Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 69 (9033 total)
49 online now:
dwise1, Tanypteryx (2 members, 47 visitors)
Newest Member: Johnny
Upcoming Birthdays: Percy
Post Volume: Total: 885,081 Year: 2,727/14,102 Month: 392/703 Week: 45/168 Day: 14/31 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   How does a flood ...
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 308 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 8 of 206 (781295)
04-03-2016 8:39 PM
Reply to: Message 7 by starlite
04-03-2016 7:17 PM


different causes for different layers?
It is incorrect to claim that creation believers are in a corner because you think they believe that all layers were flood deposited.

You would be right that most creationists don't think all the layers were deposited by the Flood, in fact I'm not sure how many -- if any -- do think that, but I do. The layers are too uniform to have had different causes, and the most sensible explanation is water that covered the whole planet.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 7 by starlite, posted 04-03-2016 7:17 PM starlite has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 9 by jar, posted 04-03-2016 8:53 PM Faith has responded
 Message 12 by starlite, posted 04-03-2016 10:18 PM Faith has not yet responded

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 308 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 10 of 206 (781297)
04-03-2016 8:55 PM
Reply to: Message 9 by jar
04-03-2016 8:53 PM


Re: different causes for different layers?
I don't know, it just did.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 9 by jar, posted 04-03-2016 8:53 PM jar has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 11 by jar, posted 04-03-2016 8:58 PM Faith has not yet responded

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 308 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


(1)
Message 21 of 206 (781314)
04-04-2016 1:01 AM
Reply to: Message 15 by starlite
04-03-2016 10:47 PM


Re: different causes for different layers?
The flood did not deposit all the layers that is a silly strawman.

it can't be a straw man if some creationists believe it, and I'm one who does.

Maybe you should describe how they deposited over hundreds of years according to your view.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 15 by starlite, posted 04-03-2016 10:47 PM starlite has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 23 by starlite, posted 04-04-2016 2:17 AM Faith has responded

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 308 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 26 of 206 (781326)
04-04-2016 2:31 AM
Reply to: Message 23 by starlite
04-04-2016 2:17 AM


Re: different causes for different layers?
Hey Starlite, it's nice to have a new creationist here, but it would help a lot if you would stop thrashing around and skipping from thread to thread and blowing steam out your ears or whatever you're doing. Slow down, calm down, try to formulate a whole argument instead of throwing out one-liners. You're going to get eaten alive here if you keep on at your current pace.

The fact remains that if some creationists believe the Flood made ALL the strata, then to say so is NOT A STRAW MAN. it's simple logic. Stop fighting it.

I already agreed that MOST creationists don't believe this, though I think they are wrong.

How could layers be deposited faster than today?

There is absolutely nothing similar between the way sediments deposit today and the way a worldwide Flood would have deposited them. I don't know why you have such a question. The layers extend across huge geographical areas, for instance, whole continents in some cases. That is NOT happening today. A huge depth of water heavy with sediments and dead things is not the same thing as streams running into basins over long periods of time, or small bodies of standing water precipitating out sediments to such a paltry level they couldn't begin to approach the immensity of the strata.

Well, maybe a lot of things were just not the way they are now. What if there were fountains of the deep bringing up water every day in some area? That would mean a lot of ebb and flow in nearby areas, no? What if plants grew a lot faster? That would mean that a lot more layers could be produced, no? Etc etc.
The real question is why should we assume it was slow?

I really don't know where you are getting your notions from. Maybe you could mention a creationist or two who has inspired you? The "fountains of the deep" are mentioned in the Bible as occurring at the beginning of the Flood, an unusual event that launched the catastrophe and has no reason to ever exist again.

The Flood would have been the rising of all the oceans to cover all the land to a depth of 23 feet or so over the highest points. It would have been full of the sediments broken down and washed off the land in the forty days of the heaviest continuous rain imaginable, full of the sediments and the dead things both, from the ocean depths as well as the land, that would then have been deposited on the land as the water rose.

You say something about plants "growing?" Everything buried in the layers was killed in the Flood and then buried. Nothing was alive, no time was needed for anything to grow.

One bit of information I picked up from being at EvC is something called Walther's Law, which shows how sediments get deposited on land in a particular order as the sea rises. The usual sediments we find in the strata: sand that becomes sandstone, carbonate that becomes limestone, mud, clay and so on. Well, the Flood would have been one humongous rising of the sea over half a year, laden with sediments stirred up from the ocean floor by the fountains of the deep as well as washed off the land.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 23 by starlite, posted 04-04-2016 2:17 AM starlite has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 38 by starlite, posted 04-04-2016 1:37 PM Faith has responded

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 308 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 43 of 206 (781387)
04-04-2016 1:43 PM
Reply to: Message 38 by starlite
04-04-2016 1:37 PM


Re: different causes for different layers?
...

