Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
5 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Evidence that the Great Unconformity did not Form Before the Strata above it
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


(2)
Message 781 of 1939 (754863)
04-01-2015 12:00 AM
Reply to: Message 775 by Faith
03-31-2015 11:00 PM


So now we're just slinging slogans. Is too science, is not, is too, is not.
Not really, I'm talking about the stuff that works. I don't care if you call it science or not.
And this is exactly what I keep objecting to as ridiculous, the whole idea of imputing long eras of time to slabs of different kinds of rock.
Okay, so what works instead?
They say it's evidence for the Old Earth, while all I can do is roll my eyes at such an idea.
But you don't even really understand it, which was proved by your wholly inaccurate caracature.
Just as tney expect it to be intuitively obvious that it implies an old earth and evolution, I regard it as intuitively obvious that the idea is absurd in the extreme.
But you don't even have the knowledge to grasp what you're actually looking at, which was proved by the drawings you made.
There is no evidence on either side, you are persuaded of either one or the other by your own subjective judgment.
But I know this isn't true, because some of the explanations work and others don't. The ones from what I'm calling the scientific side can provide examples and reasoning, in the form of objective evidence, for why their explanation works.
Do you think that you have also done that?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 775 by Faith, posted 03-31-2015 11:00 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 782 by Faith, posted 04-01-2015 12:09 AM New Cat's Eye has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1445 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 782 of 1939 (754864)
04-01-2015 12:09 AM
Reply to: Message 781 by New Cat's Eye
04-01-2015 12:00 AM


If you are going to accuse me of not understanding something you need to provide more than your assertion. You need to describe or illustrate what you are talking about and quote me on it and show why I'm wrong. At least. I have no reason to believe that YOU understood anything I've said in this thread.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 781 by New Cat's Eye, posted 04-01-2015 12:00 AM New Cat's Eye has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 783 by New Cat's Eye, posted 04-01-2015 12:23 AM Faith has not replied
 Message 785 by Coyote, posted 04-01-2015 12:31 AM Faith has not replied

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 783 of 1939 (754866)
04-01-2015 12:23 AM
Reply to: Message 782 by Faith
04-01-2015 12:09 AM


Okay, I drop my claims of your misunderstandings, and I'll assume that you do understand it, can you now answer my questions:
quote:
And this is exactly what I keep objecting to as ridiculous, the whole idea of imputing long eras of time to slabs of different kinds of rock.
Okay, so what works instead?
quote:
There is no evidence on either side, you are persuaded of either one or the other by your own subjective judgment.
But I know this isn't true, because some of the explanations work and others don't. The ones from what I'm calling the scientific side can provide examples and reasoning, in the form of objective evidence, for why their explanation works.
Do you think that you have also done that?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 782 by Faith, posted 04-01-2015 12:09 AM Faith has not replied

  
edge
Member (Idle past 1706 days)
Posts: 4696
From: Colorado, USA
Joined: 01-09-2002


(1)
Message 784 of 1939 (754867)
04-01-2015 12:23 AM
Reply to: Message 761 by Faith
03-31-2015 8:33 PM


Re: houses
When I said no evidence I was talking about this part of the conversation not the earlier part, no evidence meaning the ridiculous claim that the strata represent eras of millions of years.
Actually, we were talking about the order of geological events in the Grand Canyon. I don't remember absolute ages being the thrust of the conversation, only that the Great Unconformity is older than the Paleozoic rocks of the GC.
That's all we've been talking about today and it's all I ever referred to when I said you had no evidence. Why can't you ever just respond to what has actually been said?
Maybe you should dial it back a little bit, Faith. The data supporting an old earth are numerous and well-known. I didn't know that you were unaware of the various clocks which tell us that the earth is very ancient.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 761 by Faith, posted 03-31-2015 8:33 PM Faith has not replied

  
Coyote
Member (Idle past 2106 days)
Posts: 6117
Joined: 01-12-2008


(1)
Message 785 of 1939 (754869)
04-01-2015 12:31 AM
Reply to: Message 782 by Faith
04-01-2015 12:09 AM


