Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 67 (9078 total)
723 online now:
(723 visitors)
Newest Member: harveyspecter
Post Volume: Total: 895,332 Year: 6,444/6,534 Month: 637/650 Week: 175/232 Day: 8/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Why would an intelligent designer design these?
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 667 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 62 of 108 (226403)
07-26-2005 6:09 AM
Reply to: Message 61 by TheLiteralist
07-26-2005 5:52 AM


Re: Flood
and not all ID's are Christian

yeah, but does anyone count the raelians?

Noah's Flood is responsible for the fossil layers

how do you explain angular unconformities? (never seen a flood-layer-person answer this one yet)


אָרַח

This message is a reply to:
 Message 61 by TheLiteralist, posted 07-26-2005 5:52 AM TheLiteralist has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 64 by TheLiteralist, posted 07-26-2005 6:35 AM arachnophilia has replied

  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 667 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 67 of 108 (226590)
07-26-2005 9:35 PM
Reply to: Message 65 by CK
07-26-2005 6:40 AM


Re: ID is not Christianity / Your Argument Supports ID
Why does God have Nipples?

because people suck.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 65 by CK, posted 07-26-2005 6:40 AM CK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 70 by CK, posted 07-27-2005 3:52 AM arachnophilia has not replied
 Message 71 by CK, posted 07-27-2005 3:52 AM arachnophilia has replied

  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 667 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 68 of 108 (226591)
07-26-2005 9:39 PM
Reply to: Message 64 by TheLiteralist
07-26-2005 6:35 AM


Re: Flood
I don't know what raelians are.

the believe we were intelligently designed -- by space aliens.

However, IIRC, one of the co-discoverers of DNA (cant remember the name), eventually decided that aliens planted the first life forms (or something like that), because he understood the DNA and related cellular machinery to be too complex to have arisen spontaneously.

that sounds entirely apocryphal.

No, I probably can't explain angular unconformities. But if they can occur slowly, can they occur quickly?

well, they indicate that the strata were formed sequentially. each new layer requires the every one below it to be entirely solid.

If the land can shift axis slowly can it shift axis quickly?

many of the events that do it ARE quick events, such as earthquakes. but it means that such a thing has to happen before new layers are put on it.


אָרַח

This message is a reply to:
 Message 64 by TheLiteralist, posted 07-26-2005 6:35 AM TheLiteralist has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 69 by MangyTiger, posted 07-26-2005 10:27 PM arachnophilia has not replied
 Message 78 by TheLiteralist, posted 07-28-2005 4:10 AM arachnophilia has replied

  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 667 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 72 of 108 (226866)
07-27-2005 5:57 PM
Reply to: Message 71 by CK
07-27-2005 3:52 AM


Re: ID is not Christianity / Your Argument Supports ID
it may appear I was taking the piss with that question - I was not.

If man is created in the image of the intelligent designer (in this case, the christian god), then why would he have them?

it is my opinion that "created in the image of god" is not exactly 100% literal. more that we are patterned after god's qualities.

but that's just my take.


אָרַח

This message is a reply to:
 Message 71 by CK, posted 07-27-2005 3:52 AM CK has not replied

  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 667 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 80 of 108 (227208)
07-28-2005 10:47 PM
Reply to: Message 78 by TheLiteralist
07-28-2005 4:10 AM


Re: angular unconformities
Well, I would tend to think that, at best, AUs make a case that at least two events occurred: one for the layers at the one angle and one for the layers at the other. I fail to see how AUs indicate that all the layers involved are sequential and that every lower layer must be entirely solid before another layer can be deposited on it.

Or have I misunderstood you?

well, it requires a bit of inductive logic. extrapolate it another step.

if we have an angular section, under a flat section, every layer below the flat section had to have been formed before. so they had to be solid, then upturned, then a new layer formed on top.

so if we have more than one of these, and we do, and they happen in different layers, and they do... what does it mean? say we have layers a, b, and c. now, in on place, we have an uncomformity between a and b. so b had to be later than a. now suppose we have another unconformity elsewhere between b and c. so not only does c had to have been formed after b, but after a as well by the commutative proprety.

considering the vast amount of angular unconformities we have occuring at so very many different locations in the geologic column, it stands to reason that the layers were laid down sequentially.


אָרַח

This message is a reply to:
 Message 78 by TheLiteralist, posted 07-28-2005 4:10 AM TheLiteralist has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.1
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2022