - Conan O'Brien "I know a little about a lot of things, and a lot about a few things, but I'm highly ignorant about everything." - Moose
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Minnemooseus Member Posts: 3945 From: Duluth, Minnesota, U.S. (West end of Lake Superior) Joined: Member Rating: 10.0 |
Curiously while the theoretical column thickness is 100 miles, the maximum thickness of sediment found any place is only 16 miles. That means that at any given location at least 84% of the geologic column is missing. Again, who came up with that theoretical thickness? John Woodmorappe quotes Morris and Parker (Morris, H. and Parker, G., What is Creation Science? Master Books, El Cajon, 1982.):
quote: I'm guessing that quoted is the original source of the "100 mile" number, or perhaps some earlier work from the same people. Woodmorappe comments on this with:
quote: Repeating a bit from the first Morris - Parker quote:
quote: I have previously never heard of such a concept of a "standard column". Or any concept of a "standard column". From http://www.trueorigin.org/geocolumn.asp:
quote: The creationist side is decrying that there is no real "standard" geologic column (section) to be found. As if any sane geologist would expect to find such a thing. I truly doubt that such a thing can be found in "books and on web sites". To me (and I may be wrong), when I hear the term "geologic column" used outside of any context that would refer to a local section, I interpret it to be referring to the geologic time scale. Geologic column = geologic time scale. And the pure geologic time scale is not annotated with either rock types or thicknesses. I think most creationists (and people in general) are pretty much totally ignorant about the complexities of the Earth's crust. My guess is that the stratigraphic section(s) of the Grand Canyon are looked upon as being highly representative of the Earth in general. And such ignorance is understandable. Before college I also knew barely more than diddly squat about geology. It took the education I did absorb to get me to now know how massively geologically ignorant I still am. Well, a fine piece of writing organization. I need an editor. OSLT, Moose
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Minnemooseus Member Posts: 3945 From: Duluth, Minnesota, U.S. (West end of Lake Superior) Joined: Member Rating: 10.0 |
Then I thought perhaps Morris was just pulling it out of thin air, but then it occurred to me. He's thinking of the thickness of the earth's crust. I think they looked at the thickest section of sediment found from each of the Phanerozoic periods. A Cambrian section from one location, an Ordovician section from another location, etc. These all added up to 100 (or more) miles thick, which is probably true. They then called this composite section "the geologic column" and bemoaned that it's not found at any single location, only in textbooks etc. I certainly doubt such was ever in even a textbook. Going back again to the John Woodmorappe article. The opening paragraph:
quote: My "bolds". Sure it does. Moose
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Minnemooseus Member Posts: 3945 From: Duluth, Minnesota, U.S. (West end of Lake Superior) Joined: Member Rating: 10.0 |
From my previous message:
Minnemooseus writes: They then called this composite section "the geologic column" and bemoaned that it's not found at any single location, only in textbooks etc. I certainly doubt such was ever in even a textbook. As I was wrapping up my previous message, I got to thinking more about the above quoted. I decided it would be best elaborated on in a separate message (besides, I wanted to be done with the previous). It occurred to me that, to a degree, such a "composite geologic column" does exist in the scientific literature. It's called the legend, key, explanation, or (?) of/for a geologic map. Such can range from being only a time scale, to being a time scale and general rock type, to being a time scale and a more specific rock types, to (maybe?) actually also listing thicknesses or ranges of thicknesses. But such is not intended to imply that that "column" is necessarily found at any single location on the map (although in some cases it might). USGS.gov | Science for a changing world:
quote: The large view of the example key is at USGS.gov | Science for a changing world. This example has only sedimentary units. Other maps and keys (explanation columns) will also have igneous (intrusive and extrusive) and metamorphic rocks. Other things to see:
State geologic maps index page Minnesota map and legend from the above United States geologic map Key for U.S. map Moose Edited by Minnemooseus, : Change subtitle.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Minnemooseus Member Posts: 3945 From: Duluth, Minnesota, U.S. (West end of Lake Superior) Joined: Member Rating: 10.0 |
Earlier in this topic, I exchanged a series "geologic column" messages with Roxrkool. I will not so humbly say, this was a pretty good summary of what the geologic column is or isn't. This discussion starts at message 181 and goes thru message 185.
