Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 83 (8915 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 07-15-2019 11:55 PM
32 online now:
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: 4petdinos
Upcoming Birthdays: lopezeast0211, Theodoric
Post Volume:
Total: 856,807 Year: 11,843/19,786 Month: 1,624/2,641 Week: 133/708 Day: 67/66 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
1
23Next
Author Topic:   Depositional Models of Sea Transgressions/Regressions - Walther's Law
Dr Adequate
Member
Posts: 16097
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 12 of 533 (724801)
04-21-2014 1:43 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by Minnemooseus
04-17-2014 9:49 PM


Added by edit: Some maybe relevant messages at Dr. Adequate's "Introduction To Geology" topic:

Also:

* http://en.wikibooks.org/...cal_Geology/Walther%27s_principle
* http://en.wikibooks.org/...ical_Geology/Sea_level_variations


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Minnemooseus, posted 04-17-2014 9:49 PM Minnemooseus has acknowledged this reply

  
Dr Adequate
Member
Posts: 16097
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 13 of 533 (724802)
04-21-2014 1:46 AM
Reply to: Message 3 by Tanypteryx
04-18-2014 10:59 AM


I read Dr. A's Geology thread back when he was first posting it, but now I clearly need to read the whole thing again.

The wikibook Historical Geology derived from the thread has fewer typos / errors and is generally an improvement.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 3 by Tanypteryx, posted 04-18-2014 10:59 AM Tanypteryx has acknowledged this reply

  
Dr Adequate
Member
Posts: 16097
Joined: 07-20-2006


(1)
Message 56 of 533 (725704)
04-30-2014 6:57 PM
Reply to: Message 54 by Taq
04-30-2014 5:25 PM


Re: Rox's post on related things
Well clearly that was caused by one of those global floods we've been having lately.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 54 by Taq, posted 04-30-2014 5:25 PM Taq has not yet responded

  
Dr Adequate
Member
Posts: 16097
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 71 of 533 (725771)
05-01-2014 2:25 PM
Reply to: Message 70 by Faith
05-01-2014 1:59 PM


Re: Question
The angle is altered on the surface, but not in the buried layers. The action of water on aeolian sand would flatten the top but leave the lower laminae at the same angle.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 70 by Faith, posted 05-01-2014 1:59 PM Faith has not yet responded

  
Dr Adequate
Member
Posts: 16097
Joined: 07-20-2006


(1)
Message 152 of 533 (726549)
05-09-2014 7:29 PM
Reply to: Message 150 by Faith
05-09-2014 6:33 PM


Re: The debate is called because of Evo fraud
Fraud? Yes, OK, you got us bang to rights. For example, I personally manufactured the Ordovician Period. And I would have gotten away with it too if it wasn't for you meddling kids.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 150 by Faith, posted 05-09-2014 6:33 PM Faith has not yet responded

  
Dr Adequate
Member
Posts: 16097
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 209 of 533 (726794)
05-12-2014 3:07 PM
Reply to: Message 208 by Faith
05-12-2014 2:48 PM


The insinuations are unwelcome. I have no reluctance to discuss it. I'm trying to get Percy to stop changing the subject, which is all he's doing. I'm discussing the contours of the whole area as seen on that cross section and I don't want to be derailed into pages of argument about the Great Unconformity which I've argued to death elsewhere.

You posted a bit of batshit nonsense which we laughed at until we had to hold our kidneys in because our sides were so split, so now you want to declare it off limits for discussion. As you did in the last thread where we mentioned the Great Unconformity. We must all be forever silent about that, because you once said something dumb about it.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 208 by Faith, posted 05-12-2014 2:48 PM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 210 by Faith, posted 05-12-2014 3:14 PM Dr Adequate has responded

  
Dr Adequate
Member
Posts: 16097
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 211 of 533 (726796)
05-12-2014 3:25 PM
Reply to: Message 210 by Faith
05-12-2014 3:14 PM


You just declared it off-limits without discussing it. Unless claiming Fluddidit is considered a "discussion" nowadays.

Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 210 by Faith, posted 05-12-2014 3:14 PM Faith has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 213 by edge, posted 05-12-2014 4:06 PM Dr Adequate has not yet responded

  
Dr Adequate
Member
Posts: 16097
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 233 of 533 (726874)
05-13-2014 3:44 PM
Reply to: Message 229 by Faith
05-13-2014 11:57 AM


Re: photobucket came through
Wait, I've lost track of what you're trying to be wrong about.

Can you try again?

Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 229 by Faith, posted 05-13-2014 11:57 AM Faith has not yet responded

  
Dr Adequate
Member
Posts: 16097
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 234 of 533 (726877)
05-13-2014 3:54 PM
Reply to: Message 224 by Faith
05-13-2014 10:16 AM


Re: the great unconformity
Here's a better one: When you interpret the Great Unconformity as the root of a former mountain range that eroded down nearly flat before the strata now above it started being laid down, you have absolutely nothing to prove this, it's ALL persuasion, it's ALL interpretation. So really you have no REAL basis for objecting to my alternative view that it was created by tectonic forces that tilted a segment of strata after all the upper layers were already in place.

Apart from the fact that it requires zillions of tons of rock to conveniently vanish into nothing, violating the law of conservation of matter.

