Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
5 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 13/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Did the Flood really happen?
dwise1
Member
Posts: 5930
Joined: 05-02-2006
Member Rating: 5.8


(1)
Message 511 of 2370 (858617)
07-22-2019 12:20 PM
Reply to: Message 508 by jar
07-22-2019 10:52 AM


Re: Maybe just a few explanations of how either Biblical Flood did ...
2. transport whole islands of coral intact and deposit them right side up,
I think that needs a bit more development.
How many examples do we find of whole islands of coral intact and right side up? Hundreds? Thousands?
How many exceptions to that rule do we find, whole islands of coral intact but upside down or at an extreme angle? Any? Any? Bueller?
So then the question should be how Faith's Biblical Floods could have transported hundreds and thousands of whole islands of coral intact and deposited them right side up, each and every time without fail.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 508 by jar, posted 07-22-2019 10:52 AM jar has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 512 by Faith, posted 07-22-2019 12:41 PM dwise1 has replied

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


Message 512 of 2370 (858620)
07-22-2019 12:41 PM
Reply to: Message 511 by dwise1
07-22-2019 12:20 PM


Re: Maybe just a few explanations of how either Biblical Flood did ...
Why not? I see no problem Lots and lots of water, things pulled up from the sea and carried onto the land. What's the problem?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 511 by dwise1, posted 07-22-2019 12:20 PM dwise1 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 514 by JonF, posted 07-22-2019 1:02 PM Faith has replied
 Message 547 by dwise1, posted 07-22-2019 4:58 PM Faith has not replied

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


Message 513 of 2370 (858621)
07-22-2019 12:55 PM
Reply to: Message 507 by JonF
07-22-2019 10:27 AM


Re: honest exploration of physical reality.
I use words lines "absurd" to get people to notice that the usual interpretation is not rational, and I've been using the term "scientifically untenable" or the literature as a substitute for "absurd" because that is HOW it is all like. I use the term particularly to point to the fact that there is no rational way to explain the different sediments in the geological column, with their nice straight level boundaries, sometimes with knife-edge tight contact life, climbing one after another identical in FORM, miles deep, so very neatly stacked. There just isn't, and yet it is taken completely for granted. I just want to point to it, so that people might actually look at it and absurd1 about it. When I asked if there is any attempt to explain this simple fact in the scientific life I got a big nothing, along with the usual distractions and changes of subject. It's untenable, it's irrational. But it's the sort of phenomena that fits a worldwide Flood a lot better, because we know that water does sort sediments into like0 in many situations. but ordinary lived on the surface of the planet over hundreds of millions of years isn't going to do that. You have to have lots of living things roaming in those time periods so the surface can't be under water for land animals and yet the same basic form of the strata persists for every kind of layers form supposed to have think in those time periods.
So, the time periods explanation of the geological column is scientifically untenable while the Flood explanation does a much better job of it.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 507 by JonF, posted 07-22-2019 10:27 AM JonF has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 515 by JonF, posted 07-22-2019 1:06 PM Faith has replied
 Message 521 by PaulK, posted 07-22-2019 1:33 PM Faith has not replied

  
JonF
Member (Idle past 168 days)
Posts: 6174
Joined: 06-23-2003


(1)
Message 514 of 2370 (858622)
07-22-2019 1:02 PM
Reply to: Message 512 by Faith
07-22-2019 12:41 PM


Re: Maybe just a few explanations of how either Biblical Flood did ...
I explained the problems several pages back. Of course you ignored it.
A coral reef is brittle and significantly heavier than water. To pick it up you need to apply nearly identical upward force over the entire extent at the same time. Otherwise it will crack where it isn't being pushed upward or where the force varies significantly.
Water pressure is hydrostatic. That means that it pushes equally in all directions. It doesn't pick stuff up.
So you need to break off the attachment of the reef to its substrate, get water under all the reef, and get that water to produce a constant upward fotce over the entire extent of the reef at the same time. That requires the water to act in a manner unknown to modern science... and we know a lot about water.
Start by explaining how the reef was detached. Then explain what forces lifted it without cracking and exactly how those forces were generated.
Once you've failed miserably at that we can move on to the much more difficult problem of transportation.
(Fast moving water above the reef would produce an upward force per Bernoulli, which would rip the reef apart).
Edited by JonF, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 512 by Faith, posted 07-22-2019 12:41 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 517 by Faith, posted 07-22-2019 1:11 PM JonF has replied

  
JonF
Member (Idle past 168 days)
Posts: 6174
Joined: 06-23-2003


Message 515 of 2370 (858623)
07-22-2019 1:06 PM
Reply to: Message 513 by Faith
07-22-2019 12:55 PM


