Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 64 (9073 total)
87 online now:
dwise1, jar, nwr (3 members, 84 visitors)
Newest Member: MidwestPaul
Post Volume: Total: 893,327 Year: 4,439/6,534 Month: 653/900 Week: 177/182 Day: 10/47 Hour: 0/2

Announcements: Security Update Released


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Fossils, strata and the flood
Architect-426
Member (Idle past 3862 days)
Posts: 76
From: NC, USA
Joined: 07-16-2008


Message 121 of 163 (562461)
05-29-2010 12:33 AM
Reply to: Message 120 by roxrkool
05-22-2010 6:34 PM


Re: Oh Lord...save us from wacky "geology" theories...
Hi roxrpooh, your comments are << bracketed >>…

<< You surely are the most delusional poster we've ever had on this forum. >>

Oh I’m ‘delusional’…hmm, lets see…. And you guys think everything is milliards of years old and man came from… well… I suppose if I say monkeys then it may offend some people, so I will refrain.... It’s quite interesting that not a single dingle one of you can truly refute my observations. You simply say “your delusional” because I don’t believe in the jack-up, whimsical theories of “geology” (primarily “historical” geology, not all of it’s jacked-up…) and can immediately rip them apart exposing them for the junk they truly are. Yet those who claim to be geological “experts” refuse to recognize the fallacies in these alleged theories thus digging yourselves ever deeper into a hole of dupedom…. with no way out.

<< LOL You haven't a clue as to how geology works… >>

LOL is right! What is really hilarious is how “geology” truly does not know how the earth works(ed). You know very well my position on massive volcanism (along with aquatic debris flows) as being the primary mechanism for earths’ formations. You guys say “play”…excuse me “plate” tectonics where the earth went into some kind of continental “demolition derby”… What a fuggin’ hoot… This theory is so pathetic with its ¾” per/yr “movement” that it does not even deserve to be called science. But “geologists” are gullible folk enough to hang their hat on this idea like flies on stink. Now we have this “fact” of everything on earth being a “plate” or a “mini plate” with the strange ability to scoot independently horizontally over the globe…. Give me a break… Ya know rox, its probably best that someone outside your “field of expertise” tell you guys like it is; the plate tectonic theory is utter junk and its high time you guys get off this whimsical theory once and for all.

Here’s an example; the British Isles are a result of intense volcanism, not a friggin’ 3cm/yr “plate” crash. Get the picture there rox?

Here’s another example; rocks are brittle (including basalt, sandstone, granite, etc.)…. Why this simple fact escapes “science” is beyond me. You guys are looking at dried up rocks that have “cured”, cracked and dessicated after they were “deposited”. Yet “plate” tectonics stacked them up somehow at 4cm/yr…. Man you guys obviously have no clue how earthly material truly gets “stacked”.

<< and I am quite certain you have never opened, much less read, a book on geology >>

Yes, I do read books on “geology” whenever I want to glee over wacky, non-scientific ideas for a chuckle…. The one thing I will say about “geology” is you guys don’t deny that EVERYWHERE there was once an “ancient sea”….

<< You, my dear, are a big, fat liar with a massive inferiority complex. >>

Oh c’mon there roxyroo… just because I blatantly refuse orthodox “science” and am not afraid to challenge each and every one of you does not make me into a liar now does it? As far as a “massive inferiority complex” goes, nope, sorry, I have a “massive ego”… I am an ARCHITECT for crying out loud… and if you meet an architect who does not have an ego, do NOT hire them…

“Heat ‘n pressure”…It’s all about “heat ‘n pressure” right rox? There certainly was a helluva lot of “heat ‘n pressure” at one time in earth’s past…


