Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 64 (9163 total)
6 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,419 Year: 3,676/9,624 Month: 547/974 Week: 160/276 Day: 0/34 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Depositional Models of Sea Transgressions/Regressions - Walther's Law
JonF
Member (Idle past 189 days)
Posts: 6174
Joined: 06-23-2003


Message 327 of 533 (727202)
05-16-2014 11:15 AM
Reply to: Message 318 by Faith
05-16-2014 9:37 AM


Re: the great unconformity
The fact that there is chunky erosional material there at all is the point
But nowhere near enough to support your fantasy.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 318 by Faith, posted 05-16-2014 9:37 AM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 329 by Faith, posted 05-16-2014 11:25 AM JonF has not replied

  
JonF
Member (Idle past 189 days)
Posts: 6174
Joined: 06-23-2003


Message 342 of 533 (727273)
05-16-2014 9:18 PM
Reply to: Message 341 by roxrkool
05-16-2014 7:18 PM


Re: erosional surfaces etc
Foregone only because the evidence is irrefutable and massive.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 341 by roxrkool, posted 05-16-2014 7:18 PM roxrkool has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 343 by RAZD, posted 05-16-2014 10:26 PM JonF has not replied

  
JonF
Member (Idle past 189 days)
Posts: 6174
Joined: 06-23-2003


(1)
Message 348 of 533 (727291)
05-17-2014 8:47 AM
Reply to: Message 347 by Percy
05-17-2014 7:21 AM


Re: Musing or rant, not sure which
This will never happen if the only weapon in your arsenal is ignorance. Your ideas are unsupported by any evidence and many of them violate known physical laws. It's crazy to expect people to be convinced by ideas that make no sense.
QFT. Nailed it.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 347 by Percy, posted 05-17-2014 7:21 AM Percy has seen this message but not replied

  
JonF
Member (Idle past 189 days)
Posts: 6174
Joined: 06-23-2003


(1)
Message 389 of 533 (727613)
05-19-2014 12:03 PM
Reply to: Message 381 by Faith
05-19-2014 9:35 AM


Re: salt basin
My ideas violate no physical laws
For the umpteenth time
One year of sedimentary deposition by water cannot produce the observed geology; it violates physical laws that large pebbles settle first, followed by smaller pieces until you get to clay.
Sorting fossils in water and depositing them in the order we see violates physical laws, in that similar sized organisms in similar environments under similar conditions (e.g ichthyosaurs and dolphins, but there are lots of others.) should often be deposited together... but they never are.
Sorting the isotopes in the geological column in the order we see them violates physical laws because chemical and mechanical forces have little to no impact on nuclear properties.
And there's lots more I could list.
but many of yours have over the last year or so
Standard unsupported Faith assertion.
Despite many challenges you have never been able to identify a single violation of any physical law in any mainstream science. You cry "violation!" over and over again but that cry is all you have.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 381 by Faith, posted 05-19-2014 9:35 AM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 390 by Faith, posted 05-19-2014 12:12 PM JonF has replied

  
JonF
Member (Idle past 189 days)
Posts: 6174
Joined: 06-23-2003


(1)
Message 394 of 533 (727622)
05-19-2014 12:39 PM
Reply to: Message 390 by Faith
05-19-2014 12:12 PM


Re: salt basin
Water was water.
Gravity was gravity.
Mass was mass.
Your fludde claims require all that to be false. You're peddling magic.
"Sorting fossils in water' is not something I've ever said.
You can't even remember what you've said, much less what mainstream science has produced.
Message 322:
All the same big event, huh? Would you care to speculate as to why no crab fossil has ever been found in the same rock as a trilobite fossil? No perch in the same rock as a eurypterid? No dimetrodons with dinosaurs? Never, in any of those cases?
Something to do with the principles of hydraulic sorting.
PaulK replies:
And Faith just demonstrates why my advice was good.
No Faith, as others have pointed out, hydraulic sorting is not a viable explanation. Even at the simplest level, the fossils associated with each era have a huge range of shapes and sizes, quite the opposite if what we'd expect if hydraulic sorting were the issue.
And Message 343 you reply:
Hydraulic sortibng plus original location of the original creature, plus level of the currents in the ocean that carried them etc etc etc.
And that's just a small sample.
Or do you not realize the "hydraulic sorting" in a fludde refers to sorting in water?
We see lots of instances of similar sized and similarly shaped organisms, eating similar diets with similar behavior patterns in similar environments (including level in the ocean) but never ever ever ever found anywhere near together in the geological column. Just can't happen with the laws of how mass, water, and gravity work. No matter how much water.
Your claims are disproved by fundamental physical laws. You are preaching magic.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 390 by Faith, posted 05-19-2014 12:12 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 398 by Faith, posted 05-19-2014 1:02 PM JonF has not replied

  
JonF
Member (Idle past 189 days)
Posts: 6174
Joined: 06-23-2003


(1)
Message 445 of 533 (728339)
05-27-2014 8:56 AM


Google Street View now covers the Grand Canyon. Talk about opportunities for more Faith fantasies!

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024