Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 62 (9024 total)
68 online now:
jar (1 member, 67 visitors)
Newest Member: Moe's URL Addresss
Post Volume: Total: 882,865 Year: 511/14,102 Month: 511/294 Week: 267/136 Day: 43/32 Hour: 2/2


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Growing the Geologic Column
Pressie
Member (Idle past 9 days)
Posts: 2087
From: Pretoria, SA
Joined: 06-18-2010


(3)
Message 33 of 740 (733764)
07-21-2014 3:41 AM
Reply to: Message 32 by Faith
07-21-2014 3:19 AM


Re: Defining the Geo Column again
Faith writes:

I'd also like to point out that he's answering mainstream Geology in such a way that implies the standard view of the Geologic Column IS that identifiable stack of sedimentary strata I've been taking it to be.

Ah, so old Steve is put up a strawman about "the standard view of the Geologic Column". Typical creationist. They have to tell untruths about everything. That's all they have. Untruths. Let's remind you that his 'article', containing all those untruths, is dated 1984.

However, in real life, in 1977 from:

Margaret Gary, Robert McAfee Jr and Carol L. Wolf, eds. (1977). Glossary of Geology, American Geological Institute, fourth printing, p.292:

Geological column: (a) A composite diagram that shows in a single column the subdivisions of part or all of geologic time or the sequence of stratigraphic units of a given locality or region (the oldest at the bottom and the youngest at the top, with dips adjusted to the horizontal) so arranged as to indicate their relative positions to each other. See also columnar section
(b) The vertical or chronologic arrangement or sequence of rock units portrayed in a geologic column. See also geologic section----Syn: stratigraphic column.

Faith, stop reading creationist nonsense. They always have to lie.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 32 by Faith, posted 07-21-2014 3:19 AM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 34 by Faith, posted 07-21-2014 3:48 AM Pressie has responded

  
Pressie
Member (Idle past 9 days)
Posts: 2087
From: Pretoria, SA
Joined: 06-18-2010


(4)
Message 35 of 740 (733766)
07-21-2014 3:58 AM
Reply to: Message 34 by Faith
07-21-2014 3:48 AM


Re: Defining the Geo Column again
Faith writes:

That kind of crazed unwarranted attack on any creationist just for being a creationist is exactly why I hesitated to post that article and avoid linking creationist material here.

I pointed out exactly where your creationist source told an untruth. The attack was thus not unwarranted at all.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 34 by Faith, posted 07-21-2014 3:48 AM Faith has not yet responded

  
Pressie
Member (Idle past 9 days)
Posts: 2087
From: Pretoria, SA
Joined: 06-18-2010


(1)
Message 38 of 740 (733771)
07-21-2014 5:43 AM
Reply to: Message 34 by Faith
07-21-2014 3:48 AM


Re: Defining the Geo Column again
Faith writes:

I don't see what you think is so superior about the definition you put up.


It's the defintion the tens of thousands of geologists from all over the world use. The definition all those geologists, regardless of language barriers, use. No problems with:

... it might mean this; it might mean that.
It means the same all over the world; doesn't matter the language.

Trying to make themselves understandable to every other geologist in the world. Scientific words do have meaning; don't you know?

Edited by Pressie, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 34 by Faith, posted 07-21-2014 3:48 AM Faith has not yet responded

  
Pressie
Member (Idle past 9 days)
Posts: 2087
From: Pretoria, SA
Joined: 06-18-2010


Message 39 of 740 (733772)
07-21-2014 5:55 AM
Reply to: Message 34 by Faith
07-21-2014 3:48 AM


Re: Defining the Geo Column again
Faith writes:

The "untruths" seem to come rather frequently from your side, and you are particularly irresponsible in your posts it seems to me.

Really? From the side of of those tens of thousands of geologists from all over the world? As I see it, the few cases of dishonesty that some geologists were involved in have been pointed out and dealt with in the relevant circles. Could you provide references for "untruths" from geologists which haven't been dealt with by other geologists?

On the other side, the dishonesty of people like Chris Nevins and John Woodmorappe have been pointed out very well.

Edited by Pressie, : No reason given.

