Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 78 (8908 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 05-25-2019 9:00 PM
18 online now:
AZPaul3, edge (2 members, 16 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: WeloTemo
Post Volume:
Total: 852,042 Year: 7,078/19,786 Month: 1,619/1,581 Week: 441/393 Day: 32/43 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
RewPrev1
...
1920
21
22232425Next
Author Topic:   Was there a worldwide flood?
JonF
Member
Posts: 4748
Joined: 06-23-2003
Member Rating: 3.2


Message 301 of 372 (511004)
06-05-2009 12:54 PM
Reply to: Message 293 by anglagard
06-05-2009 9:04 AM


Re: Worldwide flood -- not
Well, did it ever occur to you or your uncited 'source' that there were different species of the same date 200km away in a different type of sediment because they represent a different environment?

African pig fossils are well understood and widely studied, and are used as index fossils. If you have radiometric dating of a formation but the pig fossils associated with that formation are from an older or earlier time, there's a problem somewhere. I'm not familiar with the case that Peg "cites", but disagreeing with pig fossils is what clued investigators there was something wrong with the original radiometric dates of the KBS Tuff, immortalized from a creationist point of view in Lubenow's Bones of Contention. In the real world the KBS Tuff story is one of a triumph of the scientific method and consilience.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 293 by anglagard, posted 06-05-2009 9:04 AM anglagard has not yet responded

Peg
Member (Idle past 3070 days)
Posts: 2703
From: melbourne, australia
Joined: 11-22-2008


Message 302 of 372 (511056)
06-05-2009 11:08 PM
Reply to: Message 293 by anglagard
06-05-2009 9:04 AM


Re: Worldwide flood -- not
anglagard writes:

Well, did it ever occur to you or your uncited 'source' that there were different species of the same date 200km away in a different type of sediment because they represent a different environment? Is the world today all desert or all river estuary?

That is an unproved conjecture...yes, they can explain the contradictory evidence that way, but without proof the obvious inconsistency in sedimentary layers remain. And further, if the environment can be so different over the short distance of 200kms, then trying to prove anything with sediment layers is just plain stupid.

there is no place on the earth where a complete record of the rocks is present. Some areas have been getting heavy deposition of sediment for millions of years, and other areas have been getting worn down thru erosion for long periods of time so the geologic column relies heavily on guesswork and hypotheticals rather then anything solid.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 293 by anglagard, posted 06-05-2009 9:04 AM anglagard has not yet responded

  
Peg
Member (Idle past 3070 days)
Posts: 2703
From: melbourne, australia
Joined: 11-22-2008


Message 303 of 372 (511058)
06-05-2009 11:29 PM
Reply to: Message 290 by anglagard
06-05-2009 8:46 AM


Re: Worldwide flood -- not
anglagard writes:

Sediment layers are always consistent with the laws of physics, chemistry, and geology. If you can show just one counterexample, then please feel free to elaborate as there would be a Nobel prize waiting.

well the sediments are not consistent in the case of the Omo valley and Lake Rudolph. Even though the fragments Richard Leakey found were dated to 2.5 million years old, the skull was the same shape as modern man. He said that other bone fragments that were found such as the leg specimens were indistinguishable from the same bones of modern men.

but they were still dated to be 2.5 million years old.

anglagard writes:

What is not consistent is the concept that evolution never occurred in the past or at present, except right after those 'kinds' super-evolved at a super-dooper rate right after any flood when housecats gave birth to lions.

fossils appear suddenly in the geologic record, not gradually as evolutution theorizes. Immediately above the lifeless sediments of the Azoic era, the Cambrian layers carrie an abundance of fossil crustaceans and shellfish, in great variety, already fully developed.