If you are going to accuse me of not understanding something you need to provide more than your assertion. You need to describe or illustrate what you are talking about and quote me on it and show why I'm wrong. At least. I have no reason to believe that YOU understood anything I've said in this thread.
We no longer have a need to "understand" what you've said on this thread or any other.
You have made yourself perfectly clear over the years. We got the message a long time ago: "The Bible says it, I believe it, that settles it."
Any real world evidence slides off like water off a duck. Science is just something for you to try to use as a cover for your beliefs, even though what you do is the exact opposite of science.
I really don't know why we waste time trying to show you the evidence--you won't accept it anyway.
A mind 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
How can I possibly put a new idea into your heads, if I do not first remove your delusions?--Robert A. Heinlein
It's not what we don't know that hurts, it's what we know that ain't so--Will Rogers
If I am entitled to something, someone else is obliged to pay--Jerry Pournelle
If a religion's teachings are true, then it should have nothing to fear from science...--dwise1
"Multiculturalism" demands that the US be tolerant of everything except its own past, culture, traditions, and identity.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 782 by Faith, posted 04-01-2015 12:09 AM Faith has not replied

  
edge
Member (Idle past 1706 days)
Posts: 4696
From: Colorado, USA
Joined: 01-09-2002


Message 786 of 1939 (754870)
04-01-2015 12:33 AM
Reply to: Message 780 by Faith
03-31-2015 11:49 PM


Re: Marley and the indigestible necklace
Lemme see. I'd guess the feces that got preserved as fossils were dried out for starters, and then got swept up rapidly in the Flood, perhaps packed in mud, ya never know, and then summarily dispatched to their final resting place in the strata, maybe even right on the spot, where being tightly compressed it remained intact, then of course fossilized over the next hundreds of years. Meanwhile I would suppose there were hundreds of thousands of similar items that got dissolved in the Flood water and never got fossilized.
No need to give up at the first obstacle that crosses your mind.
Or how about this: "scared s--tless" by the rising Flood the animal delivered the fossilized items on the spot as the animal was being buried.
Okay, so why no human fossils or trace fossils in the first phases of the flood?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 780 by Faith, posted 03-31-2015 11:49 PM Faith has not replied

  
ThinAirDesigns
Member (Idle past 2374 days)
Posts: 564
Joined: 02-12-2015


(1)
Message 787 of 1939 (754872)
04-01-2015 6:37 AM
Reply to: Message 775 by Faith
03-31-2015 11:00 PM


Faith writes:
There is no evidence on either side, you are persuaded of either one or the other by your own subjective judgment.
Testable predictions aren't subjective judgement, they are exactly the opposite. OE geology has overwhelmed and destroyed flood nonsense through it's repeatable predictions -- predictions that over the last 100 years have made the industrial revolution possible and give you the ability to sit in your arm chair and claim there is no evidence.
This thread IS the evidence. Without the predictions that OE geology makes every day, none of this (and none of us) would exist.
JB

This message is a reply to:
 Message 775 by Faith, posted 03-31-2015 11:00 PM Faith has not replied

  
Admin
Director
Posts: 12998
From: EvC Forum
Joined: 06-14-2002
Member Rating: 2.3


Message 788 of 1939 (754873)
04-01-2015 7:38 AM


Moderator Concerns
Hi Everyone,
The post volume is overwhelming my ability to moderate or even keep up with this thread. I was able to read up through page 46 today (my settings are 15 messages/page), or up through around 1 PM yesterday Eastern Time US. I'll just make a few suggestions:
  • Comments about the intelligence, discernment or lack thereof of other participants should be avoided.
  • Please stay on topic: how the Great Unconformity formed.
  • Please don't restart discussions from scratch by making assertions that give no hint of awareness that the issue has been discussed before and that pretend ignorance of the counterarguments.
  • In this last point I'll get specific. I think the volcanic argument would have been helped by quantitative evidence of how much material is sent into the atmosphere by a major volcanic event, how many such major events would have to have occurred in the last 6000 years, and how much total material in the atmosphere that would have represented.
    I think the Siberian Traps argument would have been helped with quantitative evidence of how long it takes molten lava to cool. Just by way of example, if Hover Dam, a tiny object on a geologic scale, had not been constructed with cooling pipes lain before concrete was poured, it would have taken around 700 years for the concrete to cool (concrete heats as it hardens, even to above 100°C (the boiling point of water) if the mass of concrete is great enough, such as in a dam). Lava's temperature is above 700°C, so how long would it take for miles of lava to cool from 700°C?
    I'm only using these as examples of the kinds of arguments that would be helped by more evidence. They're actually off-topic.