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 38 by starlite, posted 04-04-2016 1:37 PM starlite has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 46 by starlite, posted 04-04-2016 1:53 PM Faith has responded

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 308 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 47 of 206 (781399)
04-04-2016 1:57 PM
Reply to: Message 46 by starlite
04-04-2016 1:53 PM


Re: different causes for different layers?
I haven't yet run across creationists who DON'T impute the strata to the Flood, the only difference between them and me being that most of them don't impute ALL the strata to the Flood. I have no idea where you get your opinion about the Flood but you don't get it from any of the known creationists.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 46 by starlite, posted 04-04-2016 1:53 PM starlite has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 49 by starlite, posted 04-04-2016 2:06 PM Faith has not yet responded

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 308 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 89 of 206 (781546)
04-05-2016 8:07 AM
Reply to: Message 86 by dwise1
04-05-2016 2:51 AM


Re: different causes for different layers?
dwise to starlite writes:

i don't know who you are nor any of your history, but I would tend to agree with someone else's assessment that you are 14 years old. I think that you have recently learned or at least been told of a lot of creationist claims which has gotten you fired up to venture forth on-line to go toe-to-toe with your enemy.

That would explain a lot. I hope it's the right explanation. Thanks.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 86 by dwise1, posted 04-05-2016 2:51 AM dwise1 has not yet responded

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 308 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 95 of 206 (781584)
04-05-2016 6:49 PM
Reply to: Message 92 by jar
04-05-2016 11:20 AM


Re: Events seen round the world --- change leaves evidence
There was ONE Biblical worldwide Flood and there is plenty of evidence for it in the strata themselves that span whole continents that are laden with dead things in such a way as to show they were buried catastrophically. Fantastically good evidence.

Walther's Law gives us the method for the laying down of the strata in disparate sediments: sand that became sandstone, carbonates that became limestone, clay that became shale, mud to mudstone and so on, which are laid down one after another and one on top of the other as sea level rises, which is of course what would have happened in the flood. Walther's Law gives us the explanation for how sediments got sorted separately. Millions of years per sediment is a ridiculous notion.

And of course the fact that there are dead things galore buried in those sediments fits very nicely the Flood's purpose of wiping out all living things. Since sediments sort, apparently contents do too.

And all that evidence is still there. It hasn't gone away.

As I recall I've many times laid out a complete scenario for the Flood and even Percy once said it suffices as a model, though I'm unable to find where he said it, so your constant refrain that I haven't is false.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 92 by jar, posted 04-05-2016 11:20 AM jar has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 96 by Dr Adequate, posted 04-05-2016 8:03 PM Faith has responded
 Message 105 by edge, posted 04-05-2016 8:52 PM Faith has responded

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 308 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 98 of 206 (781592)
04-05-2016 8:27 PM
Reply to: Message 96 by Dr Adequate
04-05-2016 8:03 PM


Re: Events seen round the world --- change leaves evidence
No.

Yes. Yeah they're a jumbled tumbled mess Dr A. The dinosaurs are particularly a jumbled mess, as you can see for instance at that monument where a wall of fossils is exposed through a glass wall. They obviously didn't die normal deaths. And Steve Austin's study of the nautiloids in the redwall limestone in the Grand Canyon area certainly proves they were washed there to be buried and didn't die normal deaths.

How many times would this have happened in the flood?

The Flood rose steadily, continuing to deposit its sediments with their corpses. How many times? Once, a steady rising over about five months. One rising up, one retreat down.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 96 by Dr Adequate, posted 04-05-2016 8:03 PM Dr Adequate has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 101 by Admin, posted 04-05-2016 8:43 PM Faith has not yet responded
 Message 103 by Dr Adequate, posted 04-05-2016 8:45 PM Faith has responded

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 308 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 100 of 206 (781594)
04-05-2016 8:35 PM
Reply to: Message 99 by Percy
04-05-2016 8:33 PM


Re: One Post as Percy
I thought you said you were replying as Percy this one time, NOT moderating. I'd like to comment on your post.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 99 by Percy, posted 04-05-2016 8:33 PM Percy has acknowledged this reply

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 308 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 102 of 206 (781596)
04-05-2016 8:44 PM
Reply to: Message 99 by Percy
04-05-2016 8:33 PM


Re: One Post as Percy
OK I'll take your acknowledgment as permission to reply.

All I was interested in was jar's constant refrain that I've never supplied a model. Since you agree that I have done so I'd really appreciate it if you'd leave it at that so jar can digest the fact once and for all, and leave out your opinion as to its testability. I have opinions on your points too that wouldn't make you particularly happy. Thanks for your corroboration of the main point.

I certainly understand Walther's Law sufficiently to understand that it is THE way sediments get so clearly sorted into their own type on the scale of the Flood and by the mechanism of the Flood, the rising of the sea water. There is no other reasonable explanation for how the sediments were laid down than this Walther's Law and I am very grateful for those who posted that information.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 99 by Percy, posted 04-05-2016 8:33 PM Percy has acknowledged this reply

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 308 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 104 of 206 (781598)
04-05-2016 8:52 PM
Reply to: Message 103 by Dr Adequate
04-05-2016 8:45 PM


Re: Events seen round the world --- change leaves evidence
The nautiloids were suffocated by the sediments in the water.