This message is a reply to:
 Message 120 by roxrkool, posted 05-22-2010 6:34 PM roxrkool has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 122 by Percy, posted 05-29-2010 8:14 AM Architect-426 has taken no action
 Message 123 by Tanypteryx, posted 05-29-2010 10:50 AM Architect-426 has taken no action
 Message 124 by roxrkool, posted 05-31-2010 9:23 PM Architect-426 has replied
 Message 125 by roxrkool, posted 06-01-2010 1:07 AM Architect-426 has taken no action
 Message 135 by edge, posted 06-03-2010 10:31 AM Architect-426 has taken no action

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 20770
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 2.1


Message 122 of 163 (562490)
05-29-2010 8:14 AM
Reply to: Message 121 by Architect-426
05-29-2010 12:33 AM


Re: Oh Lord...save us from wacky "geology" theories...
Hi Architect-426,

Though I'm curious about the origin of your beliefs, such as what evidence leads you to chose "intense volcanism" as responsible for the formation of the British Isles, perhaps we should return to the original topic. What evidence in the geological layers leads you to see a flood as responsible for the particular distribution of fossils we find in the geological strata?

By the way, since you're an architect, what do you think about the possibility of multi-story reed structures such as those on the ark? Perhaps you can help out Greentwiga over in the That boat don't float thread.

--Percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 121 by Architect-426, posted 05-29-2010 12:33 AM Architect-426 has taken no action

  
Tanypteryx
Member
Posts: 3302
From: Oregon, USA
Joined: 08-27-2006
Member Rating: 3.2


Message 123 of 163 (562505)
05-29-2010 10:50 AM
Reply to: Message 121 by Architect-426
05-29-2010 12:33 AM


Re: Oh Lord...save us from wacky "geology" theories...
The funny part is roxrkool's message 120 was to Faith, but the delusional and geologically clueless parts work pretty well for you.

You sound like all those mainstream geologists who spent half a century denying plate tectonics, as the evidence piled up.

Since you think you should be the planetary dean of the geology department, why haven't you written up your research? There is a Nobel Prize just waiting for you!


What if Eleanor Roosevelt had wings? -- Monty Python

You can't build a Time Machine without Weird Optics -- S. Valley


This message is a reply to:
 Message 121 by Architect-426, posted 05-29-2010 12:33 AM Architect-426 has taken no action

  
roxrkool
Member (Idle past 228 days)
Posts: 1497
From: Nevada
Joined: 03-23-2003


Message 124 of 163 (562686)
05-31-2010 9:23 PM
Reply to: Message 121 by Architect-426
05-29-2010 12:33 AM


Re: Oh Lord...save us from wacky "geology" theories...
Architect, that post you quoted was not directed at you, but I shall reply when I have the time.

I must apologize to Faith, she wrote me a very nice PM (to which I have partially replied), despite my obnoxious post. I intend to continue my discussion with her via PM due to her current status.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 121 by Architect-426, posted 05-29-2010 12:33 AM Architect-426 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 139 by Architect-426, posted 06-08-2010 12:44 AM roxrkool has replied

  
roxrkool
Member (Idle past 228 days)
Posts: 1497
From: Nevada
Joined: 03-23-2003


Message 125 of 163 (562719)
06-01-2010 1:07 AM
Reply to: Message 121 by Architect-426
05-29-2010 12:33 AM



Here’s an example; the British Isles are a result of intense volcanism, not a friggin’ 3cm/yr “plate” crash. Get the picture there rox?

No, I don't get anything you write. Define "intense volcanism" and present your evidence for it.

Here’s another example; rocks are brittle (including basalt, sandstone, granite, etc.)…. Why this simple fact escapes “science” is beyond me.

It's obvious you have not read much about geology as this "simple fact" is known by all. Rocks on the surface/near-surface tend to behave in a brittle manner. However, rocks subjected to increased temperatures and/or pressures will often behave in a ductile manner. Try Googling "brittle-ductile transition zone."

You guys are looking at dried up rocks that have “cured”, cracked and dessicated after they were “deposited”. Yet “plate” tectonics stacked them up somehow at 4cm/yr…. Man you guys obviously have no clue how earthly material truly gets “stacked”.

