|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 63 (9162 total) |
| |
popoi | |
Total: 916,387 Year: 3,644/9,624 Month: 515/974 Week: 128/276 Day: 2/23 Hour: 0/0 |
Summations Only | Thread ▼ Details |
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Why the Flood Never Happened | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1465 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
Why don't you deal with what I have shown over and over again, that if any of the strata had been exposed at the surface for the long years you assume, they would show disturbances ragged enough to be seen all the way across the canyon. You are just repeating the party line about the kind of erosion that has to be seen close up that I've answered a million times already.
And gthe idea that there wre successive risings and falling of land or water is phhyiscally impossible.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
herebedragons Member (Idle past 878 days) Posts: 1517 From: Michigan Joined: |
That isn't actually interbedding, they're lying. Could you explain what is actually going on in those layers? I was confused by the image as well - if that is indeed Cambrian rock on top of Mississippian rock it disproves the whole geological column and the old earth HBDWhoever calls me ignorant shares my own opinion. Sorrowfully and tacitly I recognize my ignorance, when I consider how much I lack of what my mind in its craving for knowledge is sighing for. But until the end of the present exile has come and terminated this our imperfection by which "we know in part," I console myself with the consideration that this belongs to our common nature. - Francesco Petrarca "Nothing is easier than to persuade people who want to be persuaded and already believe." - another Petrarca gem.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
foreveryoung Member (Idle past 603 days) Posts: 921 Joined: |
Not if the Cambrian rock was trusted over the Mississippian rocks via faulting.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1465 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
Of course it's not problematic for him since he's willing to embrace the establishment view I've been arguing against from the beginning without bothering to address or even read or think about anything I've said. It's just physically impossible for the column of strata to be sometimes under water and sometimes exposed at the surface, and for LONG periods supposedly exposed at the surface too, which as I've argued at tedious length would show disturbances to the layers visible across the whole canyon for crying out loud.
DEAL WITH MY ARGUMENTS. They make yours irrelevant.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
herebedragons Member (Idle past 878 days) Posts: 1517 From: Michigan Joined:
|
Is this the kind of erosional layers you are expecting to see everywhere even from a distance?
HBDWhoever calls me ignorant shares my own opinion. Sorrowfully and tacitly I recognize my ignorance, when I consider how much I lack of what my mind in its craving for knowledge is sighing for. But until the end of the present exile has come and terminated this our imperfection by which "we know in part," I console myself with the consideration that this belongs to our common nature. - Francesco Petrarca "Nothing is easier than to persuade people who want to be persuaded and already believe." - another Petrarca gem.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1465 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
Yes and I drew my own illustration very similar to that one years ago to explain what I jmeant about what SHOULD be seen if the long years of exposure actually happened, that was posted here but probably isn't any more. Nobody took it seriously as usual. So are you now saying that's the way it happened in reality? If it did where's the photo to prove it?
Edited by Faith, : No reason given. Edited by Faith, : No reason given. Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Adequate Member (Idle past 305 days) Posts: 16113 Joined: |
Faith writes: the horizontality is an issue because it demonstrates the lack of disturbance to the individual layers over their millions of years, no tectonic distortion Faith writes:
You pick a picture that demonstrates the tectonic distortion
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
herebedragons Member (Idle past 878 days) Posts: 1517 From: Michigan Joined: |
So are you now saying it did? No, it obviously did not happen that way. I am not sure everyone understands what you are trying to say about this, so I saw this pic and realized "that's what she is saying should have happened" so this is for clarification. So you are saying that the Grand Canyon should look like this if it took millions of years to form? HBDWhoever calls me ignorant shares my own opinion. Sorrowfully and tacitly I recognize my ignorance, when I consider how much I lack of what my mind in its craving for knowledge is sighing for. But until the end of the present exile has come and terminated this our imperfection by which "we know in part," I console myself with the consideration that this belongs to our common nature. - Francesco Petrarca "Nothing is easier than to persuade people who want to be persuaded and already believe." - another Petrarca gem.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1465 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
Amazing how you're willing to quote out of context. The evasion and subterfuges to avoid my points are amazing. One would almost think you all KNOW I'm right but just refuse to acknowledge it.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
herebedragons Member (Idle past 878 days) Posts: 1517 From: Michigan Joined: |
Not if the Cambrian rock was trusted over the Mississippian rocks via faulting. Geology is not my forte' but here is the image that Percy posted:
Doesn't look like faulting or sliding to me. HBDWhoever calls me ignorant shares my own opinion. Sorrowfully and tacitly I recognize my ignorance, when I consider how much I lack of what my mind in its craving for knowledge is sighing for. But until the end of the present exile has come and terminated this our imperfection by which "we know in part," I console myself with the consideration that this belongs to our common nature. - Francesco Petrarca "Nothing is easier than to persuade people who want to be persuaded and already believe." - another Petrarca gem.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1465 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
I actually think the effect would be a liot worse than that, but yes, I'm saying that if AN INDIVIDUAL LAYER was actually exposed at the surface for long periods of time it would be eroded way beyond the actual erosion seen, enough to be visible across the whole canyon. Which it is not. Nor is it visible in that cross-section, a mere graphic as someone tried to dismiss it, but if the individual layers had been as disturbed as they would have been under the scenario that requires them to have bgeen exposed for millions of years (hey ten years would distort them more than we see) I'm sure the artist would have not drawn those nice neat parallel layers.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Adequate Member (Idle past 305 days) Posts: 16113 Joined:
|
Faith writes: It's just physically impossible for the column of strata to be sometimes under water and sometimes exposed at the surface Then since they are now exposed at the surface, must we conclude that they were never underwater?
and for LONG periods supposedly exposed at the surface too, which as I've argued at tedious length would show disturbances to the layers visible across the whole canyon for crying out loud DEAL WITH MY ARGUMENTS. Those aren't arguments. They're assertions. False ones.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Adequate Member (Idle past 305 days) Posts: 16113 Joined:
|
Amazing how you're willing to quote out of context. You said that there was no tectonic distortion, and that I'd shown you a photograph of it. Feel free to supply context.
One would almost think you all KNOW I'm right but just refuse to acknowledge it. I think you were right when you said that I'd shown you a photograph of the tectonic distortion, and wrong when you said there wasn't any.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1465 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
I usually give you credit for at least being able to understand what a person is saying. The best I can say now is that I was wrong, because the only alternative is to figure you are intentionally lying.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Adequate Member (Idle past 305 days) Posts: 16113 Joined:
|
Geology is not my forte' but here is the image that Percy posted: Yes, but it's bollocks. How often are things with the word "Bible" on them true?
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024