|
Author
|
Topic: Evidence of the flood
|
Taq
Member Posts: 10038 Joined: 03-06-2009 Member Rating: 5.3
|
|
Message 25 of 899 (818554)
08-30-2017 10:39 AM
|
Reply to: Message 11 by Faith
08-29-2017 11:28 PM
|
|
Faith writes: God inspired the written Word because we haven't the ability-- or the willingness --to understand the meaning of His Creation, which points to Him. The Bible was written by men. Unless you think you are God, your words are also the words of a human.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 11 by Faith, posted 08-29-2017 11:28 PM | | Faith has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 30 by Faith, posted 08-30-2017 6:14 PM | | Taq has not replied |
|
Taq
Member Posts: 10038 Joined: 03-06-2009 Member Rating: 5.3
|
|
|
Message 167 of 899 (819125)
09-06-2017 3:26 PM
|
Reply to: Message 162 by Faith
09-06-2017 2:17 AM
|
|
Re: Strata n Fossils
Faith writes: The antediluvian world was obviously teeming with life beyond our ability to imagine, and the supposed fossil record is some kind of illusion, not really even as consistent as you believe, but the evidence favors the Flood in any case so obviously it's wrong. "It's really amazing how anything anybody says can, and will, be obliterated by the endless destroying machine of EvC. Truth isn't the concern really, just demolishing the opposition, that's all, . . ."--Faith Like I said before, you perfectly describe your own posts.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 162 by Faith, posted 09-06-2017 2:17 AM | | Faith has not replied |
|
Taq
Member Posts: 10038 Joined: 03-06-2009 Member Rating: 5.3
|
|
|
Message 214 of 899 (819276)
09-08-2017 4:58 PM
|
Reply to: Message 211 by Faith
09-08-2017 3:36 PM
|
|
Re: evidence?
Faith writes: Even the Bible gives us evidence RR, not evidence of the geology of the Flood, but evidence of God Himself and His character. The stories written in the Bible by men are only evidence of what their religious beliefs were.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 211 by Faith, posted 09-08-2017 3:36 PM | | Faith has not replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 482 by riVeRraT, posted 09-13-2017 9:25 PM | | Taq has not replied |
|
Taq
Member Posts: 10038 Joined: 03-06-2009 Member Rating: 5.3
|
|
|
Message 319 of 899 (819470)
09-11-2017 1:17 PM
|
Reply to: Message 310 by Faith
09-11-2017 10:48 AM
|
|
Re: There are a large percentage of people that believe this
Faith writes: There's plenty of evidence of the global Flood, Phat, as I keep saying: the strata and the abundance of fossils cannot reasonably be explained by anything else. How does a flood sort igneous rocks and fossils so that we get a correlation between the ratios of isotopes in rocks and the fossils found below them? For example, no dinosaur fossil is found above igneous rocks that have a 40K/40Ar ratio of 27.47 and a 238U/207Pb ratio of 15.22. How does your model explain this? Edited by Taq, : No reason given.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 310 by Faith, posted 09-11-2017 10:48 AM | | Faith has not replied |
|
Taq
Member Posts: 10038 Joined: 03-06-2009 Member Rating: 5.3
|
|
|
Message 357 of 899 (819527)
09-12-2017 10:34 AM
|
Reply to: Message 336 by Faith
09-11-2017 10:50 PM
|
|
Re: Flood deposition
Faith writes: I've given plenty of evidence and argument even on this very thread, but that doesn't count of course because Evo Decrees it's wrong. What evidence? All you have presented thus far are bare assertions.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 336 by Faith, posted 09-11-2017 10:50 PM | | Faith has not replied |
|
Taq
Member Posts: 10038 Joined: 03-06-2009 Member Rating: 5.3
|
|
|
Message 358 of 899 (819528)
09-12-2017 10:38 AM
|
Reply to: Message 339 by Faith
09-12-2017 2:46 AM
|
|
Re: Flood deposition
Faith writes: It's a matter of honest seeing, as I said But that isn't going to happen is it? The question is, can you honestly see? In igneous rocks found above dinosaur fossils we find that the 40K/40Ar ratio is no more than 27.47 and the 238U/207Pb ratio in zircons is no more than 15.22. How does your model explain this? How does your flood sort rocks and fossils so that we always get this relationship between the isotope ratios in rocks and the fossils we find below them? Until you answer this question, you can't claim that you are looking at things honestly. You have to explain the correlation we see between ratios of isotopes in rocks and the species of fossils we see associated with them.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 339 by Faith, posted 09-12-2017 2:46 AM | | Faith has not replied |
|
Taq
Member Posts: 10038 Joined: 03-06-2009 Member Rating: 5.3
|
|
|
Message 521 of 899 (819756)
09-14-2017 3:42 PM
|
Reply to: Message 519 by Faith
09-14-2017 3:37 PM
|
|
Re: A charming fat fish proves radiometic dating is false cuz the varves aren't annual
