|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Evidence of the flood | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1472 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
The only reasonable explanation for the strata and fossils is the worldwide Flood.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17827 Joined: Member Rating: 2.3 |
quote: Provided the criteria for "reasonable" is "Faith likes it". From a more rational perspective the Flood utterly fails to account for the strata and the fossils. That is why science has rejected Flood geology - it just doesn't work as an explanation.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1472 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
Nothing else could reasonably account for the strata at such a depth and enormous horizontal extent, nor for such an amazing abundance of fossilized dead things which require special conditions to form, all met by the Flood. The standard accepted explanation is hardly even plausible; it's really amazing how it ever got accepted. Sure, a seeming order, but everything else says it's bogus. Even the fact that we know microevolution occurs in very short periods of time is an argument against it, and even the fossil record shows that, with its trilobites and coelacanths that show tiny changes from sedimentaqry layer to sedimentary layer, those layers that absurdly mark "time periods" of millions of years on the standard theory. Millions of years is ridiculous. And see my other recent posts for more reasons it's ridiculous that I'm not spelling out with every post.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given. Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17827 Joined: Member Rating: 2.3 |
quote: The depth is so obviously much better explained by slow accumulation over long periods of time that it isn't even funny. The extent seems to be better explained by features like deserts (the Sahara being a modern example) or epeiric seas (not currently present but a good fit for the evidence - unlike the Flood)
quote: Because obviously you only get sandstorms during a Flood. (Yes, some fossils seem to have been buried by sandstorms). Again, the Flood fails to explain the abundance (you have to assume a ridiculous abundance of - for instance - crinoids) or other features of the fossil like the pervasive order.
quote: The fact that it obviously better explains the evidence you put forward for the Flood is a rather convincing reason.
quote: That something can happen in short periods of time does not mean that it always happens in short periods of time. And there are two major points that you are ignoring. First you have no good idea of the scale of changes involved in the fossil record, second you have failed for the time needed to spread out and become abundant. Your examples of fast microevolution (aside from other doubts) deal with small island populations that are still small island populations. Not something likely to show up in the fossil record.
quote: You mean like the idiotic nonsense you made up in Message 154? That's "BO-gus" Hardly a reason to believe you - just more evidence that you don't have a real case.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1472 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
the depth is easily explained by all the dirt that was stirred up by the forty days and nights of heavy worldwide rain, on land and in the oceans. That's a lot of dirt to get sorted into sediments and redeposited. That's another thing: the "time period" explanation really can't explain the different separated sediments in the Geo Column, a gigantic sandstone, a gigantic limestone etc etc.;....
The extent seems to be better explained by features like deserts Well some of the layers span an entire continent and even reach across the ocean to another continent. And it's hard to reconcile, say, a limestone slab with a desert. In any case, it's easy to explain a Flood that covered the entire world making layer after layer of different sediments and, really, nothing else can. Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17827 Joined: Member Rating: 2.3 |
quote: That's an opinion. But it should be obviously true that long term gradual accumulation can eventually overwhelm any any single event.
quote: By which you mean that it obviously CAN explain it and the Flood obviously can't. Different sediment from different sources because of different conditions at different times works. "The Flood sorted it" doesn't work.
quote: Misleading. Where the same strata are found on different continents it's because they were together when the strata were deposited.
quote: Nobody says that limestone is deposited in deserts. That's just silly, whether it's ignorance or dishonesty.
