Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
1 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,818 Year: 3,075/9,624 Month: 920/1,588 Week: 103/223 Day: 1/13 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   What Strata does the Biblical Flood Begin & End?
Arkansas Banana Boy
Inactive Member


Message 16 of 30 (213407)
06-02-2005 5:30 AM
Reply to: Message 15 by edge
10-31-2002 10:17 PM


What we would expect
I was trolling thru old posts and found this one. A huge flood would lay down a large layer of a mixture of existing world material.
To think a flood would create multiple layered sediments does require some supernatural help.
ABB

This message is a reply to:
 Message 15 by edge, posted 10-31-2002 10:17 PM edge has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 17 by mark24, posted 06-02-2005 7:03 AM Arkansas Banana Boy has replied
 Message 24 by lfen, posted 06-04-2005 8:04 PM Arkansas Banana Boy has not replied

  
mark24
Member (Idle past 5195 days)
Posts: 3857
From: UK
Joined: 12-01-2001


Message 17 of 30 (213410)
06-02-2005 7:03 AM
Reply to: Message 16 by Arkansas Banana Boy
06-02-2005 5:30 AM


Re: What we would expect
ABB,
But given that strata can be cross-correlated globally to give a relative age, where did the flood begin & end with reference to the eras & epochs?
Mark

There are 10 kinds of people in this world; those that understand binary, & those that don't

This message is a reply to:
 Message 16 by Arkansas Banana Boy, posted 06-02-2005 5:30 AM Arkansas Banana Boy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 18 by Arkansas Banana Boy, posted 06-02-2005 3:00 PM mark24 has replied

  
Arkansas Banana Boy
Inactive Member


Message 18 of 30 (213578)
06-02-2005 3:00 PM
Reply to: Message 17 by mark24
06-02-2005 7:03 AM


Not sure
I've seen a few versions, each with their problems. As a noncreationist projecting on a creationist theory, I would go with the Cambrian boundary. One could try to claim early life and rock were set down by God, but the major trouble is that most life Noah led up the ramp would not have evolved yet if you consider that pesky geologic column.
The only other 'logical' choice could be aroung the coal forming ages, but we have seen in debate here the problems it has. I need to kill a few brain cells and go google creationist flood theory.
ABB

This message is a reply to:
 Message 17 by mark24, posted 06-02-2005 7:03 AM mark24 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 19 by mark24, posted 06-02-2005 8:38 PM Arkansas Banana Boy has not replied

  
mark24
Member (Idle past 5195 days)
Posts: 3857
From: UK
Joined: 12-01-2001


Message 19 of 30 (213667)
06-02-2005 8:38 PM
Reply to: Message 18 by Arkansas Banana Boy
06-02-2005 3:00 PM


Re: Not sure
ABB,
One could try to claim early life and rock were set down by God, but the major trouble is that most life Noah led up the ramp would not have evolved yet if you consider that pesky geologic column.
Nor does it explain all that sedimentary rock below the CB that looks exactly like the rock above it that was allegedly laid down in the flood. Nor does it explain how all the Precambrian fossils got where they are. Nor does it explain why radiometric dating shows no anomoly whatsoever when moving down the geologic column from the "present" into the Precambrian. Surely a flood would have messed things up a bit? But no, you can move down the GC uninterupted, & the rocks date older & older regardless of whether they were laid down by an alleged flood, or not.
The only other 'logical' choice could be aroung the coal forming ages, but we have seen in debate here the problems it has. I need to kill a few brain cells and go google creationist flood theory.
This presents even more of a problem, there are more pre-flood fossils to explain. The radiometric dating problem outlined above still exists, & so the the indiscriminate nature of pre-flood & flood sediments.
This is a flood, I am told, that accounts for the geologic column & the fossils contained within it. Such a cataclysm must have left evidence. The rocks that are undisturbed by the flood should be in obvious evidence, & so should the layers deposited after the flood. There should be two crashingly obvious unconformities with flood strata in the middle. But there aren't.
There is a fairly obvious conclusion to draw from this.
Mark

There are 10 kinds of people in this world; those that understand binary, & those that don't

This message is a reply to:
 Message 18 by Arkansas Banana Boy, posted 06-02-2005 3:00 PM Arkansas Banana Boy has not replied

  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1344 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 20 of 30 (213724)
06-03-2005 1:50 AM


what consensus?
i've heard creationists claim everything from the entire geological colum to just the k-t boundary. kind of a wide range of claims we're dealing with here.

אָרַח

Replies to this message:
 Message 21 by roxrkool, posted 06-03-2005 10:03 AM arachnophilia has not replied

  
roxrkool
Member (Idle past 989 days)
Posts: 1497
From: Nevada
Joined: 03-23-2003


Message 21 of 30 (213812)
06-03-2005 10:03 AM
Reply to: Message 20 by arachnophilia
06-03-2005 1:50 AM


Re: what consensus?
I've heard the Archean-Proterozoic boundary is one possibility for the beginning of the flood. I've also heard the PreC-Cambrian boundary.
The end of the flood appears to be more contentious among the YEC researchers. Some have proposed the beginning of the Cambrian, the Carboniferous, the Permian, the Cretaceous, and the Quaternary.
Basically, they don't have a clue. When they're willing to pin themselves down to a time period, they get in trouble because they can't explain all the details.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 20 by arachnophilia, posted 06-03-2005 1:50 AM arachnophilia has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 23 by edge, posted 06-04-2005 7:40 PM roxrkool has replied

  
Nighttrain
Member (Idle past 3994 days)
Posts: 1512
From: brisbane,australia
Joined: 06-08-2004


Message 22 of 30 (214049)
06-03-2005 9:51 PM


And how does one explain mountain lakes, extensive cave systems. lava tubes,craters/calderas with no sign of other than local sediments, heavy minerals deposited near today`s surface?
Simple-----it all happened subsequent to the Flood.

