Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
3 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:   The Geological Timescale is Fiction whose only reality is stacks of rock
edge
Member (Idle past 1706 days)
Posts: 4696
From: Colorado, USA
Joined: 01-09-2002


(1)
Message 34 of 1257 (787916)
07-23-2016 4:32 PM
Reply to: Message 12 by Faith
07-23-2016 2:38 AM


Re: Is the cartoon really wrong?
For those who say the cartoon is wrong, I would quote edge from the other thread, in Message 501 where he is agreeing that landscapes in the various time periods are created and then eroded away to flatness, when sediments can be deposited on the flat surface:
Yes, and then deposition continued. I would hardly consider that to be supporting your argument, since you deny that erosion occurred until after the fludde.
Is the cartoon meant to illustrate the entire world? No, it's meant to illustrate the surface of the layer that represents the time period in question (although what would have existed apart from those surfaces is also something to think about).
A surface of a layer cannot represent an entire time period.
From what he has said above it seems to me the cartoon is right on: everything has been eroded away and there is nothing but the flat expanse of sediment, which would be the case at the end of the time period.
But you said there was no erosion in the geological record.
So although everyone is calling this a misrepresentation, and edge himself called it a straw man, the worst he'd ever seen here, I think his own description of events says otherwise.
I'm not sure how to make it any simpler.
There is evidence of erosion in the geological record and buried landscapes are common.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 12 by Faith, posted 07-23-2016 2:38 AM Faith has not replied

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


Message 35 of 1257 (787917)
07-23-2016 4:36 PM
Reply to: Message 20 by Faith
07-23-2016 9:40 AM


Re: Second cartoon from OP removed
I'm focused on the STRATA, jar, those flat expanses of rock. The landscapes and surface conditions you are hallucinating do not exist on those flat expanses.
Please name one 'flat expanse of rock".
For every one you name, I can name an irregular deposit of terrestrial origin.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 20 by Faith, posted 07-23-2016 9:40 AM Faith has not replied

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


Message 36 of 1257 (787918)
07-23-2016 4:40 PM
Reply to: Message 33 by Faith
07-23-2016 4:12 PM


Re: Just a brief reply
Not at all evidence of a "genuine landscape that existed at the time" -- could very well be just the surface of the most recent deposit of sediment left by the Flood ...
Yes, and the Shinumo Sea was filled by the Tapeats Sandstone and the the Bright Angel Shale.
Oh, wait ... That's not post-fludde.
So, how's that happen?
... that would soon be followed by another, and the creature is probably running from it. Nevertheless there are probably things that can be learned about the creature from its tracks.
Why would a sea creature run from a flood?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 33 by Faith, posted 07-23-2016 4:12 PM Faith has not replied

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


Message 37 of 1257 (787919)
07-23-2016 4:43 PM
Reply to: Message 32 by Faith
07-23-2016 4:06 PM


Re: Looking around today
You may well be right that all those parts of your environment would turn to rock eventually given enough time. But turn to STRATA?
What do you mean by 'turn to strata'?
That's one thing that bothers me about this "depositional environment" idea. As if we're to see an actual river IN the rock. But the rock is just the rock. If there are some contents normally found in rivers or deltas or wherever, nevertheless the river or delta itself are not there.
Sure it is. What do you think it is composed of? The lithified sediments of a delta.
And there is no reason I know of to expect that your local environments to end up in strata even if they eventually get buried or turn into rock.
Perhaps you should give us your definition of strata. There's something very odd going on here.
I think I gave you a definition earlier. Did you read it?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 32 by Faith, posted 07-23-2016 4:06 PM Faith has not replied

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


(1)
Message 38 of 1257 (787920)
07-23-2016 4:51 PM


I thought I might try this image to help clarify some visualization that is simply not occurring here.
This image shows terrestrial sandstone (an eolian deposit) with a flat surface cutting through it.
That surface is an erosional feature.
It quite literally cuts off the inclined bedding beneath it.
This would be called truncated cross-bedding. It is a relative dating feature showing deposition, erosion and continued deposition in that order. In this case, I'm pretty sure that the erosion was by wind.