Same goes for plant life....plants with woody stems appear suddenly in the mid-Paleozoic but not before.

the rest of your rant needs no response.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 290 by anglagard, posted 06-05-2009 8:46 AM anglagard has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 304 by bluescat48, posted 06-05-2009 11:54 PM Peg has responded
 Message 307 by Coyote, posted 06-06-2009 12:18 AM Peg has not yet responded

  
bluescat48
Member (Idle past 2330 days)
Posts: 2347
From: United States
Joined: 10-06-2007


Message 304 of 372 (511061)
06-05-2009 11:54 PM
Reply to: Message 303 by Peg
06-05-2009 11:29 PM


Re: Worldwide flood -- not
Peg writes:

well the sediments are not consistent in the case of the Omo valley and Lake Rudolph. Even though the fragments Richard Leakey found were dated to 2.5 million years old, the skull was the same shape as modern man. He said that other bone fragments that were found such as the leg specimens were indistinguishable from the same bones of modern men.

but they were still dated to be 2.5 million years old.

Could you give me the reference to the above?


There is no better love between 2 people than mutual respect for each other WT Young, 2002

Who gave anyone the authority to call me an authority on anything. WT Young, 1969

Since Evolution is only ~90% correct it should be thrown out and replaced by Creation which has even a lower % of correctness. W T Young, 2008


This message is a reply to:
 Message 303 by Peg, posted 06-05-2009 11:29 PM Peg has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 308 by Peg, posted 06-06-2009 12:30 AM bluescat48 has not yet responded

  
Peg
Member (Idle past 3070 days)
Posts: 2703
From: melbourne, australia
Joined: 11-22-2008


Message 305 of 372 (511062)
06-05-2009 11:54 PM
Reply to: Message 291 by Theodoric
06-05-2009 8:56 AM


Theodoric writes:

No it isn't.

Care to explain why it would be?

Because it is a fact that the oceans were much lower then they are know as is seen by the river channels that go deep into the ocean.

there are huge land ridges that connect the continents which were at one time above the ocean and are now beneath it

there is ten times as much water by volume in the ocean as there is land above sea level

there are fossil remains of many different animals, such as lions, tigers, bears, and elk, together in common strata, which may indicate that all of these were destroyed simultaneously.

There are whole frozen mammoths coming out of the ice right now with undigested food in their stomachs which shows they died suddenly which points to a sudden catastrophic event

Im convinced that this is evidence of a great flood. Call me stupid or whatever, but the fact is that this phenomenon is visible all over the earth and it convinces me that something catastrophic must have happened. Yes, I'm simple I know.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 291 by Theodoric, posted 06-05-2009 8:56 AM Theodoric has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 306 by bluescat48, posted 06-06-2009 12:16 AM Peg has responded

  
bluescat48
Member (Idle past 2330 days)
Posts: 2347
From: United States
Joined: 10-06-2007


Message 306 of 372 (511063)
06-06-2009 12:16 AM
Reply to: Message 305 by Peg
06-05-2009 11:54 PM


Peg writes:

Because it is a fact that the oceans were much lower then they are know as is seen by the river channels that go deep into the ocean.

there are huge land ridges that connect the continents which were at one time above the ocean and are now beneath it

This occurs whenever there is an ice age. Where do you think the water that forms the massive glaciers comes from?

there are fossil remains of many different animals, such as lions, tigers, bears, and elk, together in common strata, which may indicate that all of these were destroyed simultaneously.

Catastrophe, possibly still no evidence for a global flood.

There are whole frozen mammoths coming out of the ice right now with undigested food in their stomachs which shows they died suddenly which points to a sudden catastrophic event

Catastrophe yes but still not evidence of a global flood. How about freezing to death at the beginning of an ice age?


There is no better love between 2 people than mutual respect for each other WT Young, 2002

Who gave anyone the authority to call me an authority on anything. WT Young, 1969

Since Evolution is only ~90% correct it should be thrown out and replaced by Creation which has even a lower % of correctness. W T Young, 2008


This message is a reply to:
 Message 305 by Peg, posted 06-05-2009 11:54 PM Peg has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 320 by Peg, posted 06-06-2009 12:57 AM bluescat48 has responded

  
Coyote
Member (Idle past 247 days)
Posts: 6117
Joined: 01-12-2008


Message 307 of 372 (511064)
06-06-2009 12:18 AM
Reply to: Message 303 by Peg
06-05-2009 11:29 PM


Re: Worldwide flood -- not
Even though the fragments Richard Leakey found were dated to 2.5 million years old, the skull was the same shape as modern man.