Your layman's terms mean nothing to me. Show me pictures and define what you mean by dried up, cured, cracked, dessicated, deposited, etc.

Oh c’mon there roxyroo… just because I blatantly refuse orthodox “science” and am not afraid to challenge each and every one of you does not make me into a liar now does it? As far as a “massive inferiority complex” goes, nope, sorry, I have a “massive ego”… I am an ARCHITECT for crying out loud…

I think it's quite clear you have a massive ego.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 121 by Architect-426, posted 05-29-2010 12:33 AM Architect-426 has taken no action

Replies to this message:
 Message 126 by Percy, posted 06-01-2010 6:30 AM roxrkool has replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 20770
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 2.1


Message 126 of 163 (562740)
06-01-2010 6:30 AM
Reply to: Message 125 by roxrkool
06-01-2010 1:07 AM


Re:
roxrkool writes:

It's obvious you have not read much about geology as this "simple fact" is known by all. Rocks on the surface/near-surface tend to behave in a brittle manner. However, rocks subjected to increased temperatures and/or pressures will often behave in a ductile manner. Try Googling "brittle-ductile transition zone."

Rhetorical question: How could a real architect be unaware of such simple facts about the strength of materials?

Combine this with the known inverse relationship between confidence and knowledge and what do you get? That's rhetorical, too.

--Percy

Edited by Percy, : Grammar.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 125 by roxrkool, posted 06-01-2010 1:07 AM roxrkool has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 127 by Dr Adequate, posted 06-01-2010 6:43 AM Percy has seen this message
 Message 128 by RAZD, posted 06-01-2010 8:53 PM Percy has seen this message
 Message 130 by roxrkool, posted 06-02-2010 12:49 AM Percy has seen this message

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 291 days)
Posts: 16112
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 127 of 163 (562744)
06-01-2010 6:43 AM
Reply to: Message 126 by Percy
06-01-2010 6:30 AM


Re:
Rhetorical question: How could an real architect be unaware of such simple facts about the strength of materials?

Real architects don't have to know anything about the behavior of rocks at high temperatures and confining pressures. Indeed, nowadays architects rarely work with rocks.

So on those grounds it is possible that Architect-426 could puke out ignorant nonsense about geology and still be an architect.

However, that being said, I find it difficult to believe that anyone could be so darn stupid and still be an architect. If he is, then certainly I would never risk my life by entering any building that he's designed.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 126 by Percy, posted 06-01-2010 6:30 AM Percy has seen this message

Replies to this message:
 Message 133 by anglagard, posted 06-02-2010 9:26 PM Dr Adequate has taken no action

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 644 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 128 of 163 (562800)
06-01-2010 8:53 PM
Reply to: Message 126 by Percy
06-01-2010 6:30 AM


Re:
Hi Percy,

Rhetorical question: How could a real architect be unaware of such simple facts about the strength of materials?

Answer: because they hire engineers to make their designs work. All the architect needs to do is draw pretty pictures and sell the pitch to the client.

Enjoy.


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


• • • Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click) • • •

This message is a reply to:
 Message 126 by Percy, posted 06-01-2010 6:30 AM Percy has seen this message

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 20770
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 2.1


Message 129 of 163 (562808)
06-01-2010 9:50 PM


Dr Adequate and RAZD
I'm going to let Architect address whether architecture curriculum coursework covers the strength of materials (which includes the effect of temperature), and why he didn't retain any of that information himself.