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


(1)
Message 40 of 1257 (787922)
07-23-2016 4:58 PM
Reply to: Message 24 by Faith
07-23-2016 11:30 AM


In the "time periods" associated with the strata, all that happened is that creatures died, they could not have lived because there was no landscape for them to live in, because the whole idea of time periods and landscapes for each is a fiction. That is the argument I hope to make clear.
Well, that's kind of weird since we find their footprints in the geological record at a time when the fludde covered the earth.
And I'm not going to even get into nests, eggs and coprolites.
I have asked this about 3 times now: how did footprints get transported into the upper fludde sediments of the Mesozoic? Actually, I guess it was any footprints to any Phanerozoic system.
Edited by edge, : No reason given.
Edited by edge, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 24 by Faith, posted 07-23-2016 11:30 AM Faith has not replied

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


Message 135 of 1257 (788071)
07-25-2016 2:20 PM
Reply to: Message 133 by Faith
07-25-2016 1:05 PM


Re: Cretaceous dinosaur fossils in area that was underwater for the whole time period
In the Cretaceous period as shown on the paleogeographic map of that period (in the textbook referred to), the Inland Seaway covered the middle section of the continent from the edge of the mountains of Nevada to the Great Lakes. This was part of the Zuni sequence that started in the late Jurassic and lasted for the entire Cretaceous period, some 79 million years. There is evidence of fluctuating shorelines of the seaway but the water was there for the entire Cretaceous period.
There are lots of fossil dinosaurs from the Cretaceous period. A major fossil formation is the Dakota which is one of the layers in the Grand Staircase diagram that has been posted a few times here. The Wikipedia article on this formation starts out saying it is found east of the Inland Seaway which would suggest there wasn't the problem I've been describing of there being no land area for the dinosaurs to live on because of the sea transgressions.
But the Dakota does not exist merely east of the seaway, it is also found in Utah (the Grand Staircase) and Colorado, which are certainly located in the area that was covered by the seaway. It is also found in Kansas, Nebraska, Iowa, Minnesota, and Wisconsin, most of which are at least partly in the same area that was covered by the seaway.(bold added)
Faith, how could shorelines fluctuate if there was no landscape that included shorelines?
What you are leaving out of the Wiki article is that the Dakota is a basal sand to the Cretaceous transgression. It consists of what we call a transgressive sandstone, deposited along beaches, where streams dropped their sediment load as they reached base level at the sea. With rising sea level the sand deposits migrated eastward across the continent toward its source in the mid-continent area. This is Walther's Law in action.
It consists of sandy, shallow-marine deposits with intermittent mud flat sediments, and occasional stream deposits.[3][4]
This deposition marked a reversal from millions of years of erosion. This reversal was due to rising of the mouth of the rivers, called a rise in base level, as the Cretaceous Seaway formed. This rise lowers the gradient of the rivers causing them to deposit sediment because their velocity can no longer sustain high volumes of sediment.[6](bold added)(Dakota Formation - Wikipedia)
So how do streams and shorelines and mudflats, along with the erosion of a source region, support your contention that there are no landscapes within the geological record?
I suggest that this does show the contradiction I was talking about earlier, between the claim on the one hand that the dinosaur fossils in this formation lived on the spot where they were eventually buried, but on the other hand, for that entire time period most of that land that became the Dakota formation was under water, so they could not have lived there.
Actually, you say that the seaway was there, not the Dakota Sandstone. There is a difference. For most of the existence of the seaway, it was depositing mudstone and shale along with other formations, as this cross-section shows:
The Dakota is shown as a relatively minor formation (in thickness, at least) at the base of the seaway sediments.
Certainly the Mancos Shale and the Niobrara Limestone have no dinosaur fossils. Those are the deeper marine sediments, while the Dakota Sandstone was essentially a beach deposit.
We know they died there because their fossils are in the strata of the formation found in those various states located in the area of the inland seaway.
Actually, the dinosaur fossils are found on the margins of the seaway. Fossils in the Mancos look more like this:
In other words, true marine fossils...
Seems to me this comes down to evidence that the dinosaurs did not live in that time period; they only died in that time period, and died by drowning.
Actually, they did live on the land masses surrounding the seaway.
And, by the way, if you believe there was a seaway at that time, doesn't that mean that there was a landscape? I mean, you mentioned the 'mountains of Nevada'. Please explain.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 133 by Faith, posted 07-25-2016 1:05 PM Faith has not replied