quote: If it's so easy go ahead and do it. I'll stick with the explanations that fit the evidence.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Pressie Member Posts: 2103 From: Pretoria, SA Joined: |
Faith writes: Really? Can you name one? Well some of the layers span an entire continent.... Edited by Pressie, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 422 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
Faith writes: In any case, it's easy to explain a Flood that covered the entire world making layer after layer of different sediments and, really, nothing else can. So you claim. Please explain how your flood deposits millions of recurring and repeating layers of fine silt covered by coarser silt. Present the model, method, process, mechanism, procedure Faith.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1433 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
The only reasonable explanation for the strata and fossils is the worldwide Flood. Except that it does not explain the fossils Except that it does not explain radioactive isotopes in the strata Except that it does not explain the tree rings Except that it does not explain the Lake Suigetsu fresh water varves Except that it does not explain the Cariaco Basin marine varves Except that it does not explain the radiometric dating of the 14C samples Except that it does not explain the Grand Canyon Except that it does not explain all the evidence of an old earth Etc Etc Etc
ad nauseum You never confront the evidence faith. You are incapable of being reasonable if you don't confront the evidence. Enjoyby our ability to understand Rebel☮American☆Zen☯Deist ... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ... to share. Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1433 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined:
|
the depth is easily explained by all the dirt that was stirred up by the forty days and nights of heavy worldwide rain, on land and in the oceans. That's a lot of dirt to get sorted into sediments and redeposited. ... And that doesn't explain the alternating layers of diatoms and clay silt in Lake Suigetsu ... and can't. And that doesn't explain the alternating layers of foramins and silt in the Cariaco Basin (salt water) ... and can't
... That's another thing: the "time period" explanation really can't explain the different separated sediments in the Geo Column, a gigantic sandstone, a gigantic limestone etc etc.;.... And that doesn't explain the sorting of radioactive isotopes by age and depth. If it was "stirred up" the would be evenly distributed throughout the sediment layers. And that doesn't explain uranium halos or any of the mountains of evidence for an old earth. It doesn't explain the Grand Canyon horseshoe bend formation or the different ages of speleothems in the canyon caves. It doesn't explain squat.
... . In any case, it's easy to explain a Flood that covered the entire world making layer after layer of different sediments and, really, nothing else can. Except the actual geological processes that we continue to observe going on today. Enjoyby our ability to understand Rebel☮American☆Zen☯Deist ... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ... to share. Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 22502 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 4.9
|
Faith writes: My participation on this thread has been cursory at best,... Your participation in most threads is cursory at best. Voluble, but cursory.
Strata and fossils. Works a lot better as evidence for the Flood than for your OE and evolution, LOTS better. But all you can do is say this, you can never show it. The reality is that strata and fossils as evidence for the flood fails so badly that it was abandoned a couple centuries ago.
Ridiculous really, the idea of time periods sandwiched between slabs of rock, physically impossible for it to happen that way... The strata of the geological record are the same in character as the strata being deposited today. What we see happening before our very eyes in the present is the same thing that happened in the past and formed those ancient strata. A large flood could not sort strata of different composition, particle size, fossil content, radiometric age, and containing tracks and burrows.
...which all managed somehow to get smushed down into the sediments, a bit of flora and scattered fauna and no other evidence that such a scenario ever actually existed on that spot... Now you're mentioning another discussion you abandoned in thread The TRVE history of the Flood.... Stile's last post on this topic was Message 1312. You replied in Message 1320, "I've lost all interest, sorry." And that wasn't the first time you abandoned this topic. You did so in The Geological Timescale is Fiction whose only reality is stacks of rock, replying to Stile's Message 1144, "I do intend to get back to this; just needed a break," and then you never got back to it. And that's just a couple examples. The truth is that you've abandoned defense of your various claims dozens and dozens of times. Later you just repeat them as if you've experienced complete amnesia about how poorly they fared previously, as if you can't remember a single explanation for why they're impossible. Here are your last few posts from the The TRVE history of the Flood... thread showing how you abandoned discussion there:
Faith in the TRVE history of the Flood... thread writes: Rather you pick the conjob of your own fallen intellect over the revelation of the God who made it all.... All I need is the Bible for the timing. God's word you know. I give other kinds of evidence where there is no Biblical information. ... The last dozen or so posts I've put up on this thread are all the evidence needed for the Flood and against the Geo Time Scale. Sorry, but you and your EvC army of evos are just blowing smoke. ... Ha ha. The case has been made. Sorry. ... It's been discussed to death over the last few years. You lost. ... Convincing the brainwashed isn't the right criterion. The case has been made logically though denied by the local gang of evos. Sorry. ... I've given all the evidence needed to prove the Flood. Sorry. ... I've made the case so there is no need to address all the other stuff. ... I've made my point, I proved it, that's all there is to say. Not a shred of substance in any of that, and you're continuing the "no substance" theme in this thread.
