Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 63 (9072 total)
74 online now:
Newest Member: FossilDiscovery
Post Volume: Total: 893,148 Year: 4,260/6,534 Month: 474/900 Week: 180/150 Day: 26/8 Hour: 2/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Young earth explanations for Angular Unconformities
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 284 days)
Posts: 16112
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 74 of 202 (423765)
09-24-2007 8:55 AM
Reply to: Message 73 by CTD
09-24-2007 8:40 AM


Okay, so could we have some sort of method of distinguishing between sediments deposited by natural means and sediments deposited by a magic flood?

Or are they completely indistinguishable?

Can't say I'd be willing to accept any of the assumptions that such-and-such 'takes a long time' to form, as it's been demonstrated that most, if not all of these things need to form quickly.

I fear that this demonstration has taken place only in the magical creationist fairyland in your head.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 73 by CTD, posted 09-24-2007 8:40 AM CTD has taken no action

Replies to this message:
 Message 76 by Ihategod, posted 09-24-2007 12:45 PM Dr Adequate has replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 284 days)
Posts: 16112
Joined: 07-20-2006


(1)
Message 77 of 202 (423838)
09-24-2007 3:02 PM
Reply to: Message 76 by Ihategod
09-24-2007 12:45 PM


I would suspect that the Noachian flood deposited sediments in the way we see the geologic column.

So --- how can we distinguish magic flood rocks from normal non-magic rocks? Are you saying that we can't, or what is your meaning?

It's really hard to find a source that explains it coherently ...

Mmm ... I wonder why.

Lucid books on real geology are commonplace.

... usually it involves trying to answer the onslaught of uniformitarian dogma.

If by "the onslaught of uniformitarian dogma" you mean geology, then yes, you would have to answer that at some point. Faced with this impossible task, incoherence does indeed seem the safest refuge.

Because the uniformitarian assumption prevails doesn't make it correct.

No, it's its agreement with reality that does that.

It definitely does not help the formation of ideas when evo's constantly ridicule the research in this field.

You're blaming us for your failures? Our giggling is preventing you from concentrating on your "creation science"?

I think that there could be another more fundemental problem, like that you're wrong.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 76 by Ihategod, posted 09-24-2007 12:45 PM Ihategod has taken no action

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 284 days)
Posts: 16112
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 84 of 202 (424104)
09-25-2007 4:19 PM
Reply to: Message 83 by CTD
09-25-2007 3:31 PM


But I'm not inclined to get very involved just now. Earlier in the thread, the whole line was "creationists are scared to death of unconformities because they disprove the flood." Now it's more like "We think we have enough unconformities available that we hope we can find one a creationist can't explain."

Yes, I'm not sure any of us had come across your remarkable ad hoc argument before.

I notice that you have not answered my question, which I repeat. How can we tell the difference between naturally deposited sediment and magic flood sediment?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 83 by CTD, posted 09-25-2007 3:31 PM CTD has taken no action

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.1
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2022