--Percy


  
roxrkool
Member (Idle past 228 days)
Posts: 1497
From: Nevada
Joined: 03-23-2003


Message 130 of 163 (562818)
06-02-2010 12:49 AM
Reply to: Message 126 by Percy
06-01-2010 6:30 AM


Re:
My main beef with architects is their penchant for calling all stone "granite." HELLO!! That's a two-pyroxene leuco-gabbro, not a granite. Sheesh!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 126 by Percy, posted 06-01-2010 6:30 AM Percy has seen this message

Replies to this message:
 Message 131 by RAZD, posted 06-02-2010 7:30 AM roxrkool has replied
 Message 134 by anglagard, posted 06-02-2010 9:52 PM roxrkool has taken no action

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 644 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 131 of 163 (562851)
06-02-2010 7:30 AM
Reply to: Message 130 by roxrkool
06-02-2010 12:49 AM


Re:
Hi Roxrkool,

My main beef with architects is their penchant for ...

... taking rocks for granite?

Enjoy.


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


• • • Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click) • • •

This message is a reply to:
 Message 130 by roxrkool, posted 06-02-2010 12:49 AM roxrkool has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 132 by roxrkool, posted 06-02-2010 11:29 AM RAZD has seen this message

  
roxrkool
Member (Idle past 228 days)
Posts: 1497
From: Nevada
Joined: 03-23-2003


Message 132 of 163 (562900)
06-02-2010 11:29 AM
Reply to: Message 131 by RAZD
06-02-2010 7:30 AM


Re:
heh heh

This message is a reply to:
 Message 131 by RAZD, posted 06-02-2010 7:30 AM RAZD has seen this message

Replies to this message:
 Message 136 by edge, posted 06-03-2010 10:49 AM roxrkool has replied

  
anglagard
Member (Idle past 76 days)
Posts: 2339
From: Socorro, New Mexico USA
Joined: 03-18-2006


Message 133 of 163 (563022)
06-02-2010 9:26 PM
Reply to: Message 127 by Dr Adequate
06-01-2010 6:43 AM


I Thought Architecture Was More than Drafting
Dr Adequate writes:

Real architects don't have to know anything about the behavior of rocks at high temperatures and confining pressures. Indeed, nowadays architects rarely work with rocks.

True, but it does seem strange that a profession that at least used to deal with the strength and behavior of different materials (such as steel, wood, and glass) suddenly becomes utterly incapable of understanding there are different kinds of rocks and they have different properties. Obviously Architect-426 is incapable of understanding temperatures and pressures beyond those found on the earth's surface despite the fact such conditions can be duplicated in the lab.

So on those grounds it is possible that Architect-426 could puke out ignorant nonsense about geology and still be an architect.

I agree, unlikely, but still possible. My experience has shown however that creationists are often quite comfortable with blatant dishonesty and that lying about their credentials is of no great concern (as in Hovind and Baugh's phony PhDs).

However, that being said, I find it difficult to believe that anyone could be so darn stupid and still be an architect. If he is, then certainly I would never risk my life by entering any building that he's designed.

Well, it was an architecture grad student who introduced me to Ayn Rand, so they seem to be as subject to defending an over-simplistic dogma as most other professions.

Having said that, I must agree. I don't want to enter a building designed by someone who does not understand how stress, strain, and harmonic vibrations can act to change material properties under extreme conditions, such as earthquakes, tornadoes, hurricanes, and acts of terrorism.

I would also hope every building is built upon a firm foundation, a concept that our aforementioned architect appears to have missed in more ways than one.


The idea of the sacred is quite simply one of the most conservative notions in any culture, because it seeks to turn other ideas - uncertainty, progress, change - into crimes.
— Salman Rushdie

This rudderless world is not shaped by vague metaphysical forces. It is not God who kills the children. Not fate that butchers them or destiny that feeds them to the dogs. It’s us. Only us. - the character Rorschach in Watchmen


This message is a reply to:
 Message 127 by Dr Adequate, posted 06-01-2010 6:43 AM Dr Adequate has taken no action

  
anglagard
Member (Idle past 76 days)
Posts: 2339
From: Socorro, New Mexico USA
Joined: 03-18-2006


Message 134 of 163 (563023)
06-02-2010 9:52 PM
Reply to: Message 130 by roxrkool
06-02-2010 12:49 AM


Some People Make You Wonder, Others Do Not
roxrkool writes:

My main beef with architects is their penchant for calling all stone "granite." HELLO!! That's a two-pyroxene leuco-gabbro, not a granite. Sheesh!

