Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 80 (8960 total)
98 online now:
dwise1, LamarkNewAge, PaulK, Tangle, Thugpreacha (AdminPhat) (5 members, 93 visitors)
Newest Member: Mikee
Post Volume: Total: 869,619 Year: 1,367/23,288 Month: 1,367/1,851 Week: 7/484 Day: 7/93 Hour: 2/2


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Trilobites, Mountains and Marine Deposits - Evidence of a flood?
Taq
Member
Posts: 8213
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 3.6


Message 195 of 518 (810547)
05-30-2017 5:29 PM
Reply to: Message 193 by Faith
05-30-2017 4:49 PM


Re: Percy, from the "Absence of Evidence" topic
Faith writes:

There's also some idea that the more deeply embedded the fossils are the longer the Flood should have taken. Why?

For the same reason that it took longer to build the Notre Dame than it did a back yard shed. You don't get hundreds of feet of coral growth in a single year.

If the argument is that the Flood simply covered existing mountains, that could explain the fossils ON the mountaintops, yes, but the idea is that the Flood deposited all the sedimentary layers that contain fossils, and in the case of mountains this would have happened before the mountains had been raised. After the Flood, the fossil-containing strata were pushed up to become mountains, which is why the fossils are IN the mountain and not just on it.

What evidence do you have for rapid mountain building?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 193 by Faith, posted 05-30-2017 4:49 PM Faith has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 204 by RAZD, posted 05-31-2017 7:02 AM Taq has not yet responded

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 8213
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 3.6


(1)
Message 197 of 518 (810551)
05-30-2017 5:40 PM
Reply to: Message 196 by Faith
05-30-2017 5:34 PM


Re: Just the Usual Flood Scenario
Faith writes:

But this is all from the Old Earth/evolutionist point of view. From the Flood point of view all that was already there and the Flood just picked it up and buried it in this or that layer of sediment.

You are talking about a solid piece of rock hundreds of thousands of miles in area and hundreds of feet thick. Sorry, doesn't work that way. A whole, unbroken rock the size of a giant sea doesn't get moved by a flood.

If all the supposed ordering of the fossils in the geological record are in fact merely accidental effects of a Flood that simply moved around whatever was already there, then this idea that they are clues to an ancient past is an illusion, sort of like reading tea leaves. (except of course the antediluvian ancient past -- THAT you can learn about from the fossils).

Such a process wouldn't sort fossils so that they correlate to specific isotope ratios found in igneous rocks below and above them. This is what disproves your flood story. We should see a random association between isotope ratios and fossils if your scenario is true, but we don't. Instead, we see the correlation predicted by the Old Earth and No Flood scenario.

But my point of course is that it can be accounted for by the Flood followed by mountain building so that the objection that fossils within the rocks can't be explained by the Flood is in fact explained.

What evidence accounts for this?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 196 by Faith, posted 05-30-2017 5:34 PM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 198 by Faith, posted 05-30-2017 6:00 PM Taq has not yet responded

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 8213
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 3.6


(1)
Message 398 of 518 (811955)
06-13-2017 5:50 PM
Reply to: Message 396 by Faith
06-13-2017 4:15 PM


Re: The evidence: sorted trilobites, sorted radiometric isotopes
Faith writes:

The trilobites are nothing more than cousins, and for whatever reason the Flood did sort sediments and creatures. You have no proof for your theory either, it IS all theory, period.

To back up what RAZD said, it isn't a theory that rock layers are sorted by their isotope content. It is an observable fact.

How does a flood magically sort rocks so that the igneous rocks towards the bottom of the stack of rocks have a higher Ar concentration than the rocks at the top? How is a flood able to sort trilobites and igneous rocks so that trilobites are always found below rocks with a specific K/Ar ratio?

We are not using radiometric dating here. We are simply measuring the isotope content in rocks which is an observable fact. How does a flood do this?

Edited by Taq, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 396 by Faith, posted 06-13-2017 4:15 PM Faith has not yet responded

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 8213
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 3.6


(3)
Message 417 of 518 (812021)
06-14-2017 11:12 AM
Reply to: Message 405 by Faith
06-13-2017 8:55 PM


Re: Crabs
Faith writes:

It is known that water sorts things and makes layers of sediments

It is known that the isotope content of igneous rocks is not enough to cause water to sort them by tiny tiny differences, and yet that is what we see. Therefore, those layers were not created by a single event that sorted those layers by tiny differences in Argon content.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 405 by Faith, posted 06-13-2017 8:55 PM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 418 by Faith, posted 06-14-2017 8:16 PM Taq has not yet responded

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 8213
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 3.6


Message 446 of 518 (812189)
06-15-2017 10:56 AM
Reply to: Message 422 by Faith
06-14-2017 10:05 PM


Re: water deposition
Faith writes:

The evidence is in the tight contacts between the layers, their flatness and straightness before tectonic deformation, the accumulation in some places of the whole sequence from Cambrian to Holocene without tectonic disturbance, the absence of any erosion on a scale that would imply conditions for a time period at that level in the geological column, the fact that the sediments cover enormous areas of geography layer after layer which would kill anything that had lived there, in other words the evidence shows deposition one layer after another, which implies deposition by an enormous amount of water over a short period of time.

If we were to show you layers that were not flat or straight would this disprove a recent global flood?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 422 by Faith, posted 06-14-2017 10:05 PM Faith has not yet responded

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 8213
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 3.6


Message 456 of 518 (812472)
06-16-2017 5:30 PM
Reply to: Message 450 by Faith
06-16-2017 1:19 AM


Re: Sediment source
Faith writes:

How is the expected result of worldwide rain for forty days and nights a miracle?

There have been more than 40 days and nights of rain since then, and nowhere near the amount of erosion that you are trying to claim.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 450 by Faith, posted 06-16-2017 1:19 AM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 458 by Faith, posted 06-16-2017 6:56 PM Taq has not yet responded

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2020