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


Message 137 of 1257 (788074)
07-25-2016 2:37 PM
Reply to: Message 136 by jar
07-25-2016 2:22 PM


Re: Cretaceous dinosaur fossils in area that was underwater for the whole time period
Are you using some Creationist textbook?
The Cretaceous period last over 100 million years and guess what? Once again the reality shows that you are simply wrong.
a map of the early Cretaceous from about 140 million years ago.
a map of the early Cretaceous from about 130 million years ago.
and about 115 million years ago
and about 100 million years ago.
and around 85 million years ago
as it was around 75 million years ago
and around the last we see of the dinosaurs
As you can see there were millions of years during the Cretaceous when there was land above water.
Once again reality says you are simply wrong.
This is a very good point worth repeating as a quote.
It seems that Faith didn't confine her cherry-picking of data well enough this time. Virtually everything about the Cretaceous Seaway and the Dakota Sandstone proclaims the presence of land masses and, hence, landscapes and erosion.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 136 by jar, posted 07-25-2016 2:22 PM jar has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 138 by Faith, posted 07-25-2016 3:51 PM edge has not replied

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


Message 145 of 1257 (788088)
07-25-2016 10:29 PM
Reply to: Message 144 by Faith
07-25-2016 10:12 PM


Re: Cretaceous dinosaur fossils in area that was underwater for the whole time period
I don't know exactly when Dinosaur Ridge at Golden, Colorado was deposited so that's a problem, but it appears to have been within the seaway for the whole 34 million years of the seaway's existence so it's a candidate for possibly having occurred in marine sediments. It has both Jurassic and Cretaceous dinosaur fossils.
Well, yes the Morrison Formation is Jurassic in age and is terrestrial. The Dakota directly overlies the Morrison and is peppered with dinosaur footprints.
So, how do you propose that footprints actually made it into the Dakota Sandstone?
I have an easy answer: It was a beach sand deposit with streams running across it and bringing sand down to the shoreline.
How about you?
quote:
Golden is a few miles west of Denver and appears to be within the seaway through all its shoreline changes on this map:
Yes, these rocks were right up against the Sevier orogenic belt so the shoreline, while rising, did not traverse across several states. Sea level just rose to cover a mountainous terrain, you know, a landscape. Check out my previously presented cross section.
But there are tracks. So, how did they get there under your scenario of offshore marine sediments?
This is only a few miles west of me.
(Page not found - Dinosaur Ridge)
And do you remember Walther's Law? Maybe you should review it again.
Edited by edge, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 144 by Faith, posted 07-25-2016 10:12 PM Faith has not replied

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


Message 156 of 1257 (788109)
07-26-2016 11:14 AM
Reply to: Message 152 by Faith
07-26-2016 6:47 AM


Re: Cretaceous dinosaur fossils in area that was underwater for the whole time period
I know the truth and the truth includes the revelation of the Flood.
Not really. You know what you perceive to be the truth, based on your idiosyncratic interpretation of scripture.
You really have nothing to back it up.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 152 by Faith, posted 07-26-2016 6:47 AM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 159 by Faith, posted 07-26-2016 11:21 AM edge has replied

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


Message 161 of 1257 (788114)
07-26-2016 11:22 AM
Reply to: Message 140 by Faith
07-25-2016 4:01 PM


Re: Cretaceous dinosaur fossils in area that was underwater for the whole time period
On the map in the textbook the seaway covers the whole area from the mountains on the west to the Great Lakes.
Well, that would be the maximum extent. The point is that it expanded in size from no seaway at all to the extent that you show.
This is a direct application of Walther's Law, which you evidently embraced last year. My guess is that you really didn't understand how extensive marine strata form.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 140 by Faith, posted 07-25-2016 4:01 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 163 by Faith, posted 07-26-2016 11:26 AM edge has replied

