Evidence that the Great Unconformity did not Form Before the Strata above it

I'm glad you brought this up.Contrary to almost everything Faith (and other YECs, as well) says, older rocks are generally different in appearance and more resistant to weathering; and can be recognized as such by trained individuals. Even geologists often aren't thinking about weathering as they look at rock formations such as Uluru (Uluru - Wikipedia) with its tan to brick red coloration. But if you break the rock to look at an unweathered surface, the actual color of the material is a rather boring gray. However, I don't recommend going up there and cracking open the rocks to test this.

I do consider God's own revelation to be primary evidence against all claims to evidence that contradict it, such as science's "evidence" for both an ancient earth and evolution. However, this is your forum and you can define evidence however you want, in which case I should simply stop posting here.

"God's own revelation" is exactly what we are looking at, Faith.What you are talking about is "your own misbegotten interpretation of that revelation".

What if you're wrong, edge?

Ok, you believe that your interpretation of "god's own revelation" from the (man tainted) bible to be the best there is of "god's own revelation". (This in spite of the fact that repeatedly, humans best interpretation of "god's own revelation" from the (man tainted) bible has turned out to be provably false while theological sticklers called what was ultimately determined to be truth the result of devil possession. I'm talking about things YOU now believe are true Faith)Edge (and Christians everywhere) believe that the best of "god's own revelation" is seen in his creation, that god is not a deceiver and that god expects us to use our senses, reason and intellect to review his creation.You ask: "What if you're wrong, edge?"So what method could we use to determine which one of you is right? I wonder if evidence and the testing of our understanding of that evidence with predictions would help us sort this out? HmmmmmEvidence wins, Faith loses.JB

What if you're wrong, TAD?

Wrong about what - that evidence is the best way to learn about the world around us?When a better , more reliable, more repeatable method is discovered I will adopt it and be happy and grateful for it's discovery. That's what I'll do if I'm wrong.JB

Of course I mean what if you're wrong, and that really it's the Bible that tells the truth about the world and that scientific evidence must be false where it contradicts it?But this is off topic and I'll leave it here.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

I don't have any problem with the occasional diversion onto other topics, but if there's genuine interest in discussing other aspects, such as faith versus evidence, then someone should propose a new thread over at Proposed New Topics. I do want to put in a plug for the topic of this thread, which is the evidence showing how the Great Unconformity formed.

All the Old Earthers have predictably found (made up) ways to discredit my evidence against the OE interpretation of angular unconformities, but nobody has proved it possible for erosion over millions of years to produce the extremely straight and level lines of the G.U. I showed in Message 213 and Message 313.And although my hypothesis about how angular unconformities could have formed differently from the standard OE explanation is dismissed supposedly for lack of evidence, the very fact that it's even possible that such an alternative explanation could exist, and in fact has some evidence in the experiment done by Lyell that was illustrated here, deserves better than the standard biased dissing it got. Plus I'd note bias in the usual conjecture-based "evidence" that is accepted as long as it is on the side of status quo OE belief, but rejected if it's on the YE side.OE really has no better evidence than I have, and I've come to the end of this discussion. All that's left is the unwarranted preening and back-slapping of the OE side so I leave you to it.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Faith, we love you but...

Wrong about what? I can handle being wrong.

But it isn't possible. Not without evidence.In fact, we have countervailing evidence. Evidence is evidence, Faith. You can complain all you want, but nothing changes the weight of actual evidence.

I'll say it again, you do NOT have any better evidence than I have, it's all conjectural.

Faith, what if you're wrong?You wanted everybody to play this little game of yours, so you need to be ready and willing to play it yourself.