|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Did the Flood really happen? | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
JonF Member (Idle past 199 days) Posts: 6174 Joined: |
Look at what I bolded in the "quote"
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
JonF Member (Idle past 199 days) Posts: 6174 Joined:
|
Whichever is easier.
She literally can't. She is unable to detect any difference between her inventions and reality. She believes deep down in her soul that repeating claims is discussing and supporting. See Message 920 where she repeated her claim that the geologic column does not exist under the sea floor as "evidence" against the definitions that contradict it.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
JonF Member (Idle past 199 days) Posts: 6174 Joined: |
The "stack" begins with precambrian rocks and ascends through the sedimentary layerss from Cambrian through Holocene, variations of which is what we find on the continents;
Part of it does. Just as part of it is in the Southwest US.it does not exist on the sea floor If you insist on a complete column to be part of the geologic column you are excluding almost all of the land. Including your beloved Grand Canyon If you will accept an incomplete column as part of the geologic column, define where the cutoff is and justify your choice. Edited by JonF, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
JonF Member (Idle past 199 days) Posts: 6174 Joined:
|
Now now now, I never said that "geological processes have ended." I said the Geological COLUMN, otherwise known as the Geological Timescale, has ended.
Geologic processes unavoidably produce the geologic column. No more geologic column requires that geologic processes not be active.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
JonF Member (Idle past 199 days) Posts: 6174 Joined: |
There is no problem with defining the Geo Column as the stra
Big problem. That definition is incompatible with the definition everyone else uses, and the six versions I have posted. You don't get to redefine standard and widely used terms.
Nothing else is necessary to the definition and by this definition we have no further growth of the Geological Column. It is OVER AND DONE WITH.
Nothing else is necessary to define something, but that something is not the geologic column of long and widespread use. Edited by JonF, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
JonF Member (Idle past 199 days) Posts: 6174 Joined: |
Actually I'm the one defining the reality, the actual reality, the real reality, the bona fide physical reality known as the Geological Column.
So all the world except you is wrong. Quite a delusion.
Actually I'm the one defining the reality, the actual reality, the real reality, the bona fide physical reality known as the Geological Column.
We do have a strong tendency to require evidence before changing our minds, especially when redefining standard and widely used terms. So far the only evidence produced is your sincere and strongly held belief. That's not convincing. (Remember repeating unsupported claims is not evidence. I do expect you to ignore this and repeat your claims.)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
JonF Member (Idle past 199 days) Posts: 6174 Joined: |
Oh and namecalling is another form of rationalizing it away.
We've explained why your claims are "completely made-up bullshirt nonsense" over and over again in many different ways. All you've done is repeat your claims. Do you at least admit that nobody but you accepts those claims? Not just here, but worldwide. Who but you believes those claims?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
JonF Member (Idle past 199 days) Posts: 6174 Joined: |
Mindless repetition of unsupported claims.. You got nothing but the fantasies in your head.
The geologic column underlies every point on Earth, by definition. Your feeble attempt to change the definition is obvious. There are no wrong places. Anywhere deposition is happening adds to the column, no matter how small. Edited by JonF, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
JonF Member (Idle past 199 days) Posts: 6174 Joined: |
The geologic column is indeed a very specific thing. It's defined as I have posted so many times. It is not what you claim it is.
Will you ever figure out that intrminably repeating you claims is not evidence for them? What you need is a definition from some reputable authority that agrees with you. Or examples of being used in the liter in your sense. But no such things exist. Since you never can admit err, you're stuck.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
JonF Member (Idle past 199 days) Posts: 6174 Joined:
|
That's it, that's the evidence. The Geological Column is a specific stack. It is no longer being built on. That's it, it's over.
It's not evidence for your claims. That's a description of some layers intermixed with more of the same unjustified assertions.
Nothing is building on top of it but a lakebed here and there, nothing even remotely in the ballpark.
That's one of your claims. Your claims are not evidence for your claims.
Relocating it to the sea bed removes it from its well known location.
That's one of your claims. Your claims are not evidence for your claims. Once you remove your infinitely repeated unsupported claims, you have an uncontroversial and unrelated description of some formations. Your claims are inconsistent with the universal definition of the geological column. You haven't addressed and obviously cannot address that fatal flaw. You are wrong. Edited by JonF, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
JonF Member (Idle past 199 days) Posts: 6174 Joined:
|
The sea floor is not on top of the geological column. The geo column is a stack of sediments. If you put sediments somewhere else you are not building on the geo column.
That's one of your claims. Your claims are not evidence for your claims.
Agaih, the deposits that are on top of the geo column are minuscule and therefore are not building on it.
That's one of your claims. Your claims are not evidence for your claims.
What else can I possibly say? I've said it a million times already.
You can't say anything else. You can't say "here's a definition that agrees with me". You can't say "here's a quote from someone who knows using it in my sense." Nobody in the world agrees with you. You can't say anything that would support your claims because your claims are wrong and unsupportable. Saying it is not supporting it.
Your argument makes no sense.
Your inability to understand it is not a valid criterion.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
JonF Member (Idle past 199 days) Posts: 6174 Joined: |
Not even YECs agree with you. One of the definitions I posted and which agreed with the mainstream definition came from Answers in Genesis. Another came from Conservapedia (Conservative Wikipedia). Both are very strongly creationist. AIG is one of the largest and best known YEC organizations.
NOBODY agrees with you, no matter their religion or opinion on the age of the Earth and life.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
JonF Member (Idle past 199 days) Posts: 6174 Joined: |
I'm sorry, but the evidence does NOT show that a given layer of the Geological Column was ever constructed by small deposits of sediment one at a time. All eventually creating a deposit of one sediment thousands of square miles in extent and maybe hundreds of feet deep? Don't try to put that one over on me
What evidence, and in what way does it support your claims? Edited by JonF, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
JonF Member (Idle past 199 days) Posts: 6174 Joined: |
Yes of course sediment is continuing on the sea floor. Which is not on the geological column.
That is one of your claims. Your claims are not evidence for your claims. Also your ignorant incredulity is not evidence for your claims.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
JonF Member (Idle past 199 days) Posts: 6174 Joined: |
Evidence for that claim is in my description/definitioln of the geological column which is the only rational definition in this discussion.
Another unsupported assertion including a gratuitous derogatory adjective. Your determination of reality is highly suspect for many reasons. In this case,
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024