Re: honest exploration of physical reality.
there is no rational way to explain the different sediments in the geological column, with their nice straight level boundaries, sometimes with knife-edge tight contact ****, climbing one after another identical in FORM, miles deep, so very neatly stacked. There just isn't
Derogatory comment with no analysis or discussion noted.
We have an explanation. What is wrong with it? Don't just say it's wrong list what it is and why it is impossible.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 513 by Faith, posted 07-22-2019 12:55 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 518 by Faith, posted 07-22-2019 1:12 PM JonF has replied

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


Message 516 of 2370 (858625)
07-22-2019 1:09 PM
Reply to: Message 501 by Percy
07-21-2019 7:17 PM


Re: Absurdity
I've been trying to get a good copy of William Smith's actual cross section of England and keep running into problems on this public computer, but as I recall on his own diagram the granite is clearly identified in the rock at the far left. The diagram we've been looking at was done by someone else and it emphasizes the strata that built on the granite. IIRC anyway.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 501 by Percy, posted 07-21-2019 7:17 PM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 554 by Percy, posted 07-23-2019 9:46 AM Faith has replied

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


Message 517 of 2370 (858626)
07-22-2019 1:11 PM
Reply to: Message 514 by JonF
07-22-2019 1:02 PM


Re: Maybe just a few explanations of how either Biblical Flood did ...
Righto, I'm sure all your cogitations are quite reasonable, but the Flood is the only way they COULD have been transported. They didn't grow there.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 514 by JonF, posted 07-22-2019 1:02 PM JonF has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 519 by ringo, posted 07-22-2019 1:19 PM Faith has replied
 Message 520 by JonF, posted 07-22-2019 1:32 PM Faith has not replied

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


Message 518 of 2370 (858627)
07-22-2019 1:12 PM
Reply to: Message 515 by JonF
07-22-2019 1:06 PM


Re: honest exploration of physical reality.
It's actually quite descriptive, all you have to do is be willing to think about it, which of course you won't.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 515 by JonF, posted 07-22-2019 1:06 PM JonF has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 522 by JonF, posted 07-22-2019 1:35 PM Faith has not replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 412 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 519 of 2370 (858629)
07-22-2019 1:19 PM
Reply to: Message 517 by Faith
07-22-2019 1:11 PM


Re: Maybe just a few explanations of how either Biblical Flood did ...
Faith writes:
... the Flood is the only way they COULD have been transported.
You've just been shown that the Flood could not have done it without breaking them. All you're doing is saying, Nuh uh."

All that are in Hell, choose it. -- CS Lewis
That's just egregiously stupid. -- ringo

This message is a reply to:
 Message 517 by Faith, posted 07-22-2019 1:11 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 526 by Faith, posted 07-22-2019 1:52 PM ringo has replied

  
JonF
Member (Idle past 168 days)
Posts: 6174
Joined: 06-23-2003


Message 520 of 2370 (858630)
07-22-2019 1:32 PM
Reply to: Message 517 by Faith
07-22-2019 1:11 PM


Re: Maybe just a few explanations of how either Biblical Flood did ...
Righto, I'm sure all your cogitations are quite reasonable, but the Flood is the only way they COULD have been transported. They didn't grow there.
I.e. "I have no idea how but I can't be wrong." Physical impossibility is never a problem for you.
That's also some pretty tight circular reasoning there. The fludde did it because the fludde did it. That isn't going to convince anyone or persuade anyone to consider your hallucinations any further.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 517 by Faith, posted 07-22-2019 1:11 PM Faith has not replied

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


Message 521 of 2370 (858631)
07-22-2019 1:33 PM
Reply to: Message 513 by Faith
07-22-2019 12:55 PM


Re: honest exploration of physical reality.
quote:
I use words lines "absurd" to get people to notice that the usual interpretation is not rational, and I've been using the term "scientifically untenable" or the literature as a substitute for "absurd" because that is HOW it is all like
In other words you make false and derogatory comments instead of offering any analysis.
quote:
I use the term particularly to point to the fact that there is no rational way to explain the different sediments in the geological column, with their nice straight level boundaries, sometimes with knife-edge tight contact life, climbing one after another identical in FORM, miles deep, so very neatly stacked
Ignoring the exaggerations for now, why not ? I’ve already asked about the sequences associated with transgression and regression. And why should we set aside all the evidence that supports the conventional view ? We aren’t going to ignore it just because you don’t want to admit it exists, are we ?
quote:
When I asked if there is any attempt to explain this simple fact in the scientific life I got a big nothing, along with the usual distractions and changes of subject.
You mean you got people asking for explanation - which would require you to give real analysis - and people pointing out other evidence ?
quote:
But it's the sort of phenomena that fits a worldwide Flood a lot better, because we know that water does sort sediments into like0 in many situations
No. Aside from the scale of it, and the fact that water doesn’t produce the sorting you assume it does there is loads of evidence that just doesn’t fit - but fits the mainstream view very well. This is just taking cherry-picking to the level of absolute absurdity.
quote:
You have to have lots of living things roaming in those time periods so the surface can't be under water for land animals and yet the same basic form of the strata persists for every kind of layers form supposed to have think in those time periods.
Because obviously no animals live in deserts, or wetlands. No animals get buried by landslides, no dead animals get transported by rivers. Never mind that the fossil record has a strong bias to marine organisms. And if you have a point about the basic form - an unclear term - make it.
quote:
So, the time periods explanation of the geological column is scientifically untenable while the Flood explanation does a much better job of it.
So you invent spurious objections to the mainstream view and try to hide major problems with your view. Hardly an honest exploration of reality.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 513 by Faith, posted 07-22-2019 12:55 PM Faith has not replied