--Percy
EvC Forum Director

  
saab93f
Member (Idle past 1395 days)
Posts: 265
From: Finland
Joined: 12-17-2009


(1)
Message 789 of 1939 (754875)
04-01-2015 8:21 AM
Reply to: Message 717 by Faith
03-31-2015 2:16 PM


Re: how long ago was 4230 years?
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.
Have you calculated the amount of heat stemming from "super-sonic" tectonic movements? I mean have you never looked at the picture of the Himalayas and thought that there is no frikkin way that has come to existence in just a couple of years?
We are talking about something that just cannot have happened - the amount of heat released wouldve boiled the oceans and killed everyone.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 717 by Faith, posted 03-31-2015 2:16 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 793 by Faith, posted 04-01-2015 12:50 PM saab93f has replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 790 of 1939 (754882)
04-01-2015 11:21 AM


Siberian Traps
The Siberian Traps cover an area about the size of Western Europe; over seven hundred thousand square miles and were the product of a whole series of events as opposed to a single eruption.
The basic format is of flood basalt layers of lava flows interspersed with pyroclastic ash as well as tuff.
Different layers have different chemical composition and show a pattern of sudden explosive volcanic events followed by lava flows. Since they are found as layers we can establish relative ages, lava from younger events being above lava from earlier events.
Thickness varies but even today some remaining parts are well over two miles thick.
An important consideration is that we know that lava flow fronts do not move quickly and that people can usually out walk lava advance so from that we can get some idea of how long it took for just the parts remaining to have been deposited. In addition since there is evidence of many, many overlaying layers showing separate flows we can safely assume similar speeds for each subsequent event.
The fastest lava flow front speed recorded was only six miles an hour so a human might need to jog to stay ahead of that.
There is additional evidence that shows there were at least two separate stages of volcanic activity, again, each consisting of multiple flow events.
It has been suggested that it might be useful to compare cooling times to something like Hoover Damn but I'm not at all sure that would tell us anything. The Siberian Traps are not a single monolithic object and did not have cooling pipes with cold water running through them but we can look at modern lava flow fronts to get some ideas. Lava can form a thin skin, sometimes thick enough to support a human's weight fairly quickly; perhaps in as little time as a half hour; but that skin in turn insulates the interior so that it can take weeks or months for the flow itself to cool once the event stops.
Lava can flow very rapidly through established lava pipes (maybe 40-60 MPH) but that is only in established old fields and does not expand the field.
Cooling time then is related to how fast the flow front advances and until the final extent of the individual flow is reached means little. That seems to point to flow rate being the determining time factor and once active flow stops the whole layer should cool in a fairly short period measured in months.
But again, the above holds true for each layer of lava, each event, each flow.

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

Replies to this message:
 Message 795 by Faith, posted 04-01-2015 1:05 PM jar has replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 412 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 791 of 1939 (754884)
04-01-2015 11:36 AM
Reply to: Message 707 by Faith
03-31-2015 1:46 PM


Re: Extinction fantasy
Faith writes:
Yes, ringo, individual representatives of every living thing. That would be races or varieties, which would leave lots of other races or varieties of the same Species or Kind, while representing that Species or Kind.
Again, the whole point of the Ark was to prevent extinctions. If the Ark story was true, there would be no extinct species in the fossil record (unless they all became extinct after the flood).

This message is a reply to:
 Message 707 by Faith, posted 03-31-2015 1:46 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 792 by Faith, posted 04-01-2015 12:15 PM ringo has seen this message but not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1445 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 792 of 1939 (754888)
04-01-2015 12:15 PM
Reply to: Message 791 by ringo
04-01-2015 11:36 AM


Re: Extinction fantasy
Again, the whole point of the Ark was to prevent extinctions. If the Ark story was true, there would be no extinct species in the fossil record (unless they all became extinct after the flood).
OK, here's the problem. New subspecies or varieties or races are called "Species" today. They aren't, they are subspecies or varieties or races. Whether any actual Species have become extinct I doubt but don't know. Anyway, when they report that over 99% of all species that ever lived are now extinct, most of which is based on the fossil record, they are talking really about subspecies or varieties or races, the built-in variations of Species that we get from microevolution. That huge percentage of extinctions of these subspecies, however, can be attributed to the Flood. There were representatives of every Species on the ark, but their cousins and second cousins all died out. No more sabretoothed tigers but still lots of tigers, no more woolly mammoths but still plenty of pachyderms.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 791 by ringo, posted 04-01-2015 11:36 AM ringo has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 794 by NoNukes, posted 04-01-2015 12:56 PM Faith has replied
 Message 797 by ThinAirDesigns, posted 04-01-2015 1:17 PM Faith has replied
 Message 799 by herebedragons, posted 04-01-2015 1:31 PM Faith has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1445 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 793 of 1939 (754890)
04-01-2015 12:50 PM
Reply to: Message 789 by saab93f
04-01-2015 8:21 AM