Your credentials are obvious, no one other than a well trained geoscientist would use the term "two-pyroxene leuco-gabbro."

I'm just sayin' as a library administrator with a degree in geological engineering (but of course, I knew that from the first post of yours I read).

That is a lot more than I can say for some other posters here. I just wish my poor tom cat hadn't died a few weeks ago, he was much better at smelling a rat than I am.


The idea of the sacred is quite simply one of the most conservative notions in any culture, because it seeks to turn other ideas - uncertainty, progress, change - into crimes.
— Salman Rushdie

This rudderless world is not shaped by vague metaphysical forces. It is not God who kills the children. Not fate that butchers them or destiny that feeds them to the dogs. It’s us. Only us. - the character Rorschach in Watchmen


This message is a reply to:
 Message 130 by roxrkool, posted 06-02-2010 12:49 AM roxrkool has taken no action

  
edge
Member (Idle past 946 days)
Posts: 4696
From: Colorado, USA
Joined: 01-09-2002


Message 135 of 163 (563111)
06-03-2010 10:31 AM
Reply to: Message 121 by Architect-426
05-29-2010 12:33 AM


Re: Oh Lord...save us from wacky "geology" theories...
quote:
Hi roxrpooh, your comments are << bracketed >>…
<< You surely are the most delusional poster we've ever had on this forum. >>

Oh I’m ‘delusional’…hmm, lets see…. And you guys think everything is milliards of years old and man came from… well… I suppose if I say monkeys then it may offend some people, so I will refrain.... It’s quite interesting that not a single dingle one of you can truly refute my observations. You simply say “your delusional” because I don’t believe in the jack-up, whimsical theories of “geology” (primarily “historical” geology, not all of it’s jacked-up…) and can immediately rip them apart exposing them for the junk they truly are. Yet those who claim to be geological “experts” refuse to recognize the fallacies in these alleged theories thus digging yourselves ever deeper into a hole of dupedom…. with no way out.

<< LOL You haven't a clue as to how geology works… >>

LOL is right! What is really hilarious is how “geology” truly does not know how the earth works(ed). You know very well my position on massive volcanism (along with aquatic debris flows) as being the primary mechanism for earths’ formations. You guys say “play”…excuse me “plate” tectonics where the earth went into some kind of continental “demolition derby”… What a fuggin’ hoot… This theory is so pathetic with its ¾” per/yr “movement” that it does not even deserve to be called science. But “geologists” are gullible folk enough to hang their hat on this idea like flies on stink. Now we have this “fact” of everything on earth being a “plate” or a “mini plate” with the strange ability to scoot independently horizontally over the globe…. Give me a break… Ya know rox, its probably best that someone outside your “field of expertise” tell you guys like it is; the plate tectonic theory is utter junk and its high time you guys get off this whimsical theory once and for all.

Here’s an example; the British Isles are a result of intense volcanism, not a friggin’ 3cm/yr “plate” crash. Get the picture there rox?

Here’s another example; rocks are brittle (including basalt, sandstone, granite, etc.)…. Why this simple fact escapes “science” is beyond me. You guys are looking at dried up rocks that have “cured”, cracked and dessicated after they were “deposited”. Yet “plate” tectonics stacked them up somehow at 4cm/yr…. Man you guys obviously have no clue how earthly material truly gets “stacked”.

<< and I am quite certain you have never opened, much less read, a book on geology >>

Yes, I do read books on “geology” whenever I want to glee over wacky, non-scientific ideas for a chuckle…. The one thing I will say about “geology” is you guys don’t deny that EVERYWHERE there was once an “ancient sea”….