Is this your professional opinion or are you getting this from some creationist website?

If the latter, please cite your source.

I studied fossil man through the Ph.D. exams, and I am not aware of any skull 2.5 million years old that has the same shape as modern man. I would opine that you are being lied to by creationists who are 1) anti-science, 2) willfully and sullenly ignorant of science, and 3) pushing their religious beliefs in the guise of science in spite of a huge mountain of scientific evidence that contradicts those beliefs.

If this is incorrect, please correct me.

And lets get back to the flood--the topic of this thread.

By the way, from your previous posts I realize that you are confusing sediments and geological formations. One is soil (dirt), the other is rock.


Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 303 by Peg, posted 06-05-2009 11:29 PM Peg has not yet responded

Peg
Member (Idle past 3070 days)
Posts: 2703
From: melbourne, australia
Joined: 11-22-2008


Message 308 of 372 (511065)
06-06-2009 12:30 AM
Reply to: Message 304 by bluescat48
06-05-2009 11:54 PM


Re: Worldwide flood -- not
here is a link to the article

Lake Rudolph Skull Fragments

Edited by Admin, : Shorten long link.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 304 by bluescat48, posted 06-05-2009 11:54 PM bluescat48 has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 310 by Dr Adequate, posted 06-06-2009 12:39 AM Peg has responded
 Message 313 by Coyote, posted 06-06-2009 12:44 AM Peg has not yet responded
 Message 335 by RAZD, posted 06-07-2009 10:30 PM Peg has not yet responded
 Message 336 by Theodoric, posted 06-07-2009 10:47 PM Peg has not yet responded
 Message 337 by Theodoric, posted 06-07-2009 11:01 PM Peg has not yet responded

  
Peg
Member (Idle past 3070 days)
Posts: 2703
From: melbourne, australia
Joined: 11-22-2008


Message 309 of 372 (511067)
06-06-2009 12:36 AM
Reply to: Message 297 by Dr Adequate
06-05-2009 9:37 AM


Re: Worldwide flood -- not
DrAdequate writes:

So if having different pigs in different places at the same time is an argument against real geology, why isn't having different pigs in different places an argument against flood geology, which claims that all fossils were laid down at the same time?

the argument has been about the supposed 'consistency' of sedimentary layers in the geologic column

they are obviously not consistent as the pigs show...not only the pig fossils but also the human fossils.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 297 by Dr Adequate, posted 06-05-2009 9:37 AM Dr Adequate has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 312 by Dr Adequate, posted 06-06-2009 12:44 AM Peg has not yet responded

  
Dr Adequate
Member
Posts: 16094
Joined: 07-20-2006
Member Rating: 5.5


Message 310 of 372 (511068)
06-06-2009 12:39 AM
Reply to: Message 308 by Peg
06-06-2009 12:30 AM


Re: Worldwide flood -- not
The link you provide specifically states that "the skull is different from our own species, Homo sapiens" and that it has a cranial capacity of only 800 cc, as opposed to an average of 1500 cc for modern man.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 308 by Peg, posted 06-06-2009 12:30 AM Peg has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 315 by Peg, posted 06-06-2009 12:50 AM Dr Adequate has responded

Peg
Member (Idle past 3070 days)
Posts: 2703
From: melbourne, australia
Joined: 11-22-2008


Message 311 of 372 (511069)
06-06-2009 12:42 AM
Reply to: Message 292 by Percy
06-05-2009 9:00 AM


Percy writes:

You disagree? So you're saying that the fact that 70% of the earth's surface is covered by water is evidence that the remaining 30% was also covered by water at one time? Why? Is there something about 70% in particular? If water only covered 60% of the earth, would that be sufficient evidence of flooding of the remaining portion? Of is the threshold some other number, maybe 50% or 40%? Or is it the mere presence of any amount of the earth's surface covered by water that provides sufficient evidence of flooding of the rest of it?

if you came upon a city that was covered by 70% water, would you deny that it had been flooded?