Edited by Pressie, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 34 by Faith, posted 07-21-2014 3:48 AM Faith has not yet responded

  
Pressie
Member (Idle past 9 days)
Posts: 2087
From: Pretoria, SA
Joined: 06-18-2010


Message 126 of 740 (734077)
07-25-2014 7:01 AM
Reply to: Message 123 by Faith
07-25-2014 4:12 AM


Re: a partial review
Faith writes:

although I've many times defined my view of it as specific to the particular strata that define the Geo Time Scale, that are very thick and very extensive and so on.

Why do you have this view? The geological time scale does not assign particular strata or thicknesses or extensiveness and so on at all. The geological time tables describe time periods. Your comment didn't make any sense.

Edited by Pressie, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 123 by Faith, posted 07-25-2014 4:12 AM Faith has not yet responded

  
Pressie
Member (Idle past 9 days)
Posts: 2087
From: Pretoria, SA
Joined: 06-18-2010


(1)
Message 268 of 740 (734314)
07-28-2014 1:52 AM
Reply to: Message 264 by Faith
07-28-2014 1:21 AM


Faith writes:

But this is a LOT of work and I can't keep up with it.


Of course it is. You do know that tens of thousands of geologists all over the world get paid for doing geology full-time? In my country around 3 000; where exploration and mining companies are the biggest employers, followed by research organisations (exploration and mining companies provide most of the funds for research on geology), Universities (exploration and mining companies provide most of the funds for research on geology) , Government research organisations (exploration and mining companies provide most of the funds for research on geology), etc.? Every single person working full-time on geology knows more than you about the subject.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 264 by Faith, posted 07-28-2014 1:21 AM Faith has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 269 by edge, posted 07-28-2014 2:00 AM Pressie has responded

  
Pressie
Member (Idle past 9 days)
Posts: 2087
From: Pretoria, SA
Joined: 06-18-2010


Message 273 of 740 (734319)
07-28-2014 2:27 AM
Reply to: Message 271 by Faith
07-28-2014 2:13 AM


Actually, quite a lot. The practical applications of the science of geology. Don't creationists always carry on about "observational science"?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 271 by Faith, posted 07-28-2014 2:13 AM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 274 by Faith, posted 07-28-2014 2:32 AM Pressie has not yet responded

  
Pressie
Member (Idle past 9 days)
Posts: 2087
From: Pretoria, SA
Joined: 06-18-2010


Message 278 of 740 (734324)
07-28-2014 3:05 AM
Reply to: Message 269 by edge
07-28-2014 2:00 AM


edge writes:

They test geological theories every day.

Yes, that's how we know that the Drakensberg and Lebombo group basalts (up to 1600 m thick in the Lesotho area, tapering out to the west and east) were extruded at the end of Karoo deposition. The basaltic dolerite dykes and sills intruded during the same event and are of similar age to the Drakensberg and Lebombo Groups.

Basaltic diabases are waaaaay older than the Drakensberg and Lebombo Group basalts. Its so easy to know; the contacts give it all away. Some basaltic dolerites actually intrude basaltic diabases. Aureoles, the works.

In our country a diabase is of Pre-Karoo age; a dolerite is of Karoo-age (similar compositions and minerals and crystals and crystal sizes and everything else!)

Edited by Pressie, : No reason given.

Edited by Pressie, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 269 by edge, posted 07-28-2014 2:00 AM edge has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 280 by Faith, posted 07-28-2014 3:17 AM Pressie has responded

  
Pressie
Member (Idle past 9 days)
Posts: 2087
From: Pretoria, SA
Joined: 06-18-2010


Message 281 of 740 (734328)
07-28-2014 3:21 AM
Reply to: Message 279 by Faith
07-28-2014 3:12 AM


Re: Cardenas
Faith writes:

The main evidence I have is what led me to this pondering: the fact that in many or most places I've seen on cross section the volcanic effects clearly occurred after the strata were all in place,...

What do you expect? That volcanic rocks should float in mid-air and wait for the hole between them and the surface to be filled in with sediments somehow? Hope you do know about gravity?

