Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 85 (8915 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 07-22-2019 6:07 AM
23 online now:
Heathen (1 member, 22 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: 4petdinos
Upcoming Birthdays: anglagard
Post Volume:
Total: 857,297 Year: 12,333/19,786 Month: 2,114/2,641 Week: 69/554 Day: 6/63 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   The Geological Timescale is Fiction whose only reality is stacks of rock
Tanypteryx
Member
Posts: 2250
From: Oregon, USA
Joined: 08-27-2006
Member Rating: 5.3


(3)
Message 236 of 1257 (788350)
07-29-2016 9:00 PM
Reply to: Message 232 by Faith
07-29-2016 2:29 PM


Re: How we get from rock to landscape to rock, that's the question
The idea that there aren't landscapes, hills, mountains, rivers found within sedimentary sequences is simply incorrect. Just do a google image search on 'seismic section' and you can see all sorts of preserved features.

Faith says:

The supposed seismic imagery of deeply buried "landscapes" has come up here many times and my answer is those are not actual landscapes that were ever on the surface of the earth, but simply features like "canyons" carved by running water, probably after being deposited and buried, that got filled in by the next layer of sediment. That's really the only kind of thing that is seen on that sort of imaging, not enough to hang an entire landscape on of the sort we see on the surface of the earth today.

I thought you would not be able to come up with new bizarrely strange ideas that would top your past bizarrely strange ideas but you have proven me wrong.

I don't remember seeing this "no past landscapes twist" before but you must have a definition of landscape that I have never heard before. For the life of me I can't figure out what it is though. I don't know whether I should be hopeful for enlightenment or not.


What if Eleanor Roosevelt had wings? -- Monty Python

One important characteristic of a theory is that is has survived repeated attempts to falsify it. Contrary to your understanding, all available evidence confirms it. --Subbie

If evolution is shown to be false, it will be at the hands of things that are true, not made up. --percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 232 by Faith, posted 07-29-2016 2:29 PM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 238 by Faith, posted 07-30-2016 8:38 AM Tanypteryx has responded

    
Tanypteryx
Member
Posts: 2250
From: Oregon, USA
Joined: 08-27-2006
Member Rating: 5.3


(2)
Message 245 of 1257 (788372)
07-30-2016 12:23 PM
Reply to: Message 238 by Faith
07-30-2016 8:38 AM


Re: How we get from rock to landscape to rock, that's the question
No landscapes BETWEEN STRATA is the idea, or even "within" strata since that's implied too. The only landscapes on the surface would have been before the Flood, which would have been obliterated by the Flood waters, starting with the heavy rain and continuing with the rising sea water laying down its sediments; and the landscapes that have formed after the Flood.

OK, I get it now. During the flood "land"scapes couldn't exist underwater.

"starting with the heavy rain and continuing with the rising water laying down its sediments" implies that the sediments fell with the rain. I have always wondered where the millions of cubic miles of sediment came from, now I know.

Looking at the strata all that you see is tight lines between them, but wherever there is an exposed surface you get hills and valleys, trees and other living things -- which is how I'm using the term "landscape."

"Tight lines between them". What else would you expect? I guess you you think if there was a landscape there with trees growing on it the next layer to be deposited would would only form at the level of the treetops, leaving gap of maybe a hundred feet or so?

We know that a flood would leave only one layer with the heavier, denser material at the bottom and lighter, finer material at the top and bodies of organisms with similar densities found at the same levels.

What we are arguing is whether there was ever a surface landscape in, say, the "Devonian period," or the "Permian," or the "Jurassic" etc, which would supposedly have left SOME clues instead of those flat straight contacts between their strata and the next.

Well, all we have to do is look at all the places the strata are exposed and we can see that you are mistaken. In some places there are flat, straight contacts between the strata, but in many places we can observe that there were "hills and valleys, trees and other living things" or in other words "landscapes" that were later covered by sediments.

which would supposedly have left SOME clues

People have been pointing out hundreds of clues, but you keep saying "I'm not talking about those, I'm talking about how I can't see any sky and trees and other living things when I look at certain pictures of the strata".

The layered strata is the clue that the strata were not deposited by a single flood.

The strata layers that are missing because they were eroded away before subsequent layers were deposited is a clue that the strata were not deposited by a single flood.

Sand dunes with animal tracks that are sandwiched between marine layers are clues that the strata were not deposited by a single flood.

The complete lack of a single global flood strata layer is absolute evidence that there was never a global flood.

I hope this suffices for the enlightenment you seek.

Thanks, yes it was very enlightening.