  
edge
Member (Idle past 1706 days)
Posts: 4696
From: Colorado, USA
Joined: 01-09-2002


Message 23 of 30 (214277)
06-04-2005 7:40 PM
Reply to: Message 21 by roxrkool
06-03-2005 10:03 AM


Re: what consensus?
I've heard the Archean-Proterozoic boundary is one possibility for the beginning of the flood. I've also heard the PreC-Cambrian boundary.
The end of the flood appears to be more contentious among the YEC researchers. Some have proposed the beginning of the Cambrian, the Carboniferous, the Permian, the Cretaceous, and the Quaternary.
Basically, they don't have a clue. When they're willing to pin themselves down to a time period, they get in trouble because they can't explain all the details.
Hi, Rox,
Don't forget the recolonization theory. You know, the one where it's all over by the end of the Archean. This one has the incredibly convienient feature that all evidence of previous life and civilizations was comletely destroyed by a massively destructive event in the Archean. Life then began recolonizing the earth in the Proterozoic. This all makes a lot of sense and many find it intellectually satisfying. After all, an event that would metamorphose most of the existing crust would certainly have destroyed any evidence of its passing.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 21 by roxrkool, posted 06-03-2005 10:03 AM roxrkool has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 29 by roxrkool, posted 06-05-2005 9:17 PM edge has not replied

  
lfen
Member (Idle past 4678 days)
Posts: 2189
From: Oregon
Joined: 06-24-2004


Message 24 of 30 (214284)
06-04-2005 8:04 PM
Reply to: Message 16 by Arkansas Banana Boy
06-02-2005 5:30 AM


Re: What we would expect
To think a flood would create multiple layered sediments does require some supernatural help.
Beautiful point. I would say that the real miracle was not the Flood, materializing a bunch of water is much easier than what God achieved after the flood. All traces of the flood were erased, entire populations were given false memories so they thought their civilizations were much older and they were given selective amnesia so they forgot all about the flood. Then God made the entire universe look older than it was.
When I see the amount of work he did I realize he really did repent. He must have felt so bad about the flood to go to all that extra work.
Those were awesome miracles and to think they didn't get recorded in any of the extant books of the Bible. sigh :-(
lfen

This message is a reply to:
 Message 16 by Arkansas Banana Boy, posted 06-02-2005 5:30 AM Arkansas Banana Boy has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 25 by Hrun, posted 06-05-2005 12:24 AM lfen has not replied

  
Hrun
Inactive Member


Message 25 of 30 (214396)
06-05-2005 12:24 AM
Reply to: Message 24 by lfen
06-04-2005 8:04 PM


Re: What we would expect
I don't know if this has been discussed yet, but does anybody know where all that water went?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 24 by lfen, posted 06-04-2005 8:04 PM lfen has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 26 by Lithodid-Man, posted 06-05-2005 1:26 AM Hrun has not replied

  
Lithodid-Man
Member (Idle past 2931 days)
Posts: 504
From: Juneau, Alaska, USA
Joined: 03-22-2004


Message 26 of 30 (214399)
06-05-2005 1:26 AM
Reply to: Message 25 by Hrun
06-05-2005 12:24 AM


Re: What we would expect
I don't know if this has been discussed yet, but does anybody know where all that water went?
Obviously into the icecaps, sheesh, am I the only one who saw that Costner film?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 25 by Hrun, posted 06-05-2005 12:24 AM Hrun has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 27 by Nighttrain, posted 06-05-2005 3:54 AM Lithodid-Man has replied

  
Nighttrain
Member (Idle past 3994 days)
Posts: 1512
From: brisbane,australia
Joined: 06-08-2004


Message 27 of 30 (214420)
06-05-2005 3:54 AM
Reply to: Message 26 by Lithodid-Man
06-05-2005 1:26 AM


Re: What we would expect
Icecaps? What icecaps? Ain`t no icecaps in the Bible.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 26 by Lithodid-Man, posted 06-05-2005 1:26 AM Lithodid-Man has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 28 by roxrkool, posted 06-05-2005 8:46 PM Nighttrain has not replied
 Message 30 by Lithodid-Man, posted 06-05-2005 11:15 PM Nighttrain has not replied

  
roxrkool
Member (Idle past 989 days)
Posts: 1497
From: Nevada
Joined: 03-23-2003


Message 28 of 30 (214563)
06-05-2005 8:46 PM
Reply to: Message 27 by Nighttrain
06-05-2005 3:54 AM


Re: What we would expect
Don't you remember, not everything is in the Bible.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 27 by Nighttrain, posted 06-05-2005 3:54 AM Nighttrain has not replied

  
roxrkool
Member (Idle past 989 days)
Posts: 1497
From: Nevada
Joined: 03-23-2003


Message 29 of 30 (214566)
06-05-2005 9:17 PM
Reply to: Message 23 by edge
06-04-2005 7:40 PM


Re: what consensus?
Ah, yes, the Recolonization model. Never could get Dave to elaborate on it much.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 23 by edge, posted 06-04-2005 7:40 PM edge has not replied

  
Lithodid-Man
Member (Idle past 2931 days)
Posts: 504
From: Juneau, Alaska, USA
Joined: 03-22-2004


Message 30 of 30 (214581)
06-05-2005 11:15 PM
Reply to: Message 27 by Nighttrain
06-05-2005 3:54 AM


Re: What we would expect
I was referring to the erroneous concept in Costner's "Waterworld" in which nearly all of the earth's surface was covered by water because of the melting of the polar icecaps. Seemed in keeping with YEC notions of a global flood.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 27 by Nighttrain, posted 06-05-2005 3:54 AM Nighttrain 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