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: 1/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Did the Flood really happen?
Percy
Member
Posts: 22392
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 1496 of 2370 (869341)
12-28-2019 3:52 PM
Reply to: Message 1495 by RAZD
12-28-2019 2:03 PM


Re: Depositions, and Lake Bonneville
RAZD writes:
Shouting doesn't make your points any more valid less invalid.
Attempted improvement.
AbE:
Again the reality is shown by the details Faith.
I think the problems with Faith's perspective are obvious from telescopic range all the way down to the quantum level.
-Percy
Edited by Percy, : AbE.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1495 by RAZD, posted 12-28-2019 2:03 PM RAZD has seen this message but not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22392
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


(1)
Message 1501 of 2370 (869351)
12-29-2019 8:47 AM
Reply to: Message 1499 by Faith
12-29-2019 3:50 AM


Re: Depositions, and Lake Bonneville don’t show Flood Geology
Faith writes:
The Flood explains pretty much everything, where Geology is klutzy and incompetent, and the fossil order is some kind of odd illusion especially since no creature could have evolved from the others. Again, there is absolutely no way the strata as they exist as the Geological Column, spreading across thousands of square miles, could ever have come about if they represent time periods. It is a physical impossibility but that is something you deny.
Translation into the fact-based world:
Geology explains a great deal, while the Flood is ad hoc and impossible. The fossil order is one of the clearest examples of its problems as well as a record of evolution over time. The geological column could not have been formed by a global flood, nor any sequence of floods. The strata across the Earth vary in extent from mere feet to thousands of square miles, and contain a record of radiometric age that adds to what were once mere names given to time periods. Given all the contrary evidence and the physical impossibilities, the Flood is just a religious myth that some continue to cling to as if real.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1499 by Faith, posted 12-29-2019 3:50 AM Faith has not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22392
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 1532 of 2370 (869526)
12-31-2019 5:34 PM
Reply to: Message 1520 by PaulK
12-31-2019 5:36 AM


Re: Moving post about the prehistoric geological past
PaulK writes:
In the face of those facts any honest person would have to admit that the mainstream stream view was by far the better explanation.
Commenting on the understatement, geology is a better explanation than Genesis in the way that childbirth is a better explanation than the stork for where babies come from.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1520 by PaulK, posted 12-31-2019 5:36 AM PaulK has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1533 by jar, posted 12-31-2019 7:03 PM Percy has seen this message but not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22392
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 1542 of 2370 (869568)
01-02-2020 11:30 AM
Reply to: Message 1540 by PaulK
01-02-2020 2:21 AM


Re: Land sediments sandwiched between marine sediments
PaulK writes:
quote:
Seems to me such a sandwich would show the fossil order idea to be a crock.
Obviously it wouldn’t. The order in the fossil record is not an order of environments.
Either this is wrong or you're saying something subtle that I'm not getting.
What I thought Faith was saying was that a stratigraphic sequence of marine/terrestrial/marine disproves sea transgression/regressions. The rest of her post seemed to be an attempt to support this contention using free association arguments untethered to reality.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1540 by PaulK, posted 01-02-2020 2:21 AM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1543 by PaulK, posted 01-02-2020 12:19 PM Percy has seen this message but not replied
 Message 1544 by dwise1, posted 01-02-2020 1:01 PM Percy has seen this message but not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22392
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 1574 of 2370 (869699)
01-04-2020 9:48 AM
Reply to: Message 1550 by Faith
01-02-2020 2:43 PM


Re: Land sediments sandwiched between marine sediments
Faith writes:
Love how you guys rewrite your theory every time it's challenged.
Instead of calling others dishonest and accusing them of random goalpost moving, it might be more helpful to explain what you perceive as the rewrite of theory. As far as I can tell, everyone is saying pretty much the same thing and pretty much what's in the textbooks. Some people do employ a brevity that can cause ambiguity, and I'm sure there's some talking past each other going on, because I see some certainty about what you're saying that I don't myself see.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1550 by Faith, posted 01-02-2020 2:43 PM Faith has not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22392
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


(1)
Message 1575 of 2370 (869701)
01-04-2020 11:34 AM
Reply to: Message 1555 by PaulK
01-02-2020 3:46 PM


Re: Land sediments sandwiched between marine sediments
PaulK writes:
A transgression followed by a regression followed by a second transgression will naturally produce this.
Just to add a little detail, a regression exposes land to erosive forces, so a second transgression could result in an unconformity. In other words, part or even all of the stratigraphic record of the first transgression might be absent.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1555 by PaulK, posted 01-02-2020 3:46 PM PaulK has not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22392
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 1576 of 2370 (869702)
01-04-2020 11:38 AM
Reply to: Message 1557 by Faith
01-02-2020 3:52 PM


Re: Land sediments sandwiched between marine sediments
Faith writes:
No, all that is what is assumed, based only on the ToE. If you believe against all reason that each layer of sediment represents a time period of millions of years then of course you are going to interpret some of it in terms of their land origin. In reality they were all deposited by the Flood water no matter what their original location.
You're engaging in fact-free discussion. All the objections to geology take the form of incredulity. All the claims of a flood take the form of dubious and unsupported assertions.
If you think people accept geology against all reason, you need to provide those reasons.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1557 by Faith, posted 01-02-2020 3:52 PM Faith 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