What if Eleanor Roosevelt had wings? -- Monty Python

One important characteristic of a theory is that is has survived repeated attempts to falsify it. Contrary to your understanding, all available evidence confirms it. --Subbie

If evolution is shown to be false, it will be at the hands of things that are true, not made up. --percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 238 by Faith, posted 07-30-2016 8:38 AM Faith has not yet responded

    
Tanypteryx
Member
Posts: 2250
From: Oregon, USA
Joined: 08-27-2006
Member Rating: 5.3


(1)
Message 291 of 1257 (788682)
08-03-2016 3:40 PM
Reply to: Message 287 by Faith
08-03-2016 2:57 PM


Re: Tracks in the strata
The Flood wasn't over until all the unflooded land was flooded, which took about five months, and then the Flood waters stayed at the height for a couple months before receding, which took about another five months. It all hangs together.

So, the water kept rising after it quit raining?

for a couple months before receding, which took about another five months.

Where did it recede to? A plug got pulled somewhere?


What if Eleanor Roosevelt had wings? -- Monty Python

One important characteristic of a theory is that is has survived repeated attempts to falsify it. Contrary to your understanding, all available evidence confirms it. --Subbie

If evolution is shown to be false, it will be at the hands of things that are true, not made up. --percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 287 by Faith, posted 08-03-2016 2:57 PM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 292 by edge, posted 08-03-2016 4:20 PM Tanypteryx has acknowledged this reply
 Message 294 by Faith, posted 08-03-2016 6:17 PM Tanypteryx has not yet responded

    
Tanypteryx
Member
Posts: 2250
From: Oregon, USA
Joined: 08-27-2006
Member Rating: 5.3


(1)
Message 467 of 1257 (789115)
08-10-2016 8:01 PM
Reply to: Message 463 by NosyNed
08-10-2016 4:50 PM


Re: Just the same as today.
So no one understands what you imagine was happening that makes it all so impossible.

I thought the "no landscapes in the past argument" was the most bizarre new wrinkle in her claims, but now she is giving the craziest description of geological science. In her last dozen or more posts she describes geology and biology in a way that is totally daft and that bares no resemblance to how any geologists, biologists, evolutionary biologists, or paleontologists actually describe the planet or geological and biological processes.


What if Eleanor Roosevelt had wings? -- Monty Python

One important characteristic of a theory is that is has survived repeated attempts to falsify it. Contrary to your understanding, all available evidence confirms it. --Subbie

If evolution is shown to be false, it will be at the hands of things that are true, not made up. --percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 463 by NosyNed, posted 08-10-2016 4:50 PM NosyNed has not yet responded

    
Tanypteryx
Member
Posts: 2250
From: Oregon, USA
Joined: 08-27-2006
Member Rating: 5.3


(4)
Message 983 of 1257 (790560)
08-31-2016 9:14 PM
Reply to: Message 982 by edge
08-31-2016 6:28 PM


Re: Landscape to Rock
It needs to be understood why she believes geology thinks this.

I've been trying to figure that out for weeks.

As this discussion has proceeded I have been amazed by the things that Faith seems to think that geologists think. And when I read the explanations of how the processes actually work that are posted to correct her misunderstandings I am blown away that she doesn't get it.

I think Faith meant that she thinks geology's views require fossils to show up in the geologic record in places other than where they lived.

That is also my impression. But no, they are either destroyed or preserved locally by erosion or burial in protected basins.

All through this discussion I keep thinking about the changes that I observed over many years at a pond where I studied dragonflies. I remember the first year that it totally dried up. In two days it went from having a couple inches of water in the relatively flat bottom to being drying mud. Thousands of fish were suddenly exposed and flopping around as they slowly suffocated. The sound was quite loud and disturbing. Dozens of herons and egrets showed up and feasted for several days but they really couldn't put a dent in them. Within a few days the mud-caked fish were desiccated corpses that barely smelled. Sedges rapidly grew and hid the remains and when the Fall rains refilled the pond the sedges formed a mat that completely covered the dead fish. I assume that all sorts of organisms fed on the soft remains and maybe some of the bones. By the next Spring there was a layer of soft mud covering the remains and the sedges started growing earlier.

Several years later The pond dried up again and I went out on the cracked mud flats to get some buckets of the dried mud to use in some pond aquariums that I was rearing dragonfly nymphs in. I kept finding perfectly preserved fish skeletons that reminded me of some of the fish fossils I have seen in museums. I remember thinking that in a million years these fish might be fossilized.

Sadly, my wonderful pond is now under a Walmart superstore.

One positive side note, I found some dried up dragonfly nymphs in the dry, caked mud. They were so dry that that they floated when I put them in a bucket of water. After a couple hours, I looked in the bucket and they had disappeared. When I looked closer I realized that they were at the bottom and that they were alive. It turned out that I had discovered that dragonfly nymphs were drought resistant and subsequent research showed that many species have this ability.