Himalayas etc
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.
Have you calculated the amount of heat stemming from "super-sonic" tectonic movements? I mean have you never looked at the picture of the Himalayas and thought that there is no frikkin way that has come to existence in just a couple of years?
We are talking about something that just cannot have happened - the amount of heat released wouldve boiled the oceans and killed everyone.
1) Ice age after the Flood kept things cool. Ice age also a product of whatever heat is generated in tectonic and volcanic events.
2) I never said tectonic events such as the raising of the Himalayas took only a few years. Sorry if I said something that could be interpreted that way. However I certainly don't think such events took millions of years, a few hundred would be more than enough.
3) There were no people in India for at least that long, and besides all they'd experience would be earthquakes.
Excuse me if I feel free to guess about such things, but that's what Science is doing too.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 789 by saab93f, posted 04-01-2015 8:21 AM saab93f has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 818 by saab93f, posted 04-01-2015 4:33 PM Faith has replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


(2)
Message 794 of 1939 (754892)
04-01-2015 12:56 PM
Reply to: Message 792 by Faith
04-01-2015 12:15 PM


Re: fantasy biology
OK, here's the problem. New subspecies or varieties or races are called "Species" today. They aren't, they are subspecies or varieties or races.
What's the essential difference between being of different species and being of different subspecies?
How about a shred of evidence for your assertion that modern taxonomy is completely wrong. What is it, other than support for your own position that indicates what you say is correct?
In short, what the heck do you know about biology?

Je Suis Charlie
Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)
If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass

This message is a reply to:
 Message 792 by Faith, posted 04-01-2015 12:15 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 796 by Faith, posted 04-01-2015 1:10 PM NoNukes has not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1445 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 795 of 1939 (754893)
04-01-2015 1:05 PM
Reply to: Message 790 by jar
04-01-2015 11:21 AM


Re: Siberian Traps
The Siberian Traps cover an area about the size of Western Europe; over seven hundred thousand square miles and were the product of a whole series of events as opposed to a single eruption.
The basic format is of flood basalt layers of lava flows interspersed with pyroclastic ash as well as tuff.
Different layers have different chemical composition and show a pattern of sudden explosive volcanic events followed by lava flows. Since they are found as layers we can establish relative ages, lava from younger events being above lava from earlier events.
Thickness varies but even today some remaining parts are well over two miles thick.
Any reason to think ANY of it occurred under water?
What would the effect be if it occurred during an ice age when the entire area was frozen over?
Relative ages is no problem, as long as you aren't claiming it took millions.
An important consideration is that we know that lava flow fronts do not move quickly and that people can usually out walk lava advance so from that we can get some idea of how long it took for just the parts remaining to have been deposited.
And how long DID that take?
In addition since there is evidence of many, many overlaying layers showing separate flows we can safely assume similar speeds for each subsequent event.
The fastest lava flow front speed recorded was only six miles an hour so a human might need to jog to stay ahead of that.
There is additional evidence that shows there were at least two separate stages of volcanic activity, again, each consisting of multiple flow events.
So tell us what time frame you are talking about. How long for all the events to occur?
It has been suggested that it might be useful to compare cooling times to something like Hoover Damn but I'm not at all sure that would tell us anything. The Siberian Traps are not a single monolithic object and did not have cooling pipes with cold water running through them
Unless perchance they erupted into water or a frozen landscape.
but we can look at modern lava flow fronts to get some ideas.
Risky to assume conditions then were the same as now.
Lava can form a thin skin, sometimes thick enough to support a human's weight fairly quickly; perhaps in as little time as a half hour; but that skin in turn insulates the interior so that it can take weeks or months for the flow itself to cool once the event stops.
Weeks or months no problem. It's those millions of years that are open to question.
Lava can flow very rapidly through established lava pipes (maybe 40-60 MPH) but that is only in established old fields and does not expand the field.
Cooling time then is related to how fast the flow front advances and until the final extent of the individual flow is reached means little. That seems to point to flow rate being the determining time factor and once active flow stops the whole layer should cool in a fairly short period measured in months.
Months perfectly within Flood time scale. I'd have accepted a few hundred years.
But again, the above holds true for each layer of lava, each event, each flow.
So add up those months and what do you get? Nothing that would keep the tenth generation from Noah out of the area I would guess.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 790 by jar, posted 04-01-2015 11:21 AM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 802 by jar, posted 04-01-2015 1:47 PM Faith has replied
 Message 804 by edge, posted 04-01-2015 1:58 PM Faith has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024