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.
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 that's just one line of evidence. There are many more which you have shown a preference to deny.
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.
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.
Walther's Law gives us the explanation for how sediments got sorted separately. Millions of years per sediment is a ridiculous notion.
Why is that?
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.
So, if this happened all at once why do we not see mammals buried with trilobites?
And all that evidence is still there. It hasn't gone away.
Except for the evidence that you choose to ignore...
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.
Yes, a model that has been shown to be fallacious.
In any case, if you are going to impose on me your own interpretation of the Bible which I absolutely reject, ...
You want to do that yourself, eh?
... perhaps discussion is simply impossible and I should opt out of this thread.
Well, a discussion implies that you would consider what your counterpart is saying. Flat rejection does kind of kill conversation.
Knowing how bizarre and singular your view of the Bible is, is the reason I didn't join this thread when it was originally posted, and hesitated this time too. What's the point? You have an invented Bible and and invented Christianity and I adhere to the real one.
I believe what Jar is trying to say is that, not only is the YEC interpretation incorrect, but the Bible itself is contradictory.
Also, reducing the Flood to ONE LAYER of the strata is beyond absurd.
I don't believe that anyone intends do so so. Anyone with a modicum of geological experience knows that rock layers come in (recognizable) packages.
The problem here is that there is no discernible package that looks like a rising and lowering global flood. On the other hand, we do see regional and even continental flooding occurring many times in the geological record.
Compounding your error is the fact that at virtually no point in the geological record can we ascertain a period when there was no land mass that was being eroded. Evidence to that effect is the presence of beach sands, swamps, lakes and a host of other land-type deposits. After all if there is no beach, how do you get beach sands?
Now, if we can see numerous large marine encroachments (look up 'cyclothems') on land during say the Devonian of Pennsylvania, why can we not see something that is as major as the Biblical flood?
Re: Events seen round the world --- change leaves evidence
You have a false idea of the Flood. It's no wonder if there is no evidence for YOUR idea of the Flood since it couldn't have happened. Your expectations of what would constitute evidence are ridiculous.
Please give us some evidence that is diagnostic of a biblical flood and not a regional or local flood. In other words, how do you know that a flood is global? Have you traced the strata around the world?
The actual evidence has been given. Worldwide strata indicating worldwide water deposition according to Walther's Law, worldwide fossils indicating worldwide death by water.
First of all Walther's Law applies to all rising and lower of sea level.
Secondly, what do you mean by 'death by water'? Most of the fossils in the fossil record are marine.
If it's not good enough for you that's not surprising since you have unreasonable expectations and the usual assumptions of those hostile to the idea of the ONE Biblical Flood..
Actually, the hostility is directed a the militant YECs rather than their flood per se. Rejection does not mean hostility.
The actual evidence has been given.
As I've said many times the evidence you present is also evidence for mainstream geology. What you need is a way to tell them apart. We have given you some ideas here, but you seem to ignore those possibilities.
Just to clarify, I don't reject the fact that these things are occurring, I reject the claim that they in any way represent how the Geologic column was built.
Well then it's kind of weird that the deposits we see forming in the present look exactly like those of the geological record.
I will admit that the continental crust of the Archean exposed in shield areas looks very different from what we see elsewhere, but that really was a looooong time ago. In fact, that's another thing the YEC simply cannot explain.
Oh well, this thread got even worse today. Mere assertions of establishment science are treated as evidence, repeated statements are accepted though they had already been answered many times.
If we focused on the data, things might go a little bit better. Right now, I see that problem is that the data is ignored while toxic accusations such as 'brainwashing' overwhelm and destroy the conversation.