You might also consider reading and/or taking the related discussion to the Geologic Column topic. Edge has a pretty good message at message 3 there. By the way, I, Rox, and Edge all have geology degrees. They are real world working geologist while I'm much more pseudo. For me to try to say anything else would to be highly redundant. Moose Added by edit: Above, I linked to where I came in on the discussion in this topic. I neglected to cite the Roxrkool message at the beginning of the chain. It is a massive work found at message 176. Edited by Minnemooseus, : See above. Professor, geology, Whatsamatta U Evolution - Changes in the environment, caused by the interactions of the components of the environment. "Do not meddle in the affairs of cats, for they are subtle and will piss on your computer." - Bruce Graham "The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness." - John Kenneth Galbraith "Yesterday on Fox News, commentator Glenn Beck said that he believes President Obama is a racist. To be fair, every time you watch Glenn Beck, it does get a little easier to hate white people." - Conan O'Brien "I know a little about a lot of things, and a lot about a few things, but I'm highly ignorant about everything." - Moose
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Minnemooseus Member Posts: 3945 From: Duluth, Minnesota, U.S. (West end of Lake Superior) Joined: Member Rating: 10.0 |
From the quote box:
quote: Yes, there are numerous examples of stratigraphic sections (my preferred term) that include rocks of all the geologic periods of the Phanerozoic (the Cambrian to the present). If you want to call this a complete geologic column, well OK - But I think such is BS. There is no such thing as a universal stratigraphic section, and no qualified sane geologist would claim that there is. Somewhere along the line, I'm going to post a follow up to something upthread from a year plus ago. It may or may not be tonight. Moose Professor, geology, Whatsamatta U Evolution - Changes in the environment, caused by the interactions of the components of the environment. "Do not meddle in the affairs of cats, for they are subtle and will piss on your computer." - Bruce Graham "The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness." - John Kenneth Galbraith "Yesterday on Fox News, commentator Glenn Beck said that he believes President Obama is a racist. To be fair, every time you watch Glenn Beck, it does get a little easier to hate white people." - Conan O'Brien "I know a little about a lot of things, and a lot about a few things, but I'm highly ignorant about everything." - Moose
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Minnemooseus Member Posts: 3945 From: Duluth, Minnesota, U.S. (West end of Lake Superior) Joined: Member Rating: 10.0 |
Minnemooseus writes: Woodmorappe comments on this with:
quote: They (the creationist side) found examples of thick sedimentary sections from the individual Phanerozoic (post pre-Cambrian) geologic periods, from various locations (and times) around the world. These sections are the result of the geologic processes happening at that time and at that location. Then they (the creationist side) go on to expect that the results of those geologic processes, of different times and locations, should be all found stacked up (to ~100 miles thick) at a single location, if the concept of a geologic column is to be true. The sediments are the evidence of the geologic history of a specific time and a specific place. To expect the same evidence of geologic history to be found at a single location is akin to expecting to find the evidence of human activity in the U.S. in the 1900's, the evidence of human activity in England in the 1800's, the evidence of human activity in Germany in the 1700's, the evidence of human activity in Japan in the 1600's, the evidence of human activity in Iran in the 1500's, the evidence of human activity in China in the 1400's, ..., the evidence of human activity of Egypt in the 100's, etc., etc., etc., all at one single location on Earth. Of course you're not going to find it at any one location - It happened at different locations. Moose Added by edit:
John Woodmorappe quotes Morris and Parker (Morris, H. and Parker, G., What is Creation Science? Master Books, El Cajon, 1982.):
quote: I would love to see that figure 44. It's not reproduced at the cited online source - Anyone have a copy of (Morris, H. and Parker, G., What is Creation Science? Master Books, El Cajon, 1982.), or able to find a reproduction online? Edited by Minnemooseus, : See above.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Minnemooseus Member Posts: 3945 From: Duluth, Minnesota, U.S. (West end of Lake Superior) Joined: Member Rating: 10.0 |
John Woodmorappe quotes Morris and Parker (Morris, H. and Parker, G., What is Creation Science? Master Books, El Cajon, 1982.):
quote: I would love to see that figure 44. It's not reproduced at the cited online source - Anyone have a copy of (Morris, H. and Parker, G., What is Creation Science? Master Books, El Cajon, 1982.), or able to find a reproduction online? I think the following is probably their "standard geologic column":
A way more detailed version can be found here:Geologic time scale - Wikipedia These are not rock columns (stratigraphic sections) . There are no rock types or thicknesses mentioned. It is a timeline. Moose
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Minnemooseus Member Posts: 3945 From: Duluth, Minnesota, U.S. (West end of Lake Superior) Joined: Member Rating: 10.0 |
I got a "Great Debate" with Buz, vaguely plodding along at What variety of creationist is Buzsaw? (Minnemooseus and Buzsaw only).
I could there use a reply from Buz. Moose Professor, geology, Whatsamatta U Evolution - Changes in the environment, caused by the interactions of the components of the environment. "Do not meddle in the affairs of cats, for they are subtle and will piss on your computer." - Bruce Graham "The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness." - John Kenneth Galbraith "Yesterday on Fox News, commentator Glenn Beck said that he believes President Obama is a racist. To be fair, every time you watch Glenn Beck, it does get a little easier to hate white people." - Conan O'Brien "I know a little about a lot of things, and a lot about a few things, but I'm highly ignorant about everything." - Moose
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Minnemooseus Member Posts: 3945 From: Duluth, Minnesota, U.S. (West end of Lake Superior) Joined: Member Rating: 10.0 |
As per the subtitle "You're trying to have it both ways", initiated here, Buz's position accepts (or is at least agnostic) about the c. 4.5 billion year age of the Earth. It that sense, he is NOT a young Earth creationist (YEC). As such (as I see it), he's also willing to accept those old lunar etc. radiometric dates.
Per animal life on Earth - He's a full blown YEC. It's those old Earth dates of rocks associated with his "young life" that he has problems with. Some sort of "part of the Earth is ancient, but large parts are much younger than the mainstream scientific perspective" thing. Yes, it's a convoluted position. That's why I tried to isolate it in a "Great Debate" - To try to straighten things out without his (more or less) unique position mucking up other topics. All this is off-topic here and should not be discussed further. And I have the special privilege of dealing with Buz one-on-one in the GD topic. Personal Message me if you wish to discuss this further. Moose
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Minnemooseus Member Posts: 3945 From: Duluth, Minnesota, U.S. (West end of Lake Superior) Joined: Member Rating: 10.0 |
I couldn't understand half his post's. Im not sure if he's a genuis and im an idiot or im a genuis and he's an idiot. Either way it was too deep for me. I did recognize that TC was about Philosophy as much as he was about Science. My impression is that he recognized the invalidity of his previous young Earth creationist (YEC) geologic positions, but was reluctant to completely abandon them. His later messages became quite murky and in general difficult to follow (and I have a geology degree). Moose Edited by Minnemooseus, : Change ID.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024