|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Did the Flood really happen? | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
JonF Member (Idle past 198 days) Posts: 6174 Joined: |
No, but there are places where it is so extensive there is no doubting that its overall extent far exceeds anything being deposited today. Except in the places where almost all the deposition is happening, on top of the geologic column.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
JonF Member (Idle past 198 days) Posts: 6174 Joined: |
commandeer the ocean beds as the next layer of the geo column, are ...I'm trying to avoid insulting language ... how about "inadequate.
No, that's not appropriate, nor is" commandeer ". The geologic column by definition, now and in the past and in the future, underlies everywhere on Earth, including the oceans. That's a fact, with which many YECs agree. You are entitled to your opinion. You are not entitled to your own facts. The geologic column underlies all the Earth. You are trying to define "transportation" as "gasoline engined vehicles" and insisting that diesel, wind, and pedal-driven vehicles are not transportation.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
JonF Member (Idle past 198 days) Posts: 6174 Joined: |
It isn't contributing significantly to global warming. We are the problem.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
JonF Member (Idle past 198 days) Posts: 6174 Joined: |
Then if we agree on that, surely we can agree that the geological column is over and done with, absolutely kaput.
Does not follow. The geologic column continues to grow in areas of net deposition, such as the ocean floors. It grows exceedingly slowly, but it grows.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
JonF Member (Idle past 198 days) Posts: 6174 Joined: |
teeny weeny little sedimentary deposits as the continuation of the geological column.
Any deposition, teeny weeny or huge, is extending the geologic column. But the ocean floors are large. There's no such thing as sediments on any scale in the wrong places. All places on Earth are right. I posted three definitions that agree with us and refute you. I can dig up plenty more. You have no support for your version except your pitiful need to exclude almost all the places of net deposition.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
JonF Member (Idle past 198 days) Posts: 6174 Joined:
|
When I said recent deposits are teensy weensy I MEANT in extent, not depth
And you were wrong. Oceans.
Nonesense to the rest of your nonsense.
And we are back to derogatory assertions with no analysis or discussion. You are pathetic.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
JonF Member (Idle past 198 days) Posts: 6174 Joined: |
And how many times do *I* have to tell YOU that the oceans are not building on the geological column?
128,785,965,708,984 times. And it still will be wrong. As is your peculiar definition of the geologic column. There is no wrong place. Every point on Earth is on top of the geologic column, including sea floors. Your argument is founded on a pathetic attempt to redefine a standard term. That is, you have no rgument. Repeating your ludicrous claims isn't going to make them true. It's telling that you have not addressed the definitions I have posted, and that you've made no attempt to provide any support for your fantasy. As usual. Here's a few more definitions which refute your claims:
quote: quote: quote: Edited by JonF, : No reason given. Edited by JonF, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
JonF Member (Idle past 198 days) Posts: 6174 Joined: |
Oceans. QED.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
JonF Member (Idle past 198 days) Posts: 6174 Joined: |
try to understand what the Geological Column is while you're gone.
I've posted several definitions to which he can refer and whichyou can't handle.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
JonF Member (Idle past 198 days) Posts: 6174 Joined: |
So if it's too small we just imagine that eventually a whole bunch of small deosits of the same sediment will accumulate on the Geo Column hither and yon until eventually we have a new stratum for our time, complete with fossils even. Gosh what understanding of natural processes you all have!
FIFY.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
JonF Member (Idle past 198 days) Posts: 6174 Joined: |
I guess I missed them.
I've posted definitions three times now. You didn't miss them.
quote:(Merriam-Webster, note "a locality or region") quote:(CreationWiki.com, note "crust" ) quote:(Conservapedia, note" around the world quote: quote: quote: Did you notice that none of those definitions restrict the location of the geologic column in any way? Every point on the crust (which encompasses all the parts that are above the mantle, including sea floors is the top of "the" geologic column. Really it's the local portion of a world-wide geologic column. The interior layers of the crust vary widely from place to place. But we can tell from context that "geologic column" really means "local geologic column.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
JonF Member (Idle past 198 days) Posts: 6174 Joined: |
You haven't answered any points. Repeating claims is not answering.
What is the source of your claim that the geologic column is only on land?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
JonF Member (Idle past 198 days) Posts: 6174 Joined: |
Fixed It For You. I corrected an obvious error in your message.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
JonF Member (Idle past 198 days) Posts: 6174 Joined: |
Well, it does speak of it as a "stack" while the ocean deposits aren't deep enough to be a stack
The pictures we have posted show lots of layers. A stack is "a pile of objects, typically one that is neatly arranged". They are a stack.
They are obviously newer than the geological column as we find it on all the continents,
Why? And, were that true, why would that be an issue?
the column does not exist on the sea floor
6,886 unsupported assertions which are contradicted by those definitions. 128,785,965,702 to go.
and since they do not build upon that familiar well known geological column that defines all the time periods it's not part of it.
Since they don't build upon your made-up version of the geologic column but do build on the geologic column as it is defined by everyone but you, it's part of the geologic column.
And may I also point out that since it is new and does not build on the geological column
No, you may not, because that's false as shown by those definitions. Of course you could produce a definition from some source other than you, except no such source exists. The definition of the geologic column does not restrict it to land. Edited by Admin, : The spaces in the 128 billion number made it hard to read, maybe just me, but removed them. Also, corrected typo in quote from Faith's message: continenents => continents
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
JonF Member (Idle past 198 days) Posts: 6174 Joined: |
Well, but I HAVE provided endless repetition of my unsupported claims
FIFY Edited by JonF, : No reason given.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024