|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1473 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Evidence that the Great Unconformity did not Form Before the Strata above it | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 422 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
Faith writes: You have NOT proved the need for immense periods of time, you have artificially invented the idea. And the Flood took ONE YEAR with a few years of aftereffects, not 6000 years. Again faith, you need to provide a model, method, mechanism, process or procedure to explain what does exist that does not require immense periods of time. We are waiting on you.Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Pressie Member Posts: 2103 From: Pretoria, SA Joined:
|
Faith writes: Nope. I just told you what's found in the various "rock layers" in parts of South Africa. And the relative ages of those "rock layers" to each other.
But you interpret the age of the strata you get from the boreholes according to the Geo Time Scale of hundreds of millions of years,... Faith writes: Nope. I just told you what's found in the various "rock layers" in parts of South Africa. And the relative ages of those "rock layers" to each other.
...and extrapolate the dates of fossils that are normally associated with particular strata also from that scale, so what's the difference? Faith writes: I don't have a problem. I just told you what fossils are found in various "layers" of rocks in South Africa and the relative ages of rocks to each other. The Beaufort is younger than the Ecca and the Dwyka and the Transvaal and the Wits and the Barberton. And that the lower parts of the Beaufort are older than the middle parts and older than the upper parts of the Beaufort. And the fossils we find in the lower parts and middle parts and upper parts of the Beaufort. All just from outcrops and boreholes... And then you say you DO get mammals, and they're "near the top" which is where I said they normally are. So what's your problem? Edited by Pressie, : No reason given. Edited by Pressie, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
edge Member (Idle past 1735 days) Posts: 4696 From: Colorado, USA Joined: |
I didn't say their houses would be buried in the upper strata, just the people.
I noticed. So, where are the houses that once existed before the flood? Can you show us one sitting on the Great Unconformity? How about an arrowhead or pottery shard? This isn't rocket science, Faith. If there were people around at the beginning of the flood, then their artifacts should be found in the first phase of the flood, not just at the 'top' of the geological column. They did not just 'run uphill'.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Pressie Member Posts: 2103 From: Pretoria, SA Joined: |
edge, to me coprolites are always very interesting. Those guys just had a dump or two around their houses...
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
edge Member (Idle past 1735 days) Posts: 4696 From: Colorado, USA Joined: |
You have NOT proved the need for immense periods of time, ...
Well, not to \[b\]you/b. Most reasonable people agree that old ages make more sense. They understand that the house of ad hoc cards you are building is pure fantasy.
... you have artificially invented the idea. And the Flood took ONE YEAR with a few years of aftereffects, not 6000 years.
And your supporting evidence?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1473 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
You WAY underestimate the destructive power of a worldwide Flood.
However, sometimes I think there may be artifacts from the pre-Flood world that are misinterpreted by Science as usual. Don't know, maybe all perished. Of course your biased interpretation must be better than mine because it's yours, right?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1473 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
Well, not to \[b\]you/b. Most reasonable people agree that old ages make more sense. Right, old ages just subjectively "make more sense," they just FEEL more right, don't they? That's why I laughed when I realized the earth was really only a few thousand years old. We just FEEL LIKE it should be a lot older.
They understand that the house of ad hoc cards you are building is pure fantasy. Yeh, that's sad because it's the Old Earth that's the fantasy, and they believe it only because they've been told it and because it just SEEMS like it must be right although the evidence claimed for it is utterly ridiculous. And the "ad hoc" here is the manufactured proofs of this invention that just FEELS like it must be right. Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
edge Member (Idle past 1735 days) Posts: 4696 From: Colorado, USA Joined:
|
You WAY underestimate the destructive power of a worldwide Flood.
Heh, heh, heh ... So the evidence we ask you for was destroyed!!! Amazing. And convenient for you. So, then, Faith, why do we have fossils at all, particularly in the lower flood sediments? How were delicate soft-bodied creatures preserved, and how did we get things like footprints in soft sediments?
However, sometimes I think there may be artifacts from the pre-Flood world that are misinterpreted by Science as usual. Don't know, maybe all perished.
Well, if you think so...
Of course your biased interpretation must be better than mine because it's yours, right?
I'd say that pretty much everyone here has a better interpretation than you. At least, they have provided support for their arguments.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
edge Member (Idle past 1735 days) Posts: 4696 From: Colorado, USA Joined: |
edge, to me coprolites are always very interesting. Those guys just had a dump or two around their houses...
Yeah, I was thinking about those also. I guess dinosaur feces were more durable than human feces... There's always a reason, eh?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 422 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
How did the flood only sort grass pollens into certain epoch layers and not into others?
Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1473 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
Once again the "support" is pathetically nothing but senseless mental constructs and inventions. Time periods in strata, it's laughable except that it's bamboozled most of the human race, which really isn't funny.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1473 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
Gosh I don't know, why don't you interview them?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
edge Member (Idle past 1735 days) Posts: 4696 From: Colorado, USA Joined:
|
Right, old ages just subjectively "make more sense," they just FEEL more right, don't they?
In the face of radiometric ages (that would be 'evidence' to most of us), yes, it seems more sensible. And we can discuss rates of other geological processes also if you want. But I'm pretty sure you don't want to. That would be supporting evidence after all...
That's why I laughed when I realized the earth was really only a few thousand years old. We just FEEL LIKE it should be a lot older.
Even to people who don't know about the evidence, yes.
Yeh, that's sad because it's the Old Earth that's the fantasy, ...
Who is sad?
... and they believe it only because they've been told it and because it just SEEMS like it must be right although the evidence claimed for it is utterly ridiculous.
Yes, when one considers the evidence, it sure does seem to be that way.
And the "ad hoc" here is the manufactured proofs of this invention that just FEELS like it must be right.
"Proofs"? What on earth are you talking about? But yes, when one actually studies the rocks, there is a certain confidence in the consilience of evidence.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Pressie Member Posts: 2103 From: Pretoria, SA Joined:
|
Faith writes: Magic can do anything. That's why creationism is not science. You WAY underestimate the destructive power of a worldwide Flood. You do know that the Beaufort Group contains fossils of reptiles in the oldest deposits; then various degrees of fossils of mammal-like reptiles a bit higher up, then degrees of fossils of reptile-like mammals a bit higher, then mammals at the top, don't you? The theory of evolution can explain that sequence of fossils scientifically. Magic fluddies can't.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1473 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
Coprolites are FOSSILS. If human beings were found fossilized in great numbers then we could expect to find human coprolites. But it appears that humans along with some of the higher mammals, escaped fossilization and got eaten up by sea creatures or bacteria. Maybe they lived in grass huts that got destroyed too.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024