...not to mention the simple absurdity of expecting a time period to have any kind of neat physical demarcations at all, let alone a whole series of them over hundreds of millions of years. The geologists of 200 and 300 years ago were expecting evidence supporting the Biblical account, but they accepted the evidence as they found it and followed it where it led. Which was to an ancient Earth. --Percy
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 22502 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 4.9 |
riVeRraT writes: Percy writes: What you *do* try to do is be absurdly contrary and argumentative at every opportunity, which is actually a good strategy for those with no support for their position. Wait a sec, did you just call me a scientist? Are you accusing me of using the scientific method? There you go, putting words in my mouth. I never offered a hypotheses. I Well what do you know, contrary and argumentative with no support for your position. Again.
I just offered evidence. As I stated earlier, it was because I am tired of hearing the phrase "there is no evidence". A hawk seeking shelter is not evidence of a Biblical myth.
There is evidence, you just choose to ignore it based on other evidence. "Hey, hawk's in the car, it's raining, must be evidence that the Flood of the Bible was a real event." Good show!
You must believe in God by faith. If you must, you must.
In order for that statement to be true, you cannot use objective evidence to believe in God. That's my hypothesis, based on John 3:16 and many other verses. But you're interpreting objective evidence (hawk seeks shelter in car, something that was observed to have really happened) as evidence of the Flood, a Biblical myth supporting your belief in God.
More irrelevant nonsense. You're arguing that a hawk in a car is evidence for a Biblical myth. What does that have to do with the fact that the evidence found me? I wasn't looking for evidence, it just happened, and as I watched it I felt the Holy Spirit telling me this is the way God designed animals. Yep, sounds like you've got an open and shut case there - the evidence sought you out, then voices in your head told you God designed animals to seek out cars (which by the way don't resemble an ark) for shelter. --Percy
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 440 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
riVeRraT writes:
A disciple of Christ would be somebody who follows the teachings of Christ. You'd learn more by broadening your scope. Right now, your belief in Christ seems to be holding your learning back - e.g. you can't seem to learn that the Flood never happened.
Liek I prefer not to be called a Christian. Disciple is better, because I am always learning.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 440 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined:
|
riVeRraT writes:
Read the topic title. You said that it was evidence OF the flood. That is a hypothesis of sorts. But does your evidence support the flood story? Do animals seek shelter in non-flood situations? Yes. So your hypothesis fails.
I never offered a hypotheses. I just offered evidence. riVeRraT writes:
Nobody is ignoring your evidence. They're ignoring your interpretation of the evidence - because it's nonsensical.
There is evidence, you just choose to ignore it based on other evidence. riVeRraT writes:
That statement isn't true. Jesus Himself encouraged Thomas to use objective evidence.
You must believe in God by faith. In order for that statement to be true, you cannot use objective evidence to believe in God.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1472 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
The standard theory can't be known either. And it's so utterly absurd I would hope some people would soon wake up and see it.
Yes I know early geologists expected geology to confirm the Bible but their imagination was too limited to see that it really does; that's why they went with the so-called evidence of an ancient earth, which hardly deserves the term "evidence" at all, since until radiometric dating methods came along it was just a lot of stuff like Hutton's assessment of Siccar Point "Oh that must have taken a LONG time." He was wrong, it wasn't formed in stages, it was formed all at once in the Flood, and the unconformity occurred after all the strata were laid down, just as similar formations occurred elsewhere after the Flood. Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024