What if Eleanor Roosevelt had wings? -- Monty Python

One important characteristic of a theory is that is has survived repeated attempts to falsify it. Contrary to your understanding, all available evidence confirms it. --Subbie

If evolution is shown to be false, it will be at the hands of things that are true, not made up. --percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 982 by edge, posted 08-31-2016 6:28 PM edge has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 984 by Faith, posted 08-31-2016 9:20 PM Tanypteryx has responded

    
Tanypteryx
Member
Posts: 2250
From: Oregon, USA
Joined: 08-27-2006
Member Rating: 5.3


(2)
Message 985 of 1257 (790562)
08-31-2016 9:59 PM
Reply to: Message 984 by Faith
08-31-2016 9:20 PM


Re: Landscape to Rock
I would think I'd said it enough times by now that this isn't about what I think Geologists think. Good grief.

Well, I can't figure out what you think or what your point is. The processes of geology, deposition, erosion, fossilization are so obvious and easy to understand that it is hard to believe that you really don't get it after all these discussions.

I think that the gibberish of your "puzzle" and the rest of the stuff you have posted in this thread is a total con job.

Good grief indeed.


What if Eleanor Roosevelt had wings? -- Monty Python

One important characteristic of a theory is that is has survived repeated attempts to falsify it. Contrary to your understanding, all available evidence confirms it. --Subbie

If evolution is shown to be false, it will be at the hands of things that are true, not made up. --percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 984 by Faith, posted 08-31-2016 9:20 PM Faith has not yet responded

    
Tanypteryx
Member
Posts: 2250
From: Oregon, USA
Joined: 08-27-2006
Member Rating: 5.3


(5)
Message 1025 of 1257 (790694)
09-03-2016 2:53 PM
Reply to: Message 1024 by Faith
09-03-2016 2:14 PM


This is so absolutely hopeless there is no point in continuing.

So stop.

This thread needs to be shut down. PLEASE.

Many of the rest of us find it very interesting and I (for one) am learning from both questions and answers.

I don't know what the problem is so there is no hope that I can do anything about it. It's all quite clear to me what I'm trying to do and the incomprehension of others is beyond me. I can't solve this and apparently nobody else can.

What is incomprehensible to me is how you can possibly still not see that what you are trying to show as a problem for geology is not a problem. The processes of geology that you have described as problems for geology are not because that is not how it happens.

Almost universally, we understand the descriptions and explanations that have been put forward by edge, PaulK, and others and they make perfect sense. You have muddled everything so badly because you reject the one factor that makes everything obvious, deep time......hundreds of millions of years of deposition, erosion, life and death.

All the rocks, all the strata, all the canyons, all the fossils, all of the evidence shows that these processes have been going on for hundreds of millions of years. There are no chinks in the evidence that refute this conclusion or that supports any hint of the YEC fantasies.

I hope this thread stays open and continues to show that your argument is a muddled pile of gibberish that will never rise to the level science, let alone throw any doubt on the modern understanding of geology.


What if Eleanor Roosevelt had wings? -- Monty Python

One important characteristic of a theory is that is has survived repeated attempts to falsify it. Contrary to your understanding, all available evidence confirms it. --Subbie

If evolution is shown to be false, it will be at the hands of things that are true, not made up. --percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1024 by Faith, posted 09-03-2016 2:14 PM Faith has not yet responded

    
Tanypteryx
Member
Posts: 2250
From: Oregon, USA
Joined: 08-27-2006
Member Rating: 5.3


(1)
Message 1032 of 1257 (790703)
09-03-2016 5:06 PM
Reply to: Message 1029 by Faith
09-03-2016 4:38 PM


Re: What is in the Landscape?-correction
And another thing I guess you won't get is that in this thread I'm not arguing from YECism or the Flood, I'm trying to argue strictly from the facts I glean from YOU GUYS.

If this was true then two of the major facts we have repeated over and over: 1) hundreds of millions of years, 2) the same processes operate today that operated in the past, are conspicuously missing from your arguments.

I'm trying to argue strictly from the facts I glean from YOU GUYS.

I would note that you argued differently in Message 984

quote:
I would think I'd said it enough times by now that this isn't about what I think Geologists think. Good grief.

What if Eleanor Roosevelt had wings? -- Monty Python

One important characteristic of a theory is that is has survived repeated attempts to falsify it. Contrary to your understanding, all available evidence confirms it. --Subbie

If evolution is shown to be false, it will be at the hands of things that are true, not made up. --percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1029 by Faith, posted 09-03-2016 4:38 PM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 1034 by Faith, posted 09-03-2016 5:19 PM Tanypteryx has responded

    
Tanypteryx
Member
Posts: 2250
From: Oregon, USA
Joined: 08-27-2006
Member Rating: 5.3


(1)
Message 1036 of 1257 (790709)
09-03-2016 6:55 PM
Reply to: Message 1034 by Faith
09-03-2016 5:19 PM


Re: What is in the Landscape?-correction
You seem to think I'd have to agree with those things to be arguing strictly from the facts I glean from you guys? That makes no sense. I'm arguing AGAINST those things, but I guess not in a way you can recognize.

