Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
6 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/7


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Soracilla defends the Flood? (mostly a "Joggins Polystrate Fossils" discussion)
Soracilla
Inactive Member


Message 3 of 190 (80939)
01-26-2004 10:25 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by JonF
01-26-2004 10:09 AM


I'll just post this quick note so you will not think I am avoiding the challenge. I have read most of your links in part, but it will take some time to comprehensively go through them, especially since I only get to the evcforum a few nights a week. So I shall respond in a few days after I have read through the sites and researched the topic more completely. Perhaps I will find that I was mistaken this whole time, for you have some great arguments. Hope it is not too much trouble to ask you to be patient for me to respond with more than complete ignorance. Thanks, Soracilla.

The man who does not read good books has no advantage over the man who can't read them.
-Mark Twain

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by JonF, posted 01-26-2004 10:09 AM JonF has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 4 by NosyNed, posted 01-27-2004 1:41 AM Soracilla has not replied
 Message 6 by roxrkool, posted 01-27-2004 10:46 AM Soracilla has not replied

Soracilla
Inactive Member


Message 10 of 190 (84003)
02-06-2004 5:27 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by JonF
01-26-2004 10:09 AM


I do apologize for my lateness in getting this in, for I've completely forgotten. After reading through your links I found few things that I could answer well with my current knowledge, and the arguments were quite well stated. However, there are a few things that bother me still about accepting your position.
One, I found the articles on the Creationists forfeiting their previous beliefs rather unpersuasive on the whole, for the mere fact that Creationists did forfeit their beliefs does not do anything beyond making one prone give the view a fair hearing.
Two, the polystrate tree rebuttals were mostly composed of saying that Evolutionists in our current age do not believe in uniformitarianism, and such trees can be created by the earth quickly moving over a tree (by volcanic rock moved by the eruption, sand dunes moving, or other explanations). But one thing bothers me: if such a quick movement of the land happened and the tree was fossilized in that, it still does not account for the different layers the tree goes through. For if the layers are divided because they are marks of millions of years before, why would a fossilized tree be polystrate if it fossilized in the same layer of earth that covered it? It seems to me that if a tree became fossilized, regardless of how, it would remain in one layer, the one in which it fossilized. But we don't see that; the trees go through layers that represent millions of years, and I cannot possibly see how that is possible by your view of the ages of the layers in the earth.
Also I'd like to say that I was never trying to prove that the Flood happened by appealing to polystrate trees, just that they show that the layers cannot represent ages millions of years long.
Soracilla

The man who does not read good books has no advantage over the man who can't read them.
-Mark Twain

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by JonF, posted 01-26-2004 10:09 AM JonF has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 11 by JonF, posted 02-06-2004 6:32 PM Soracilla has not replied
 Message 12 by Bill Birkeland, posted 02-07-2004 4:57 PM Soracilla 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