Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,808 Year: 3,065/9,624 Month: 910/1,588 Week: 93/223 Day: 4/17 Hour: 1/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Evidence of the flood
Percy
Member
Posts: 22389
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 646 of 899 (819889)
09-14-2017 8:25 PM
Reply to: Message 586 by Faith
09-14-2017 5:36 PM


Re: A charming fat fish proves radiometic dating is false cuz the varves aren't annual
KEEP IT UP. I DON'T HAVE TO RESPOND TO YOU.
Keep what up? Describing how sediments are being deposited throughout most of the world? Okay, sure.
The sediments are not being deposited "here and there". The sediments are being deposited throughout most of the world. Sediments come to rest at the lowest local point, and the lowest local points are mostly in lake and sea beds, though some are on land. Ocean covers around 3/4 of the world, so at least 3/4 of the world is acquiring sedimentary deposits. Any region that is an area of net deposition will acquire sediments atop the stratigraphic column at that location, thereby adding themselves to that column.
Did you get that "3/4 of the world" part? Do you understand now that sediments are not being deposited "here and there"?
Or by keeping it up did you mean the part where I noted how obvious it is that you're not reading the rebuttals, that you're not only ignorant of facts but even of the very discussion you're trying to participate in.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 586 by Faith, posted 09-14-2017 5:36 PM Faith has not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22389
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 647 of 899 (819890)
09-14-2017 8:33 PM
Reply to: Message 597 by Faith
09-14-2017 5:43 PM


Re: Again, the Geo Column shows the absurdity of the OE/ToE
Faith writes:
BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH
Well, so much for your claim of substantive posts. With each reply you're just reinforcing and providing more examples of the very immaturity, rudeness and lack of respect that causes you so much difficulty. Certainly you're not giving anyone else a chance to win the "worst contributor ever to this board" award.
This is a discussion board, not a Twitter feed. Please stop with the one-liners and begin discussing.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 597 by Faith, posted 09-14-2017 5:43 PM Faith has not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22389
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 648 of 899 (819891)
09-14-2017 8:41 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
This makes no sense because it isn't a reply to anything I said. You don't quote anything from my post, so I have no idea what you're referring to. Let's try again.
Granting, in just this post and just for the sake of making an argument, that the Flood was an actual event, there had to have been a topmost layer deposited by the flood. After the flood there would be places in the world where there was net sedimentation. These sediments were deposited atop the topmost Flood layer and were therefore continuous with it. Nothing else is possible. This must be true by definition.
And the deposits on top of those first deposits on the topmost Flood layer are in turn continuous, and the deposits above those, and the ones above those, and so on right up to the current day.
You are therefore wrong to state that "current deposits are not continuous with the deposits of that one-time event" and will have to rethink your position.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 611 by Faith, posted 09-14-2017 5:55 PM Faith has not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22389
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 649 of 899 (819893)
09-14-2017 8:49 PM
Reply to: Message 613 by Faith
09-14-2017 5:56 PM


Re: A charming fat fish proves radiometic dating is false cuz the varves aren't annual
Faith writes:
I COULD NOT CARE LESS.
Really? You could not care less that your one-liner messages are bringing down the quality of discussion and making discussion very difficult?
YOUR ATTITUDE IS OFFENSIVE.
You find offensive my feelings about the insulting and disrespectful way you're treating the board and this thread's participants?
Maybe you need to take a break.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 613 by Faith, posted 09-14-2017 5:56 PM Faith has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 867 by Aussie, posted 09-20-2017 2:15 PM Percy has seen this message but not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22389
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


(3)
Message 650 of 899 (819894)
09-14-2017 9:02 PM
Reply to: Message 642 by Faith
09-14-2017 7:31 PM


Re: fair notice
Faith writes:
I AM ABANDONING THIS THREAD. IT HAS BECOME THE USUAL INSANE DISCONNECT. THIS IS A PARADIGM PROBLEM AND IT CANNOT BE RESOLVED HERE.
Oh, gee, what a shocker, Faith is abandoning a thread again.
What you call "the usual insane disconnect" is your own fault. It started with your false claims of having already proved your points, extended into your refusals to address almost any of the rebuttals, and the end became inevitable when you dropped into one-liner mode.
It is not a "paradigm problem." You don't have a paradigm, you have a religion. You're trying to shoehorn reality into your own eclectic interpretation of the Bible.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 642 by Faith, posted 09-14-2017 7:31 PM Faith has not replied

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


Message 651 of 899 (819895)
09-14-2017 9:54 PM
Reply to: Message 633 by Faith
09-14-2017 7:16 PM


