|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,890 Year: 4,147/9,624 Month: 1,018/974 Week: 345/286 Day: 1/65 Hour: 0/1 |
Summations Only | Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Creationism Road Trip | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Coyote Member (Idle past 2134 days) Posts: 6117 Joined:
|
Well, we AREN'T "looking through deep time" for the Flood. It DID occur about 4300 years ago -- and the Bible itself is the source of the calculations. I don't know why there are those other dates, either, it's depressing that there's so much discrepancy. I go with Morris. It's all recent time. It's just that the entire geological column was laid down IN THE FLOOD around 4300 BC, so it isn't "deep time" at all. Ay, there's the rub! The geological column was not laid down around 4,300 years ago (nor BC either!). On this point the evidence is unambiguous. You just keep making up "what-ifs" so that you can support your beliefs in spite of all of that evidence against you. If you can't accept evidence, what use is there presenting it to you? Your mind appears like a steel trap: rusted shut.Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge. Belief gets in the way of learning--Robert A. Heinlein
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1473 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
From all the bazillions of tons of loose sediments carried in the Flood waters that had been scoured off the land mass in the early stages of the Flood.
He who surrenders the first page of his Bible surrenders all. --John William Burgon, Inspiration and Interpretation, Sermon II.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1473 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
Well we could argue about which side of this debate has the most minds that are rusted shut on their particular beliefs.
I was glad to find the Biblical Geology guy because he's one, and there are others, who does believe the Flood accounts for the entire geological column as I do, even though most of the creationists who come through EvC don't accept that idea.He who surrenders the first page of his Bible surrenders all. --John William Burgon, Inspiration and Interpretation, Sermon II.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 422 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
Well let's see if that holds up to examination.
Do you know what schist looks like? Do you know what it is made from? And exactly which early stage of the flood?Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Boof Member (Idle past 274 days) Posts: 99 From: Australia Joined: |
Faith writes: The weight of the stack, some two miles deep or so, put pressure on the lowest layers in conjunction with the volcanic magma and heat from below, to form the granite and schist. And what mechanism brought these schists and granites back to the surface Faith? I am aware of some eclogites in Australia which were formed at depths of 45km. I'm sure there are some which have probably formed even deeper. If these are now at the surface and were formed, as you contend, during the flood they have thus risen at rates of 5-10m per year. But nobody noticed. Even more mysteriously they have now completely stopped rising. But before you go too far down the track of telling me how they got where they are I suggest you do some research on depressurisation melting - strange things happen to rocks when you rapidly reduce them from high pressures.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1473 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
schist is a metamorphic rock that takes heat to form.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
roxrkool Member (Idle past 1017 days) Posts: 1497 From: Nevada Joined: |
The weight of the stack, some two miles deep or so, put pressure on the lowest layers in conjunction with the volcanic magma and heat from below, to form the granite and schist. So you're suggesting that schist and granite only occur at the bottom of the rock column? I suggest you do a little research on schist and granite and buried flood basalts, and consider retracting that silly argument.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1473 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
I did research on all that but some time ago and don't feel like looking it up again right now. If I have it wrong I have it wrong. It takes heat and or pressure to form metamorphic rock as i recall and granite is a volcanic product. I'm only responding to jar's challenges, you seem to be introducing another subject. Perhaps you could be more specific.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1473 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
Back to the surface of what and from what? I have no idea what you are talking about. Jar was talking about the Vishnu schist at the bottom of the Grand Canyon. I added a remark about the granite that is also there. There is a volcano beneath the canyon, and diagrams show magma intruding into the schist. It is perfectly reasonable to explain its formation by the volcanic heat and the pressure of a two mile deep stack of sediments above.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Boof Member (Idle past 274 days) Posts: 99 From: Australia Joined: |
Tell me Faith - does the flood model refer to the entire geological column as you purport, or does it only apply to the Grand Canyon? If it is the entire geological column how do my ecglogites get from 45km burial depth back up to the Earth's surface in 4000 years without melting again as geophysics tell us they will.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1473 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
I have NO idea what you are talking about. Again, I am responding to a particular shallenge about Vishnu schist. Period. Yes, the geological column all over the world had to have been formed by the Flood.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
roxrkool Member (Idle past 1017 days) Posts: 1497 From: Nevada Joined: |
I'm addressing your suggestion that schist and granite were formed following the great flood as a result of compression and heat due to the overlying sediments. In OE, that's certainly possible, though you'd have to add a whole lot more overlying sediment and tectonic stress. But large amounts of granite and schist are found exposed on the surface of the earth today, mostly in mountain ranges. Sometimes, very large mountain ranges.
How did these rocks form without the overlying sediments to bury, compress, and allow them to cook deep in the earth? ------ Granite is a plutonic rock which forms from the cooling and crystallization of magma in the subsurface, generally, several kilometers deep. Granite has a medium-grained texture, meaning you can see the individual minerals forming the rock. Volcanic rocks cool and crystallize in the surface or near-surface environment, and tend to be finer-grained. Rhyolite is the surface/near-surface equivalent of granite.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
foreveryoung Member (Idle past 611 days) Posts: 921 Joined:
|
faith writes: Back to the surface of what and from what? I have no idea what you are talking about. Jar was talking about the Vishnu schist at the bottom of the Grand Canyon. I added a remark about the granite that is also there. There is a volcano beneath the canyon, and diagrams show magma intruding into the schist. It is perfectly reasonable to explain its formation by the volcanic heat and the pressure of a two mile deep stack of sediments above. While 2 miles of sediment may seem like a lot of weight, it is not enough to create the pressures necessary to turn soft sediments into hard schist. It might be enough to turn soft sediments into sedimentary rocks however.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1473 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
Well I'm very glad to hear that at least in principle I'm making some sense. Feel free to add all the tectonic stress you want as that is considered by many creationists to have occurred somewhere after or in the later stages of the Flood, and it seems to have occurred in conjunction with volcanic activity as well. A volcano did erupt beneath the canyon, partly spilling over the canyon walls in one place, and I believe there is also a large pluton beneath the canyon which may explain why that area has a mounded appearance. A mound into which the canyon was cut. But I understand that there are other possible explanations for the lifting of the land there.
Exposed granite? Formed deep in the earth of course, pushed up by tectonic forces? He who surrenders the first page of his Bible surrenders all. --John William Burgon, Inspiration and Interpretation, Sermon II.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1473 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
Remember the volcano beneath as well as the layers above. And remember also that those were very very wet sediments. Adds a bit of weight.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024