Edited by Pressie, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 279 by Faith, posted 07-28-2014 3:12 AM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 283 by Faith, posted 07-28-2014 3:37 AM Pressie has responded

  
Pressie
Member (Idle past 9 days)
Posts: 2087
From: Pretoria, SA
Joined: 06-18-2010


Message 289 of 740 (734337)
07-28-2014 7:45 AM
Reply to: Message 280 by Faith
07-28-2014 3:17 AM


Faith writes:

...interesting that even in this post of yours the age is really just windowdressing, what concerns you --

Actually, the relative age of a rock is very imporatant in exploration and mining.
Faith writes:

... as it should -- is the relationships between the rocks themselves...

That's very important in geology.
Faith writes:

... and their physical condition. ...

That's very important in geology, too. Everyone should consider what a rock can weather too, etc. That's why the weathering of rocks is such a huge part of geology. Minerology etc. Do you think that all those tens of thousands of geologists are all stupid?

Edited by Pressie, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 280 by Faith, posted 07-28-2014 3:17 AM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 295 by Faith, posted 07-28-2014 12:27 PM Pressie has not yet responded

  
Pressie
Member (Idle past 9 days)
Posts: 2087
From: Pretoria, SA
Joined: 06-18-2010


Message 290 of 740 (734339)
07-28-2014 7:52 AM
Reply to: Message 283 by Faith
07-28-2014 3:37 AM


Re: Order of events as shown on cross sections
Faith writes:

Weird, Pressie, no idea where you get such a weird idea.

Seems like that's what you think about extrusions and intrusions.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 283 by Faith, posted 07-28-2014 3:37 AM Faith has not yet responded

  
Pressie
Member (Idle past 9 days)
Posts: 2087
From: Pretoria, SA
Joined: 06-18-2010


Message 291 of 740 (734340)
07-28-2014 7:56 AM
Reply to: Message 283 by Faith
07-28-2014 3:37 AM


Re: Order of events as shown on cross sections
Faith writes:

ABE: Here's what I mean: if for instance the cross section shows a stack of layers with a magma dike running from the Precambrian rocks at the very bottom to the Tertiary at the very top and spilling over the top, then we can conclude that the strata were all there first and then the volcanic event occurred.

Actually, no. Igneous rocks indicate igneous events. For example, we do have diabases 'running' from precambrian rocks to the Tertiary in the Karoo and the Karoo sediments were deposited in those valleys formed by those eroded diabases. The volcanic events occured first, then the sedimentation occurred later. Then more volcanic events to form the dolerites and basalts after the main sedimentation events.

Edited by Pressie, : No reason given.

Edited by Pressie, : No reason given.

Edited by Pressie, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 283 by Faith, posted 07-28-2014 3:37 AM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 294 by Faith, posted 07-28-2014 12:26 PM Pressie has not yet responded

  
Pressie
Member (Idle past 9 days)
Posts: 2087
From: Pretoria, SA
Joined: 06-18-2010


Message 662 of 740 (735039)
08-05-2014 8:42 AM
Reply to: Message 659 by Faith
08-05-2014 8:03 AM


This was very funny:

Faith writes:

The thing about faults is there's no way to tell for sure the timing of when they formed

After the deposits investigated. Faults don't form in mid-air... Not very difficult.

Sorry, I just don't think that having any conversations with people such as Faith is productive anymore. It's like having debates in any 'Malhuis'. It's like trying to get inmates in an institution for the mentally insane trying to produce sanity.

Edited by Pressie, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 659 by Faith, posted 08-05-2014 8:03 AM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 663 by Faith, posted 08-05-2014 8:50 AM Pressie has not yet responded
 Message 668 by RAZD, posted 08-05-2014 8:59 AM Pressie has not yet responded

  
Pressie
Member (Idle past 9 days)
Posts: 2087
From: Pretoria, SA
Joined: 06-18-2010


Message 706 of 740 (735118)
08-06-2014 1:00 AM
Reply to: Message 703 by Faith
08-06-2014 12:02 AM


The Navajo sandstone is shown as one sandstone 'layer' in cross-sections.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 703 by Faith, posted 08-06-2014 12:02 AM Faith 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 © 2021