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


(1)
Message 164 of 1257 (788117)
07-26-2016 11:26 AM
Reply to: Message 159 by Faith
07-26-2016 11:21 AM


Re: Cretaceous dinosaur fossils in area that was underwater for the whole time period
My interpretation of scripture is the traditional orthodox interpretation, not at all idiosyncratic.
Then you should explain to us why so many Christians, along with numerous other sects, disagree with you.
The interpretations that find millions of years in scripture, and believe in evolution, those are idiosyncratic, nothing but capitulations to worldly dogmas.
Or they are capitulation to reality. You know: God's works.
As I said to coyote we can go on exchanging dogmas. How about we don't?
What do you think my dogma is?
You know what you perceive to be the truth, based on the brainwashing you've received from your education.
I see. So, people who study the earth are brainwashed, but YECs are not.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 159 by Faith, posted 07-26-2016 11:21 AM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 176 by Faith, posted 07-26-2016 12:36 PM edge has replied

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


Message 166 of 1257 (788119)
07-26-2016 11:29 AM
Reply to: Message 163 by Faith
07-26-2016 11:26 AM


Re: Cretaceous dinosaur fossils in area that was underwater for the whole time period
I understand how the seaway expanded and contracted. You are right that I don't see the connection with Walther's Law though, so perhaps you would perform a self-sacrificing kindness and explain it to me?
Here is a nice lady who will explain it to you. I would say that she is quite knowledgeable.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZSsULiPouTo
Note how she shows topography and a landscape above the sea level.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 163 by Faith, posted 07-26-2016 11:26 AM Faith has not replied

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


Message 175 of 1257 (788134)
07-26-2016 12:22 PM
Reply to: Message 174 by Faith
07-26-2016 12:14 PM


Re: and multiple shore lines
Any shore lines of worldwide extent, or continent-covering extent for that matter, have to be from the Flood.
Again, please review Walther's Law.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 174 by Faith, posted 07-26-2016 12:14 PM Faith has not replied

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


(1)
Message 177 of 1257 (788137)
07-26-2016 1:01 PM
Reply to: Message 176 by Faith
07-26-2016 12:36 PM


Re: Cretaceous dinosaur fossils in area that was underwater for the whole time period
Because you mostly get the oddballs in a debate like this, who want to "prove" that you can abuse scripture and still be a Christian. The orthodox believers who come here don't stay very long. I'm stu/pid enough to keep at it for some reason. Well, I really do believe creationists have proved OE science to be wrong, it's just a matter of getting the right evidence presented.
So, your belief is proven even though you don't have the right evidence. That's an interesting take on it.
(I am coming to believe, however, that God doesn't want us to win this argument. He wants us to know the truth through faith in Him, not through scientific evidence or any worldly means.)
That's a convenient argument. You are right because God wants you to lose the argument. That's so .... Christian of a notion.
Are you being punished?
If you claim to understand how God works you need to know a lot more. Nothing can trump God's word, and nothing in God's word contradicts any actual truth about God's world either. It can't contradict science. That's one way I know the science about these things is wrong. However, I also think it's pretty obvious that it's wrong just looking at the actual facts. Even if I can't prove the contradiction between the strata and their clues and the reality, I know the reality was the Flood so all those clues are misleading you. One way of trying to say this is to try to get the reality across that the only actual landscape in any "time period" is a slab of rock, on which there could not possibly ever have been any other kind of landscape. It's so obvious to me it's constantly a puzzle how you all are so impervious to it.
But you keep showing us evidence for landscapes in the geological past. And you accuse us of being contradictory?
Whatever standard Geology teaches
How about standard astronomy?
It's really amazing that so many scientists can be so wrong and yet you, with no education at all, have found them in error.
My hat is off to you.
Not "people who study the earth" but people who believe all the stuff Geology teaches, yes.
So, learning about the earth has become irrelevant, yes? It's more about beliefs than learning.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 176 by Faith, posted 07-26-2016 12:36 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