Re: A charming fat fish proves radiometic dating is false cuz the varves aren't annual
Once again, that is very strange. Other geological columns show the effects of erosion, volcanism and plate tectonics.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 633 by Faith, posted 09-14-2017 7:16 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 658 by Faith, posted 09-15-2017 8:06 AM edge has not replied

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


Message 652 of 899 (819896)
09-14-2017 11:29 PM
Reply to: Message 639 by Faith
09-14-2017 7:26 PM


Re: strat column
THEY WOULD NOT HAVE THE SAME FORM AS THE ACTUAL GEO/STRATIGRAPHIC COLUMN, BUT NOBODY WILL ANSWER MY REQUEST TO PROVE IT, WHICH I TAKE AS EVIDENCE THAT THERE IS NO SUCH EVIDENCE.
This does not answer my question.
But what do you mean by the "actual geo/stratigraphic column"?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 639 by Faith, posted 09-14-2017 7:26 PM Faith has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 653 by Pressie, posted 09-15-2017 1:17 AM edge has not replied

  
Pressie
Member
Posts: 2103
From: Pretoria, SA
Joined: 06-18-2010


(1)
Message 653 of 899 (819904)
09-15-2017 1:17 AM
Reply to: Message 652 by edge
09-14-2017 11:29 PM


Re: strat column
I also don't know what Faith is trying to say here. Every spot on earth has an actual geo/stratigraphic column. And they are all different. Every single one of them. So, the phrase "the actual geo/stratigrapic column" doesn't make any sense.
Edited by Pressie, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 652 by edge, posted 09-14-2017 11:29 PM edge has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 657 by Faith, posted 09-15-2017 8:05 AM Pressie has not replied
 Message 673 by ringo, posted 09-15-2017 12:12 PM Pressie has not replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 654 of 899 (819909)
09-15-2017 3:29 AM
Reply to: Message 561 by Faith
09-14-2017 5:14 PM


Re: A charming fat fish proves radiometic dating is false cuz the varves aren't annual
quote:
JUST STOP REPLYING TO ME, THAT WILL SOLVE YOUR PROBLEM.
In other words you just want to win. You don't care if your arguments are any good. You don't care if you have the facts right. Everyone else should just stop proving you wrong and correcting your errors.
I don't think so. Why shouldn't you make the effort to come up with good arguments instead of calling already-rebutted arguments good and demanding that everyone else agree with you? Why shouldn't you make the effort to get the facts right instead of just insisting that your ill-informed opinions are correct no matter what?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 561 by Faith, posted 09-14-2017 5:14 PM Faith has not replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1404 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 655 of 899 (819911)
09-15-2017 7:33 AM
Reply to: Message 539 by Coyote
09-14-2017 4:51 PM


Re: A charming fat fish proves a lack of imagination if nothing else ...
Mt. St. Helens ash and Hawaiian lava flows.
The sea floor
  • of the atlantic ocean
  • of the pacific ocean
  • of the meditarian ocean
  • of the indian ocean
  • of the arctic ocean
  • and all the seas, bays, inlets, sounds, lakes and ponds around the world
Dust falling from the sky settles to the bottom continuously. Dust that includes ash and smoke particles and that includes radioactive isotopes, isotopes that can be dated to show that indeed the lower the sediment the older it is, just as we know and expect from the law of superposition. And including debris from dead insects, birds, mammals, fishes, algae, sea weeds, etc etc etc
Animals and plant material die and is covered by sediments. If the bottom in anoxic the bodies will be covered gradually as the sediment builds up and builds up around them, eventually covering them. It's so simple.
Nice large area continuous deposits just exactly like we see in rock layers of rocks that once were the bottom of the sea in the past. Rocks that we can date with radiometric methods and again show that the lower strata are older than the upper strata, and again confirming the law of superposition.
Enjoy

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAmerican☆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)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 539 by Coyote, posted 09-14-2017 4:51 PM Coyote has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 656 by Faith, posted 09-15-2017 8:02 AM RAZD has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 656 of 899 (819912)
09-15-2017 8:02 AM
Reply to: Message 655 by RAZD
09-15-2017 7:33 AM


