Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,819 Year: 3,076/9,624 Month: 921/1,588 Week: 104/223 Day: 2/13 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Did the Flood really happen?
JonF
Member (Idle past 168 days)
Posts: 6174
Joined: 06-23-2003


Message 811 of 2370 (859214)
07-29-2019 7:02 PM
Reply to: Message 797 by Faith
07-29-2019 6:23 PM


Re: evidence?
The Pacific Ocean is 15 times larger than the United States and 6.5 times larger than North America and 3.6 times larger than the Americas (North, Central, and South). The Atlantic Ocean is 2.5 times larger than the Americas. The Indian Ocean is 1.7 times larger than the Americas. All these oceans are areas of net deposition and are adding to the geologic column.
Even if only 1/10 of the Pacific generates one layer it will dwarf the extent of any layers in the Midwest and in the Grand Canyon/Grand Staircase area.
WTF is it with lakes? Lakes are usually areas of net deposition, they add to the geologic column, but their additions seldom have impressive extent. I'm talking about OCEANS. The subject is OCEANS. If you reply please do not use the word "lake" or any synonym. Feel free to discuss OCEANS.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 797 by Faith, posted 07-29-2019 6:23 PM Faith has not replied

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


Message 812 of 2370 (859215)
07-29-2019 7:10 PM
Reply to: Message 810 by Faith
07-29-2019 7:01 PM


Re: once again now: the strata would originally NOT have been where the diagram has them
Faith writes:
They originally had other ends.
Well, one end is off the diagram on the right-hand side, so we can't say anything about that end based on the diagram. The ends of the individual strata that are now on the surface will definitely erode, like everything on the surface does. But there's no indication of anything "broken off".

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

This message is a reply to:
 Message 810 by Faith, posted 07-29-2019 7:01 PM Faith has not replied

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


Message 813 of 2370 (859216)
07-29-2019 7:18 PM
Reply to: Message 798 by Faith
07-29-2019 6:25 PM


Re: evidence?
It doesn't say what part of Arizona. The depth is also not specified. One needs access to the technical papers for such information. Given the ENORMOUS extent of strata in the Southwest on which you love to harp, it definitely captured one or more of those ENORMOUS strata. .
The point is, ignoring color, the layering in the Arizona core is very similar to the layers in the ocean cores.
Layers are being formed as I write and are adding to the geologic column. Some of them rival or exceed the ENORMOUS extent of layers in the Southwest US.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 798 by Faith, posted 07-29-2019 6:25 PM Faith has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 825 by JonF, posted 07-29-2019 7:40 PM JonF has not replied
 Message 826 by jar, posted 07-29-2019 8:08 PM JonF has not replied

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


Message 814 of 2370 (859217)
07-29-2019 7:23 PM
Reply to: Message 806 by Faith
07-29-2019 6:51 PM


Re: once again now: the strata would originally NOT have been where the diagram has them
You are assuming that all the strata end at the sea level line? Really? Really?
Did you notice that all of the strata are continuous above the bottom line?
There's no broken off pieces in that drawing.
Did you notice that all of the strata are continuous above the bottom line?
There's no broken off pieces in that drawing.
Edited by JonF, : No reason given.
Edited by JonF, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 806 by Faith, posted 07-29-2019 6:51 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 815 by Faith, posted 07-29-2019 7:26 PM JonF has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1445 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 815 of 2370 (859218)
07-29-2019 7:26 PM
Reply to: Message 814 by JonF
07-29-2019 7:23 PM


Re: once again now: the strata would originally NOT have been where the diagram has them
I've said dozens of times already that the strata we see on the surface continue below the sea level line and form that distorted block of strata we see there.
They had to have been broken at their tops.
You do realize they are not in their original position, don't you? They had to have been stacked one on top of another originally, then they fell down into this current arrangement and the rest of the strata went beneath the sea level line.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 814 by JonF, posted 07-29-2019 7:23 PM JonF has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 818 by JonF, posted 07-29-2019 7:28 PM Faith has replied
 Message 819 by JonF, posted 07-29-2019 7:31 PM Faith has replied
 Message 828 by PaulK, posted 07-30-2019 12:00 AM Faith has not replied

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


Message 816 of 2370 (859219)
07-29-2019 7:27 PM
Reply to: Message 810 by Faith
07-29-2019 7:01 PM


Re: once again now: the strata would originally NOT have been where the diagram has them
They originally had other ends
And you know this how? Wait, wait, don't tell me... you really really want it to be so.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 810 by Faith, posted 07-29-2019 7:01 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 817 by Faith, posted 07-29-2019 7:28 PM JonF has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1445 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 817 of 2370 (859220)
07-29-2019 7:28 PM
Reply to: Message 816 by JonF
07-29-2019 7:27 PM