Faith writes: I have arguments that work, I don't need another. They don't work, you need another.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 519 by Faith, posted 09-14-2017 3:37 PM | | Faith has not replied |
|
Taq
Member Posts: 10038 Joined: 03-06-2009 Member Rating: 5.3
(1)
| |
| |
| |
|
|
Message 522 of 899 (819757)
09-14-2017 3:44 PM
|
Reply to: Message 520 by Faith
09-14-2017 3:41 PM
|
|
Re: A charming fat fish proves radiometic dating is false cuz the varves aren't annual
Faith writes: Nothing, they're just sediments being deposited here and there, not part of anything. They just disappear? Seriously? It seems pretty obvious that they are deposited right on top of the existing geologic column and become part of that geologic column. If you can't even admit this obvious and simple fact, then you have no leg to stand on.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 520 by Faith, posted 09-14-2017 3:41 PM | | Faith has replied |
|
Taq
Member Posts: 10038 Joined: 03-06-2009 Member Rating: 5.3
|
|
|
Message 528 of 899 (819763)
09-14-2017 4:10 PM
|
Reply to: Message 527 by Faith
09-14-2017 4:07 PM
|
|
Re: A charming fat fish proves radiometic dating is false cuz the varves aren't annual
Faith writes: HEY! SHOW ME these supposed current varve deposits that I'm supposed to think are part of the Geo Column. I already did in other threads. You are wrong.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 527 by Faith, posted 09-14-2017 4:07 PM | | Faith has not replied |
|
Taq
Member Posts: 10038 Joined: 03-06-2009 Member Rating: 5.3
|
|
|
Message 529 of 899 (819764)
09-14-2017 4:11 PM
|
Reply to: Message 524 by Faith
09-14-2017 3:48 PM
|
|
Re: A charming fat fish proves radiometic dating is false cuz the varves aren't annual
Faith writes: The Geologic Column was formed by the Flood, the current deposits are not continuous with the deposits of that one-time event.
They are continuous. You are wrong.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 524 by Faith, posted 09-14-2017 3:48 PM | | Faith has not replied |
|
Taq
Member Posts: 10038 Joined: 03-06-2009 Member Rating: 5.3
|
|
|
Message 547 of 899 (819782)
09-14-2017 5:02 PM
|
Reply to: Message 546 by Faith
09-14-2017 5:00 PM
|
|
Re: A charming fat fish proves radiometic dating is false cuz the varves aren't annual
Faith writes: THE GEO TIME SCALE IS BASED ON THE GEO COLUMN. The time scale is based on the ratio of isotopes in the rocks.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 546 by Faith, posted 09-14-2017 5:00 PM | | Faith has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 550 by Faith, posted 09-14-2017 5:06 PM | | Taq has replied |
|
Taq
Member Posts: 10038 Joined: 03-06-2009 Member Rating: 5.3
|
|
|
Message 577 of 899 (819812)
09-14-2017 5:28 PM
|
Reply to: Message 550 by Faith
09-14-2017 5:06 PM
|
|
Re: A charming fat fish proves radiometic dating is false cuz the varves aren't annual
Faith writes: IN THE ROCKS OF THE GEO COLUMN. Do you think rocks are going to be in the sky?
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 550 by Faith, posted 09-14-2017 5:06 PM | | Faith has not replied |
|
Taq
Member Posts: 10038 Joined: 03-06-2009 Member Rating: 5.3
|
|
|
Message 578 of 899 (819813)
09-14-2017 5:29 PM
|
Reply to: Message 576 by Faith
09-14-2017 5:27 PM
|
|
Re: A charming fat fish proves radiometic dating is false cuz the varves aren't annual
Faith writes: THE STRATA WERE STILL WET WHEN DEPOSITED IN RAPID SEQUENCE BY THE FLOOD, AND WHEN THE SAG OCCURRED DUE TO THE LIGHTER SALT LAYER GRAVITY DREW THE SEDIMENTS TOWARD THE LOW PART OF THE SAG No they didn't. You are wrong.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 576 by Faith, posted 09-14-2017 5:27 PM | | Faith has not replied |
|
Taq
Member Posts: 10038 Joined: 03-06-2009 Member Rating: 5.3
|
|
|
Message 616 of 899 (819852)
09-14-2017 6:02 PM
|
Reply to: Message 611 by Faith
09-14-2017 5:55 PM
|
|
Re: A charming fat fish proves radiometic dating is false cuz the varves aren't annual
Faith writes: PROVE IT. SHOW A SINGLE EXAMPLE OF DEPOSITION ON TOP OF THE GEO GOLUMN THAT IS CONTINUOUS WITH IT. THE MISSISSIPPI DELTA LAYERS DON'T EVEN COVER THE GOLUMN THAT SAGS INTO THE GULF OF MEXICO
Then what column do they cover? Or do you think they float up into the sky?
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 611 by Faith, posted 09-14-2017 5:55 PM | | Faith has not replied |
|
Taq
Member Posts: 10038 Joined: 03-06-2009 Member Rating: 5.3
|
(1)
| |
| |
| |
|
|
Message 617 of 899 (819853)
09-14-2017 6:03 PM
|
Reply to: Message 615 by Faith
09-14-2017 5:57 PM
|
|
Re: A charming fat fish proves radiometic dating is false cuz the varves aren't annual
Faith writes: ON TOP OF IS NOT CONTINUOUS WITH Then what makes a layer continuous?
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 615 by Faith, posted 09-14-2017 5:57 PM | | Faith has not replied |
|
™ Version 4.2