Re: A charming fat fish proves a lack of imagination if nothing else ...
THEY ARE NOT ONE SINGLE SEDIMENT WHICH SO MANY OF THE STRATA IN THE STRAT COLUMN ARE, FOLLOWED BY A COMPLETELY DIFFERENT SEDIMENT THAT OFTEN DOESN'T BLEND OR MIX AT ALL WITH THE OTHER, AND THEY ARE NOT FLAT FLAT FLAT LIKE THOSE STRATA, EITHER ON THE TOP OR THE BOTTOM. THE COMPARISON IS ABSURD. SAME WITH LAKE BOTTOMS. IF THE GREEN RIVER VARVES BELONG TO THE STRAT COLUMN THEN THEY WERE FORMED IN THE FLOOD AND CERTAINLY NOT BY ANNUAL TWOS.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 655 by RAZD, posted 09-15-2017 7:33 AM RAZD has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 661 by jar, posted 09-15-2017 8:42 AM Faith has not replied
 Message 665 by Pressie, posted 09-15-2017 8:47 AM Faith has not replied
 Message 667 by RAZD, posted 09-15-2017 8:49 AM Faith has not replied
 Message 671 by Percy, posted 09-15-2017 9:17 AM Faith has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 657 of 899 (819913)
09-15-2017 8:05 AM
Reply to: Message 653 by Pressie
09-15-2017 1:17 AM


Re: strat column
THEY ARE ALL THE SAME IN BASIC FORM: FLATNESS ON TOP AND BOTTOM, OFTEN UNIFORM SEDIMENT, OFTEN TIGHT CONTACTS BETWEEN RECOGNIZABLY DIFFERENT LAYERS.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 653 by Pressie, posted 09-15-2017 1:17 AM Pressie has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 669 by edge, posted 09-15-2017 8:53 AM Faith has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 658 of 899 (819914)
09-15-2017 8:06 AM
Reply to: Message 651 by edge
09-14-2017 9:54 PM


Re: A charming fat fish proves radiometic dating is false cuz the varves aren't annual
ONLY AFTER ALL THE STRATA WERE LAID DOWN.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 651 by edge, posted 09-14-2017 9:54 PM edge has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 663 by jar, posted 09-15-2017 8:43 AM Faith has not replied
 Message 672 by Percy, posted 09-15-2017 9:46 AM Faith has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 659 of 899 (819915)
09-15-2017 8:12 AM
Reply to: Message 631 by edge
09-14-2017 7:13 PM


Re: A charming fat fish proves radiometic dating is false cuz the varves aren't annual
WHY ARE YOU GIVING EXAMPLES OF DEFORMED STRATA? THOSE PROVE THAT THE STRAT COLUMN IS A UNIT THAT WAS ALL LAID DOWN BEFORE IT WAS DEFORMED, AND THE ONLY WAY IT COULD SERVE AS A BASE FOR FURTHER STRATA ABOVE THE HOLOCENE IS IF YOU COULD SHOW THAT THE NEW DEPOSIT LOOKS EXACTLY LIKE THE STRATA BELOW. ALL THE STRATA ARE THE SAME IN FORM, THIS IS SHOWN IN EVERY CASE, SO IF YOU CLAIM THE COLUMN IS ONGOING ALL NEW LAYERS HAVE TO CONFORM TO THE OLD. WHICH IS RIDICULOUS BECAUSE THE STRAT COLUMN IS A UNIT, IS ALWAYS A UNIT, AND IT'S OVER AND DONE WITH. IT WAS LAID DOWN IN THE FLOOD BY CONTINUOUS DEPOSITION, DEFORMED AFTERWARD, AND ANYTHING BUILDING ON IT IS SOMETHING ELSE ENTIRELY.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 631 by edge, posted 09-14-2017 7:13 PM edge has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 662 by Pressie, posted 09-15-2017 8:43 AM Faith has not replied
 Message 664 by jar, posted 09-15-2017 8:45 AM Faith has not replied
 Message 666 by edge, posted 09-15-2017 8:48 AM Faith has not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22389
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


(2)
Message 660 of 899 (819916)
09-15-2017 8:40 AM
Reply to: Message 584 by Faith
09-14-2017 5:36 PM


Re: A charming fat fish proves radiometic dating is false cuz the varves aren't annual
Faith writes:
PROVE THAT THE SEDIMENTS STILL BEING DEPOSITED ARE CONTINUOUS WITH THE EXISTING GEO CVOLUMN.
That the sediments being deposited all around the world are continuous with the stratigraphic columns at each location is not something that requires proof. If is something that is self-evident. Nothing else is possible.
Let me ask you this question: If current sedimentary deposits are somehow separated from the older sedimentary deposits below them (you can think of them as being from the Flood if you like), if they are not continuous with the rest of the stratigraphic column, then what is it that's keeping them separate?
If there were something keeping the current sediments that lie on top separate from the rest of the stratigraphic column that lies below, then presumably we could dig down and discover what that is. Since humans have dug literally millions of holes in the ground (wells, mines, building foundations, subways, tunnels, cores, etc.), we should have found this "thing" keeping current sediments separate from the older sediments. Where is this "thing" that separates? We've never found it. Because it doesn't exist.
Therefore current sediments are continuous with the older sediments that lie below them.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 584 by Faith, posted 09-14-2017 5:36 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