Re: once again now: the strata would originally NOT have been where the diagram has them
Why on earth would I WANT it to be so? I have no need for it to be so. It just looks that way to me.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 816 by JonF, posted 07-29-2019 7:27 PM JonF has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 821 by JonF, posted 07-29-2019 7:35 PM Faith has not replied

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


Message 818 of 2370 (859221)
07-29-2019 7:28 PM
Reply to: Message 815 by Faith
07-29-2019 7:26 PM


Re: once again now: the strata would originally NOT have been where the diagram has them
Then where are the broken off strata in the Smith drawing? What color are they in the drawing? What are the nearest labels in the drawing?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 815 by Faith, posted 07-29-2019 7:26 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 820 by Faith, posted 07-29-2019 7:33 PM JonF has replied

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


Message 819 of 2370 (859222)
07-29-2019 7:31 PM
Reply to: Message 815 by Faith
07-29-2019 7:26 PM


Re: once again now: the strata would originally NOT have been where the diagram has them
There's no reason to believe they fell into place. You haven't yet understood that the angles of the strata in the drawing are very very wrong. The strata are really almost horizontal,.
I doubt you'll ever get it.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 815 by Faith, posted 07-29-2019 7:26 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 822 by Faith, posted 07-29-2019 7:36 PM JonF has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1445 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 820 of 2370 (859223)
07-29-2019 7:33 PM
Reply to: Message 818 by JonF
07-29-2019 7:28 PM


Re: once again now: the strata would originally NOT have been where the diagram has them
Whut?
I've been trying to get across how I see it as Percy tries to illustrate it:
Start with long straight horizontal strata stacked from Cambrian up to Holocene.
Tectonic activity raises the rock/mountain beneath this column of strata, causing them to break into two sections.
The left or west side falls into the sea.
The right or east side falls down so that the upper broken-off ends form the short tilted rocks on the surface of the island arranged from west to east,
while the rest of their length continues beneath the sea level line forming the distorted strata we see there.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 818 by JonF, posted 07-29-2019 7:28 PM JonF has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 823 by JonF, posted 07-29-2019 7:36 PM Faith has not replied

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


Message 821 of 2370 (859224)
07-29-2019 7:35 PM
Reply to: Message 817 by Faith
07-29-2019 7:28 PM


Re: once again now: the strata would originally NOT have been where the diagram has them
It just looks that way to me.
And to nobody else. What do you see in that drawing that looks that way to you? There are no "other ends" shown, there's no indication of any break anywhere.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 817 by Faith, posted 07-29-2019 7:28 PM Faith has not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1445 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 822 of 2370 (859225)
07-29-2019 7:36 PM
Reply to: Message 819 by JonF
07-29-2019 7:31 PM


Re: once again now: the strata would originally NOT have been where the diagram has them
They had to fall into place because strata are not laid down as we see them, they are laid down each horizontally and stacked vertically one on top of the other. This is how they had to be originally so we need a way to explain how they got into their current position, and that's what I'm visualizing for Percy to try to illustrate.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 819 by JonF, posted 07-29-2019 7:31 PM JonF has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 824 by JonF, posted 07-29-2019 7:39 PM Faith has not replied

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


Message 823 of 2370 (859226)
07-29-2019 7:36 PM
Reply to: Message 820 by Faith
07-29-2019 7:33 PM


Re: once again now: the strata would originally NOT have been where the diagram has them
Repeating your claims is not discussion or worthwhile. Answer my questions. They're not difficult or tricky.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 820 by Faith, posted 07-29-2019 7:33 PM Faith has not replied

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


Message 824 of 2370 (859228)
07-29-2019 7:39 PM
Reply to: Message 822 by Faith
07-29-2019 7:36 PM


Re: once again now: the strata would originally NOT have been where the diagram has them
They are still horizontal or very nearly so. They are still stacked on top of each other. You are seriously misinterpreting the drawings and ignoring the many attempts to point out why you are misinterpreting.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 822 by Faith, posted 07-29-2019 7:36 PM Faith has not replied

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


Message 825 of 2370 (859229)
07-29-2019 7:40 PM
Reply to: Message 813 by JonF
07-29-2019 7:18 PM


Re: evidence?
It doesn't say what part of Arizona. The depth is also not specified. One needs access to the technical papers for such information. Given the ENORMOUS extent of strata in the Southwest on which you love to harp, it definitely captured one or more of those ENORMOUS strata. .
The point is, ignoring color, the layering in the Arizona core is very similar to the layers in the ocean cores.
Layers are being formed as I write and are adding to the geologic column. Some of them rival or exceed the ENORMOUS extent of layers in the Southwest US.
Are you going to ignore this?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 813 by JonF, posted 07-29-2019 7:18 PM JonF 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