This has been brought to your attention before. We're talking about many cubic kilometers of rock, they can't just be hiding behind a tree.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 224 by Faith, posted 05-13-2014 10:16 AM Faith has not yet responded

  
Dr Adequate
Member
Posts: 16097
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 399 of 533 (727631)
05-19-2014 1:08 PM
Reply to: Message 398 by Faith
05-19-2014 1:02 PM


Re: salt basin
"Sorting fossils in water" is a strange misrepresentation of the idea ...

... that fossils were arranged by "the principles of hydraulic sorting".


This message is a reply to:
 Message 398 by Faith, posted 05-19-2014 1:02 PM Faith has not yet responded

  
Dr Adequate
Member
Posts: 16097
Joined: 07-20-2006


(3)
Message 401 of 533 (727635)
05-19-2014 1:29 PM
Reply to: Message 385 by Faith
05-19-2014 9:58 AM


Re: salt basin
The problem is it's messier elsewhere. It rapidly gets too complex and requires an enormous amount of time ...

But Faith, don't you see that this is what's wrong with your whole argument? You want a single explanation for the whole of geology. But then you won't look at anything but the G.C, and when we indulge you by talking about that, you won't look at anything below the Great Unconformity, and when we draw your attention to the fossils and the footprints lying above it, you say you don't have the time to look at it in detail ... everything is too much for you to look at except the one single fact you think proves you right.

Now we are not like that. We can say: pick any spot on the face of the Earth, and let's talk about the rocks and the fossils there, and we'll show you how this can be explained in terms of real geology.

You say: let's look at just one place, and just look at some facts but not others, and let's only look at the rocks in that location above a certain arbitrary point, and if we restrict ourselves only to the facts that you want us to look at they'll prove how right you are.

Well on that basis you could implore us to only look at ostriches while considering your position that no birds can fly.

Geologists ask me to look at the whole of geology, at all the rocks available. You beg us to focus on a few facts about one portion of the rocks in one location. Who is more likely to be right about geology?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 385 by Faith, posted 05-19-2014 9:58 AM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 406 by roxrkool, posted 05-19-2014 4:12 PM Dr Adequate has not yet responded
 Message 412 by Faith, posted 05-20-2014 9:54 AM Dr Adequate has responded

  
Dr Adequate
Member
Posts: 16097
Joined: 07-20-2006


(3)
Message 423 of 533 (727729)
05-20-2014 11:05 AM
Reply to: Message 412 by Faith
05-20-2014 9:54 AM


Re: pick a site
I know the Flood happened and the GC shows the ridiculousness of Old Earth explanations. All other locations would also be products of the Flood but it would be harder answering all the Geology objections.

"I know birds can't fly and the ostrich shows the ridiculousness of Ornithologist explanations. All other birds would also be flightless but it would be harder answering all the Zoology objections."

If anything, this analogy favors you, because we have shown extensive evidence that the G.C. strata weren't produced by a single flood.

Right, so you pick the other location you want to discuss, OK?

Ideally, your model would fit all of them. That was my point. At the very least you should consider a wide range of phenomena; and you should try to keep an open mind on the subject of whether completely different geological features were all produced by exactly the same process. You might find --- who knows? --- that the different features are best explained by the diverse known geological processes that perfectly explain them.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 412 by Faith, posted 05-20-2014 9:54 AM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 424 by Faith, posted 05-20-2014 11:17 AM Dr Adequate has not yet responded

  
Dr Adequate
Member
Posts: 16097
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 449 of 533 (730418)
06-28-2014 2:16 AM
Reply to: Message 448 by Faith
06-28-2014 12:57 AM


Re: All that erosion that sculpted around the strata
If your point is that strata are only eroded after they've been deposited, this is equally consistent with real geology as with Flood geology or indeed with magic-strata-pixies geology. The only thing it's inconsistent with is time running backwards. It's kind of ... y'know ... logically inevitable.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 448 by Faith, posted 06-28-2014 12:57 AM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 450 by Faith, posted 06-28-2014 2:18 AM Dr Adequate has responded

  
Dr Adequate
Member
Posts: 16097
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 451 of 533 (730420)
06-28-2014 2:22 AM
Reply to: Message 450 by Faith
06-28-2014 2:18 AM


Re: All that erosion that sculpted around the strata
In order for something to be eroded, it must first be present.

What else do you have as evidence for the Flood? All the ingredients of my dinner were grown before they were cooked! How do you explain that, evolutionists!


This message is a reply to:
 Message 450 by Faith, posted 06-28-2014 2:18 AM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 452 by Faith, posted 06-28-2014 2:25 AM Dr Adequate has responded

  
Dr Adequate
Member
Posts: 16097
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 454 of 533 (730423)
06-28-2014 2:34 AM
Reply to: Message 452 by Faith
06-28-2014 2:25 AM


Re: All that erosion that sculpted around the strata
Well, I am reading it. You write (for example): "This is true of the Grand Canyon where all the strata are there from Tapeats to Kaibab before the canyon itself was cut." Well, yes. This is because in order for a canyon to cut through strata, the strata have to be there before it cuts through them. If they weren't there, it couldn't have cut through them. If the canyon had been cut and then the Coconino Sandstone, for example, had been added afterwards, then if we briefly overlook the gross structural difficulties that this would involve, it would also be true just as a matter of logic that the canyon would not have been cut through it.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 452 by Faith, posted 06-28-2014 2:25 AM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 455 by Faith, posted 06-28-2014 2:44 AM Dr Adequate has responded

  
1
23Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019