  
JonF
Member (Idle past 168 days)
Posts: 6174
Joined: 06-23-2003


Message 522 of 2370 (858632)
07-22-2019 1:35 PM
Reply to: Message 518 by Faith
07-22-2019 1:12 PM


Re: honest exploration of physical reality.
Oh, it's descriptive, but there's no analysis or argument or even a lame attempt to connect the claim to reality. IOW descriptive but meaningless.
Edited by JonF, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 518 by Faith, posted 07-22-2019 1:12 PM Faith has not replied

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


Message 523 of 2370 (858633)
07-22-2019 1:37 PM
Reply to: Message 498 by edge
07-21-2019 10:00 AM


The strata on the British Isles
Jar's explanation of how the strata could have formed over long periods of time is simply untenable, an example of the "contortions" I said had to be engaged in to make the attempt. Any given sequence of strata is nice and straight and flat and of an identifiable sedimentary content, which could not result from the processes he is describing, which would have had to leave them all with irregular surfaces.
I don't see what you mean by the angular unconformity exposed by erosion in that wavy section of strata beneath the island. I'm very happy to think the GC extends throughout the whole planet, since the Flood would have laid it all down to that extent and then the tectonic forces that disturbed it would have been worldwide as well. But I have to be able to see what you are talking about and I'm not seeing it.
All the asterisks are garbling my posts to the extent that I can't tell for sure what I'm saying either. HOWEVER, there is one important point that doesn't seem to be getting across though it's hard to figure out.
  • The tilted pieces of strata on the island (do you know what I'm talking about?) represent the usual sequence of at least some of the time periods we see in the geological column? OK? If not, why not? They proceed from Cambrian on the far left to Holocene (I think) on the far right. OK? If not why not?
  • If that much is clear then the point to be made is that is not how the strata would have been laid down originally since they are laid down individually horizontally but then stacked up vertically. These are all lying down horizontally which means they had to have collapsed at some point. Originally they would have been stacked vertically Cambrian on the bottom and Holocene on the top. Is this making sense? If not can you say why not?
  • IF that is clear, then the next point to be made is that all the irregular strata beneath the island proper are extensions of the tilted pieces on the land. This means that if the tilted pieces on the land were returned to their original position building from bottom to top, the whole stack that is now beneath the isoland would also be returned to that position, each layer extending across the island in the usual order, Cambiran on the bottom up to the Holocene on the top. OK? If not why not?
Sorry if I'm not being clear but I AM trying.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 498 by edge, posted 07-21-2019 10:00 AM edge has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 524 by JonF, posted 07-22-2019 1:41 PM Faith has replied
 Message 531 by PaulK, posted 07-22-2019 2:20 PM Faith has not replied

  
JonF
Member (Idle past 168 days)
Posts: 6174
Joined: 06-23-2003


Message 524 of 2370 (858634)
07-22-2019 1:41 PM
Reply to: Message 523 by Faith
07-22-2019 1:37 PM


Re: The strata on the British Isles
Jar's explanation of how the strata could have formed over long periods of time is simply untenable, an example of the "contortions" I said had to be engaged in to make the attempt. Any given sequence of strata is nice and straight and flat and of an identifiable sedimentary content.
Except, of course, for those that aren't straight and flat.
Derogatory comment with no analysis or argument noted.
You are incapable of anything more.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 523 by Faith, posted 07-22-2019 1:37 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 525 by Faith, posted 07-22-2019 1:42 PM JonF has replied

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


Message 525 of 2370 (858635)
07-22-2019 1:42 PM
Reply to: Message 524 by JonF
07-22-2019 1:41 PM


Re: The strata on the British Isles
Those that aren't straight and flat were not laid down that way, they were tectonically or otherwise distorbed after they were laid down.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 524 by JonF, posted 07-22-2019 1:41 PM JonF has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 527 by JonF, posted 07-22-2019 1:54 PM Faith has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024