Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,808 Year: 3,065/9,624 Month: 910/1,588 Week: 93/223 Day: 4/17 Hour: 1/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Big-Sediment vs. Little-Sediment Flood Geology?
lpetrich
Inactive Member


Message 1 of 18 (70068)
11-30-2003 1:06 PM


Over at Internet Infidels Discussion Board there is a creationist named Ed whom I have repeatedly locked horns with (metaphorically, of course). He believes in the literal historicity of Noah's Flood, but he believes in a strange variant of Flood Geology.
At one time, he'd advocate two versions of it, which I call big-sediment and little-sediment Flood Geology. Big-sediment Flood Geology is the usual version, which holds that much of the Phanerozoic rock, if not all of it, is due to Noah's Flood. By contrast, little-sediment Flood Geology states that Noah's Flood was responsible for a tiny layer in the geological column, one that can easily escape the notice of geologists.
Ed went through a period of advocating both as a counter to mainstream geology, switching between them as was expedient -- and never caring that they cannot both be right. He would respond to critical questions by claiming that he is not a geologist, while continuing to advocate both views. More recently, however, he has settled little-sediment Flood Geology.
He maintains that this conveniently-hidden flood happened about 2 million years ago, and he makes some other related claims, like the Bible omitting lots of people in its lists of begots and that Homo erectus is the same species as Homo sapiens. I have offered to have a formal debate with him on IIDB about that subject, but he has refused.
He'd make other claims, like mainstream geologists rejecting the literal historicity of Noah's Flood because they have decided to rebel against God. However, he has offered no direct evidence for his claim, but has instead claimed that he knows human nature, and that it is human nature to rebel against God.
[This message has been edited by lpetrich, 11-30-2003]

Replies to this message:
 Message 2 by roxrkool, posted 12-05-2003 5:11 PM lpetrich has not replied

  
lpetrich
Inactive Member


Message 3 of 18 (72655)
12-13-2003 7:10 AM


Ed's been very snotty, claiming that this alleged flood layer would be too thin to notice, since Noah's Flood had only lasted for one year.
Yes, he's an OEC. He's even claimed that it was standard practice to omit many of the members of Biblical genealogies.
He's also claimed that Homo erectus and Homo sapiens are the same species; he clearly wants to imply that our species was around when that alleged flood had happened.

Replies to this message:
 Message 4 by roxrkool, posted 12-13-2003 10:47 AM lpetrich has not replied

  
lpetrich
Inactive Member


Message 18 of 18 (74617)
12-21-2003 9:29 PM


Seems like Ed is the only little-sediment Flood Geologist that any of you people have ever heard of -- that's true of me also.

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024