Austin showed that the nautiloids are represented by individuals of all ages all mixed together, which wouldn't happen with normal deaths.

You need to provide the evidence of your scavenger assertion and your multiple transgressions-regressions assertion.

ABE: My guess is that the rising and falling of the tides would account for the latter IF the evidence is good, though it is probably just the usual reading-into-the-facts anyway, and very likely the creatures buried with evidence of scavenger damage were already in that condition when the Flood overtook them.

Just a war of interpretations you see.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 103 by Dr Adequate, posted 04-05-2016 8:45 PM Dr Adequate has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 114 by Dr Adequate, posted 04-05-2016 10:33 PM Faith has responded

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 308 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 106 of 206 (781601)
04-05-2016 9:06 PM
Reply to: Message 105 by edge
04-05-2016 8:52 PM


Re: Events seen round the world --- change leaves evidence
Actually not, particularly since we don't see any evidence for more recent lifeforms in older rocks. If there were one huge flood, the fossils would be all mixed up, lions next to trilobites. We don't see that.

But your whole notion of "older rocks" is just the OE theory. If the rocks aren't older then which lifeforms are found in them has nothing to do with the age of the rocks.

And this notion that the fossils would all be jumbled up is again just interpretation for which you have no specific evidence, it's just your own head trip. Since Walther's Law sorts sediments it apparently also sorted the dead creatures that were deposited with them. According to what principle I have no idea but obviously sorting occurred.

This entire discussion is of course always just one interpretation against another and yours are usually no better than the Flood interpretations. I think I've given killer evidence for the Flood many times but you'll never see it because of your OE tinted glasses.

One sediment per millions of years is ridiculous on the face of it. A slab of rock of one kind of sediment that spans a whole continent and even the entire world was simply not built up over millions of years, as if the surface of the earth were EVER composed of one sediment. Golly gee just look at the surface of the earth NOW and realize that those strata simply do NOT represent the surface of this planet in any time period whatever let alone for millions of years.

Problem is that we see it repeated over and over in the geological record, always recording a new set of fossil evidence. And we never see evidence that the entire planet was inundated.

You do not "see" this at all, you interpret this into the facts that are subject to other more reasonable interpretations.

The evidence I've given is sufficient.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 105 by edge, posted 04-05-2016 8:52 PM edge has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 107 by jar, posted 04-05-2016 9:12 PM Faith has responded
 Message 112 by edge, posted 04-05-2016 10:22 PM Faith has responded

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 308 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 108 of 206 (781604)
04-05-2016 9:16 PM
Reply to: Message 107 by jar
04-05-2016 9:12 PM


Re: Events seen round the world --- change leaves evidence
OF course I don't know how the fossils were sorted and it's ridiciulous to expect that of a Floodist. The model doesn't have to account for how the creatures were sorted since one wouldn't expect a Flood to have a sorting method.

Percy agrees I've provided a model, and in fact I've provided a model many many times in the past.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 107 by jar, posted 04-05-2016 9:12 PM jar has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 109 by jar, posted 04-05-2016 9:27 PM Faith has responded
 Message 110 by Coyote, posted 04-05-2016 9:49 PM Faith has responded
 Message 113 by edge, posted 04-05-2016 10:27 PM Faith has responded
 Message 117 by PaulK, posted 04-06-2016 12:48 AM Faith has not yet responded

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 308 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 115 of 206 (781615)
04-05-2016 10:38 PM
Reply to: Message 110 by Coyote
04-05-2016 9:49 PM


Re: Events seen round the world --- change leaves evidence
Jar keeps saying I don't have a model. The fact is I do, and that's all I'm required to answer at this point.

But when you say it has to be tested against reality, I will for the umpteen jillionth time say that what you regard as reality is really just OE/evolutionist interpretation of reality, not reality itself. I say the strata and their fossil contents are excellent evidence for a worldwide Flood and they are, just on the face of it they are, and the idea that a miles-deep stack of straight flat slabs of rock of different kinds of sediments could possibly represent the surface of this earth at different time periods is nutty, Coyote, just nutty. The only way anyone could hold onto that idea is by just not thinking about it, keeping their focus on the details and missing the big picture.

Why should there be time periods at all, let alone time periods marked by a particular kind of sediment with a particular kind of fossil contents? That alone makes no sense. You are NOT going to get anything like that out of the era WE live in. Look at the current surface of the earth. It is NOT going to flatten down to a slab of some particular kind of sediment that spans the world EVER. And no other "time period" ever did so either. The idea is nutty nutty nutty.

Just because years of piling on assumption after assumption after interpretation after interpretation seems to "prove" YOUR model by sheer accumulation of same doesn't make it so.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 110 by Coyote, posted 04-05-2016 9:49 PM Coyote has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 156 by Dr Adequate, posted 04-06-2016 11:51 AM Faith has responded
 Message 175 by Tanypteryx, posted 04-06-2016 7:04 PM Faith has responded

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2021