Bill Nye vs. Ken Ham

Abrasion between the forcibly uptilting Supergroup and the flat Tapeats above, brought about by tectonic and volcanic force, in which were embedded many bits and pieces from those lower strata. There would have been a lot of abrasion as the contact slid quite a distance, a quarter of a mile in the case of a boulder sized chunk of quartzite off the Shinumo layer of the Supergroup.ABE: Weathering would leave chemical traces too, according to some creationists who have studied that contact, and they say it isn't present.As for erosion between other layers most of it looks to me like the kind of disturbance that would have been caused by runoff between the lahyers.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

How about the angle that the Tigris and Euphrates rivers, which are mentioned in Genesis with respect to the location of the Garden of Eden, have apparently been spared being buried under tens of thousands of feet of flood stratigraphy?How many other antediluvian locations, such as possibly Jerusalem, Jericho, the Nile, the Dead Sea, the Red Sea, and so on, are present today where they were prior to the flood?Why were they not buried?

not in particular, but yes. sort of. things like that. strictly speaking, sedimentation happens in the present, too. there are generally layers of loose sediment between the rock and your feet. there just tends not to be much of it. that sort of depends. are you claiming that noah took a relatively small number of "kinds" aboard the ark, which then rapidly speciated to represent life as we know it today? because... then transitional species just became a huge problem for the flood. particularly because they'd necessary all exist within human history. we should see transitional forms in archaeology of ancient sites, or described in ancient writings, or depicted by cultures all over the world. fantastic, as long as you can explain why they'd look so similar to the transitional species missing from above the geologic column. i'm not talking about fossils. i'm talking about bones. actual bones, in archaeological digs.

A jagged crack or cracks in the very uppermost strata is exactly what I've described a million times on the other thread, into which the receding Flood waters would have rushed (or the water of a megalake that was left at the end of the Flood perhaps), taking chunks of those upper strata with them. There would not be any evidence NOW of all that though because all the upper strata a mile deep above the Kaibab rim of the canyon washed away. And there has been so much erosion of the walls of the canyon since all that there wouldn't be any evidence left of the direction of the initial flow of water either.

I have no idea what you are talking about and unfortunately I have to take a break for a while.

interesting. that's the closest thing to an actual stab at a mechanism for producing the natural evidence that i think i've ever seen you make.so, to get this right, you're saying the supergroup of strata was solid rock when this happened? and the tapeats above it? and how did the softer tapeats weather the harder basalt and quartzite below it? gonna need a source on that one.

interesting. so you're arguing that, for all intents and purposes, what we have today was 100% made by the colorado river?

This is you in Message 164 of the Why the Flood Never Happened thread: You said precisely what I claimed you said. Incredibly, the one who can't be trusted about what you've said is you.You know what they say about a web of lies collapsing under its own inconsistencies and contradictions? This happens because untrue stories don't have a foundation in fact to anchor them to reality. It's the same for you and the stories you make up about evolution and geology. You can't keep them straight (or even remember them) because they don't have any basis in fact.--Percy

In the Why the Flood Never Happened thread it was indeed Faith's position that no pre-Flood layers survived the flood, and that all strata we see today were the result of the flood. The supergroup was originally laid down horizontally just like all the above layers, but then a volcano beneath the canyon caused them to tilt, even though deeply buried.Faith changes her positions so often that I stopped calling her on it. Calling her on it never ends well, so I just go with whatever she says last.--Percy

My post did not contain the word "STRATA". I said "sediments laid down post-Flood by non-magical processes."

Only if the rocks exposed to weathering contain minerals that react with oxygen or water.

I have no reason to think those layers are anything at all like the strata of the geological column. I see no relevance of this in this discussion, and I'm not even sure what you are trying to say. There are claims that sedimentary layers are being laid down today but nothing anyone has described is anything like the strata of the geological column that I've seen. ???
Noah took representatives of all Kinds. You are going to have to be more clear about what you are saying. What you mean by "transitional species" for starters. I don't know what you are talking about. Keep in mind that varieties of the Kinds are often called "species" by evolutionists because there can be a great number of them (dogs for example) and even the products of what is called "speciation" and yet to a creationist be only a variety of the Kind. You are going to have to explain what you mean because I have no clue. "transitional species" and "missing from above the geologic column" are absolutely meaningless terms to me. That's already a huge difference from the geological column of course. So please explain what on earth you are trying to say about these bones. Aren't they usually just domesticated animals assocated with the settlement excavated at the archaeological site?

Well, my source for this information is the video by the British creationist geologist Paul Garner who was reporting on other geologists' work, such as Steve Austin.

Which wasn't clear which is why I emphasized that there are no post-Flood STRATA. What sediments you have in mind and why this is relevant I have no clue.

* sigh *You know the sediments in which we find, for example, Roman coins? Babylonian pottery? Anglo-Saxon beadwork? The ruins of Pompeii? Those sediments would be post-Flood, would they not?Now, since you and Ham believe that superduperevolution happened after the Flood, the intermediate forms should be in these post-Flood sediments, correct? And not in lithified sediment, which the two of you ascribe to the Flood, right?