Recently we had 1/3 of the state of Queensland covered by water...it was flooded...higher areas were unaffected but lower areas were definately flooded. If the floodwaters remain and I was to visit in 10 years time having never known the place before, i would probably not think it was flooded.

It doesnt mean that its not flooded though. Same goes for the earth. Just because we were not around when the oceans were lower, does not mean that the earth is not flooded now. When the evidence is that the oceans were at one time much lower, then the only logical conclusion is that it must now be flooded.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 292 by Percy, posted 06-05-2009 9:00 AM Percy has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 314 by Dr Adequate, posted 06-06-2009 12:46 AM Peg has responded
 Message 319 by bluescat48, posted 06-06-2009 12:57 AM Peg has responded
 Message 331 by Percy, posted 06-06-2009 7:30 AM Peg has not yet responded

  
Dr Adequate
Member
Posts: 16094
Joined: 07-20-2006
Member Rating: 5.5


Message 312 of 372 (511070)
06-06-2009 12:44 AM
Reply to: Message 309 by Peg
06-06-2009 12:36 AM


Re: Worldwide flood -- not
You haven't answered my point. If it was impossible to have different kinds of pigs living in different places at the same time, then the existence of different pigs in different places in the geological record would mean that the fossils couldn't have been laid down by Noah's flood, which was a one-off event occurring at one particular time.

Of course, it is perfectly possible to have two species of pigs living at the same time. But if it was impossible, the fossil record would deliver the same blow to "flood geology" as you hope to deliver to real geology.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 309 by Peg, posted 06-06-2009 12:36 AM Peg has not yet responded

Coyote
Member (Idle past 247 days)
Posts: 6117
Joined: 01-12-2008


Message 313 of 372 (511071)
06-06-2009 12:44 AM
Reply to: Message 308 by Peg
06-06-2009 12:30 AM


Re: Worldwide flood -- not
I can't get anything out of that link.

Please just tell me what skull you're talking about.


Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 308 by Peg, posted 06-06-2009 12:30 AM Peg has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 317 by Dr Adequate, posted 06-06-2009 12:54 AM Coyote has responded

Dr Adequate
Member
Posts: 16094
Joined: 07-20-2006
Member Rating: 5.5


Message 314 of 372 (511072)
06-06-2009 12:46 AM
Reply to: Message 311 by Peg
06-06-2009 12:42 AM


if you came upon a city that was covered by 70% water, would you deny that it had been flooded?

No. That would be because I know that cities are typically built above water.

And if you can find any evidence of cities buried beneath the lowest layers of sedimentary rocks, you'll have a point.

Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 311 by Peg, posted 06-06-2009 12:42 AM Peg has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 316 by Peg, posted 06-06-2009 12:51 AM Dr Adequate has responded

Peg
Member (Idle past 3070 days)
Posts: 2703
From: melbourne, australia
Joined: 11-22-2008


Message 315 of 372 (511073)
06-06-2009 12:50 AM
Reply to: Message 310 by Dr Adequate
06-06-2009 12:39 AM


Re: Worldwide flood -- not
"Unresolved is the relationship of the new find to Homo Habilis who's bone fragments were found in Olduvial Gorge 500 miles south of Lake Rudolf in a layer 1.75 million years old. The hand bones of this species suggested a dexterity approaching that of modern man and Dr Clarke suspects the new find may be an earlier form of homo habilis. However the brain chamber of this only measured 656 cubic centermeters compared to Mr Leakeys estimate of 800 for the newly peiced together skull"

So how can a 1.75 million year old fossil resemble modern man?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 310 by Dr Adequate, posted 06-06-2009 12:39 AM Dr Adequate has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 321 by Dr Adequate, posted 06-06-2009 12:57 AM Peg has not yet responded
 Message 322 by bluescat48, posted 06-06-2009 1:02 AM Peg has not yet responded
 Message 332 by lyx2no, posted 06-06-2009 9:12 AM Peg has not yet responded
 Message 334 by lyx2no, posted 06-06-2009 2:47 PM Peg has not yet responded

  
RewPrev1
...
1920
21
22232425Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019