Summations Only

quote:

---

Just with the few points in the film ("Is Genesis History?") I've mentioned so far there's lots of that evidence for the Flood everybody keeps saying doesn't exist, some of which I've given myself many times.

---

Well I know you refuse to deal with my exposures of your evidence but that’s no reason to keep from posting.

quote:

---

The evidence of Mt. St. Helens where flows from the volcano cut a canyon through solid rock, and formed straight flat sedimentary strata in a matter of hours, shows that it doesn't take aeons of time to produce such phenomena.

---

I’m pretty sure that nothing was cut through solid rock at Mt. St. Helens and it will take more than your assertion to convince me. Not only is your source unreliable, you have a habit of misrepresenting your sources, too.And, of course, it is well-known that some deposits can be produced quickly. But that is not even evidence that the Earth is young, let alone evidence of the Flood.

quote:

---

The straightness and flatness of the strata, which they show in the Grand Canyon and at Sedona, and the tightness of the contacts between the layers, as well as the great areas of geography they cover, are all compatible with the Flood and not an Old Earth. Sedimentation on that scale on the continents isn't happening today, and what is happening beneath the oceans is far from straight and flat as the strata we see in these photos.

---

I will note that your claims about the flatness of the ocean are based on a diagram that is very likely not to scale. I will also note that there are significant deviations from flatness that you just ignore.And that is before we get to the fact that the whole idea that the Flood could produce even your idea of the strata is highly questionable even in principle, not to mention the evidence that it could not have produced that actual strata that exist.

quote:

---

The fact that fossilization needs special conditions to occur, conditions met abundantly by the Flood, producing the billions of dead things the Flood was supposed to bring about, but only extremely rarely met in normal life as usual. This really ought to be acknowledged as primo evidence for the Flood, but of course all we get is denial and ad hoc explanations.

---

This is outright dishonest. The conditions required for fossilisation can certainly occur without a worldwide flood, and given the timescales available can be certainly be expected to have occurred many times. This is not in the least ad hoc. Moreover the fact of the order of the fossil record fits neatly with conventional views and pretty much rules out the Flood.But of course you will never have the honesty to admit that - you will go on misrepresenting the replies you get so you can keep on using your favourite falsehoods.

quote:

---

Dinosaur beds that contain thousands of individual animals, what we'd expect of the Flood but something requiring special made-up circumstances to be explained in normal time.

---

The circumstances required are hardly that unusual. And given that these deposits are quite consistent with the standard view - including their place in the order fo the fossil record - it is hard to say that the Flood is even a likely explanation.And that is before we get into the baroque ad hoc explanations you offer for fossil footprints.So, the Flood is still grossly inferior to conventional explanations.

Utterly false!

Except for the fact that they are lying, no flows cut through solid rock and the strata laid down is easily identified as volcanic ash and does not demonstrate the layering and sorting found in reality.They lie and misrepresent reality as easily as they lie and misrepresent the Bible and Christianity. Except for the fact they are lying and misrepresenting reality as easily as they lie and misrepresent the Bible and Christianity.The layer in the Grand Canyon are NOT flat or straight and show sorting that would be impossible for any flood to create. Except for the fact that they are lying. The flood does not meet the conditions needed to produce the fossilization found in reality and in fact what is found in reality could not possibly be created by a flood. Floods do not sort critter by type or create the layers as found in reality. Except for the fact they are lying and misrepresenting reality as easily as they lie and misrepresent the Bible and Christianity. What we see is exactly what should be seen if the conventional explanation is considered and totally impossible to be created by a flood.Your video is simply lies created by professional liars to be marketed to the willfully ignorant and dishonest.

Well, that's what they said. What's your contrary evidence?

the fact that ANYTHING is laid down in straight layers in such a short period of time, from a mere flowing stream of material, is evidencence that such layering doesn't take millions of years.I am looking at the same strata they are describing as flat and straight while they are describing it and it certainly is flat and straight.Fossilization requires rapid burial in wet conditions. The Flood provides those circumstances in gigantic abundance, while under normal circumstances those conditions only occur extremely rarely and on a local scale. The billions of fossils show it happened on a massive scale, which is of course what the Flood was supposed to accomplish.Death on the scale of the dinosaur beds found all over the world is indeed what one should expect of a worldwide Flood, and not so easy to explain on uniformitarian principles.You make a lot of wild assertions without one iota of support, interesting. Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

After breaking. Such as? Why? Fantasixing is the ,more appropriate word.

Nothing at all significant in comparison with those on the sea floor. CAN occur but extreeeeeeeemely rarely and on a teeeeeeeny scale in comparison with the reality.Thousands and thousands of dinosaur bodies all tumbling down streams around the world and ending up in a heap of jumbled pieces? Oh that is NOT going to happen under normal circumstances.It's really remarkable how ready you all are to accept the impossible and dismiss the realistic based only on your belief in evolution. Such faithfulness is certainly touching, though scientifically untenable.

The cognitive dissonance must be immense.I guess we can't say that 'it is what it is' anymore.It is what 'Faith wants it to be'.In one case, we have the Grand Canyon rocks easily eroded away by thousands of feet (and then become lithified later). And in a second case we have freshly deposited sands that harden enough in one hour to withstand the constant attack of sea waves. And then, those sands can also survive the onrush of a flood surge that will carry tons of sand, silt and gravel and yet still contain fragile footprints.Hey, it makes sense to me.If Faith's scenario is different from this, she needs describe the situation better. But I don't see the alternatives. Edited by edge, : No reason given.

What jumble of bones where?A plausible scenario is better than your impossible scenarios. If it had happened, it would have.Edited by JonF, : No reason given.Edited by JonF, : No reason given.

Well, yes, of course. I'm not picturing waves going long distances over the continent to break way up there. They break and then the water continues that distance to dump its sediment all along the way. Bay of Fundy? Cuz they don't have as far to travel from the higher sea level. Guessing is all you guys do too, it's all that CAN be done with such things in the distant past.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

And not a single animal that the mainstream says existed only before or after 66-69 million years ago. Why? Yes. Why not normal deaths?

quote:

---

Fossilization requires rapid burial in wet conditions

---

Rapid burial yes - althoug( even that can be some time after death, but wet conditions are absolutely not required. Burial by desert sand will do very well.

quote:

---

The Flood provides those circumstances in gigantic abundance, while under normal circumstances those conditions only occur extremely rarely and on a local scale.

---

The conditions are hardly extremely rare even when we include the ones you missed out. And that they occur on a local scale is absolutely consistent with the fossil record - more so than it is with one single short-term event.

quote:

---

The billions of fossils show it happened on a massive scale, which is of course what the Flood was supposed to accomplish.

---

This is just irrational. You cannot show through mere numbers that fossils were the result of one single event or many smaller events. And the real evidence favours many, varying smaller events over long periods of time.

[qs][qs] Three miles horizontally. Not a lot .It has extrtemely high tides trapped. Which has nothing to do with wavelength. Irrelevant ad hominem noted. Edited by JonF, : No reason given.

????? Why not? ?????

That's not an answer to my question.Note that many different animals live in the same environments today and no doubt did then. Note that there are hundreds of thousands of animal found in the fossil record that are not found in the Lance formation. Was that a gated community of only dinosaurs?