<< You, my dear, are a big, fat liar with a massive inferiority complex. >>

Oh c’mon there roxyroo… just because I blatantly refuse orthodox “science” and am not afraid to challenge each and every one of you does not make me into a liar now does it? As far as a “massive inferiority complex” goes, nope, sorry, I have a “massive ego”… I am an ARCHITECT for crying out loud… and if you meet an architect who does not have an ego, do NOT hire them…

“Heat ‘n pressure”…It’s all about “heat ‘n pressure” right rox? There certainly was a helluva lot of “heat ‘n pressure” at one time in earth’s past…

Hi roxrpooh, your comments are << bracketed >>…
<< You surely are the most delusional poster we've ever had on this forum. >>

Oh I’m ‘delusional’…hmm, lets see…. And you guys think everything is milliards of years old and man came from… well… I suppose if I say monkeys then it may offend some people, so I will refrain.... It’s quite interesting that not a single dingle one of you can truly refute my observations. You simply say “your delusional” because I don’t believe in the jack-up, whimsical theories of “geology” (primarily “historical” geology, not all of it’s jacked-up…) and can immediately rip them apart exposing them for the junk they truly are. Yet those who claim to be geological “experts” refuse to recognize the fallacies in these alleged theories thus digging yourselves ever deeper into a hole of dupedom…. with no way out.

<< LOL You haven't a clue as to how geology works… >>

LOL is right! What is really hilarious is how “geology” truly does not know how the earth works(ed). You know very well my position on massive volcanism (along with aquatic debris flows) as being the primary mechanism for earths’ formations. You guys say “play”…excuse me “plate” tectonics where the earth went into some kind of continental “demolition derby”… What a fuggin’ hoot… This theory is so pathetic with its ¾” per/yr “movement” that it does not even deserve to be called science. But “geologists” are gullible folk enough to hang their hat on this idea like flies on stink. Now we have this “fact” of everything on earth being a “plate” or a “mini plate” with the strange ability to scoot independently horizontally over the globe…. Give me a break… Ya know rox, its probably best that someone outside your “field of expertise” tell you guys like it is; the plate tectonic theory is utter junk and its high time you guys get off this whimsical theory once and for all.

Here’s an example; the British Isles are a result of intense volcanism, not a friggin’ 3cm/yr “plate” crash. Get the picture there rox?

Here’s another example; rocks are brittle (including basalt, sandstone, granite, etc.)…. Why this simple fact escapes “science” is beyond me. You guys are looking at dried up rocks that have “cured”, cracked and dessicated after they were “deposited”. Yet “plate” tectonics stacked them up somehow at 4cm/yr…. Man you guys obviously have no clue how earthly material truly gets “stacked”.

<< and I am quite certain you have never opened, much less read, a book on geology >>

Yes, I do read books on “geology” whenever I want to glee over wacky, non-scientific ideas for a chuckle…. The one thing I will say about “geology” is you guys don’t deny that EVERYWHERE there was once an “ancient sea”….

<< You, my dear, are a big, fat liar with a massive inferiority complex. >>

Oh c’mon there roxyroo… just because I blatantly refuse orthodox “science” and am not afraid to challenge each and every one of you does not make me into a liar now does it? As far as a “massive inferiority complex” goes, nope, sorry, I have a “massive ego”… I am an ARCHITECT for crying out loud… and if you meet an architect who does not have an ego, do NOT hire them…

“Heat ‘n pressure”…It’s all about “heat ‘n pressure” right rox? There certainly was a helluva lot of “heat ‘n pressure” at one time in earth’s past…



Ya know, I can't tell that you've said anything in this post other than an envious rant about geologists.

Massive fail, pal.

Why not calm down and give us one scrap of information to work with?

You might try something like, ... oh let me think... 'evidence' or maybe a citation. I'm sure you get the idea.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 121 by Architect-426, posted 05-29-2010 12:33 AM Architect-426 has taken no action

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.1
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2022