Sure, I recognize it. That is the ugly, raw, gaping wound in your argument.

All of the evidence leads to the inescapable conclusion that the geological processes we see today have been occurring for many hundreds of millions years. ALL THE EVIDENCE.

Before you have any chance whatsoever you have to present evidence that not only refutes the findings of science (hundreds of millions of years of geological processes), but that lends absolute support to your argument.

I am trying to show that you can't physically get from your imaginary landscape in your imaginary time period to the rock in the strata that represents it. Since it IS all imaginary, however, it may nevertheless be possible to do it,

Your operative word here is "imaginary", but although you repeatedly assert this you have been completely unsuccessful in demonstrating it. You have no evidence. As I said above you cannot show what you are trying to show until you first refute the evidence of millions of years of geological processes and present evidence for your imaginary problem.

It would make a nice proof of the imaginary nature of the time periods and the weird idea of stacks of landscapes/environments if I could do it but if I can't even get it across it's a lost cause for which I'm losing a lot of hair.

Well, so far you have not presented any evidence that supports the assertion that the vast periods of time are imaginary. The reason you can't get it across is because all the evidence shows that you are wrong.

I'm losing a lot of hair.

Boy, I hear you, but I am living proof that bald is beautiful......

REALLY, all it would take to make some progress in understanding what I'm trying to say is just to assume I'm not stu*pid and not likely to be contradicting myself in all the glaring ways you impute to me, and I am saying something that would make sense if you'd just put the brakes on your first nonsensical way of misreading me and consider that it's probably wrong.

No one is misreading you Faith. Everyone can clearly see that your thinking is hopelessly muddled. We disagree with you, but that doesn't mean we don't or can't understand you. The flaws in your argument are gaping, glaring wounds like I said earlier. You will never convince anyone until you address those.


What if Eleanor Roosevelt had wings? -- Monty Python

One important characteristic of a theory is that is has survived repeated attempts to falsify it. Contrary to your understanding, all available evidence confirms it. --Subbie

If evolution is shown to be false, it will be at the hands of things that are true, not made up. --percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1034 by Faith, posted 09-03-2016 5:19 PM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 1037 by Faith, posted 09-03-2016 7:03 PM Tanypteryx has responded
 Message 1052 by Faith, posted 09-04-2016 2:55 AM Tanypteryx has not yet responded

    
Tanypteryx
Member
Posts: 2250
From: Oregon, USA
Joined: 08-27-2006
Member Rating: 5.3


Message 1039 of 1257 (790713)
09-03-2016 7:21 PM
Reply to: Message 1037 by Faith
09-03-2016 7:03 PM


Re: What is in the Landscape?-correction
Faith writes:

The problem with imaginary concepts is that they are very flexible and can be bent in enough directions to seem to prove themselves correct.

Well, you have bent your imaginary concepts into shapes that put 10 dimensional spcetime to shame, but they don't seem to prove themselves correct, for that you need evidence.

I still think it may be possible to show this. Even if I could, however, I do doubt the ability of those for whom the concepts of stacked time and stacked landscapes have solidified into concrete and glued their brain cells into an indissoluble mass, to be able to recognize the proof even if I can pull it off.

Ah, the last refuge of those losing the argument, accuse your opponents of being too stupid to understand your brilliance. Well done.


What if Eleanor Roosevelt had wings? -- Monty Python

One important characteristic of a theory is that is has survived repeated attempts to falsify it. Contrary to your understanding, all available evidence confirms it. --Subbie

If evolution is shown to be false, it will be at the hands of things that are true, not made up. --percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1037 by Faith, posted 09-03-2016 7:03 PM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 1050 by Faith, posted 09-04-2016 2:30 AM Tanypteryx has responded

    
Tanypteryx
Member
Posts: 2250
From: Oregon, USA
Joined: 08-27-2006
Member Rating: 5.3


Message 1051 of 1257 (790731)
09-04-2016 2:53 AM
Reply to: Message 1050 by Faith
09-04-2016 2:30 AM


Re: What is in the Landscape?-correction
No, I'm not calling anyone stu*pid

Of course you are.

Still no evidence, just muddled thinking and a fantasy that will never convince anyone because you can't make sense of it yourself. "It must be an illusion." Grow up.


What if Eleanor Roosevelt had wings? -- Monty Python

One important characteristic of a theory is that is has survived repeated attempts to falsify it. Contrary to your understanding, all available evidence confirms it. --Subbie

If evolution is shown to be false, it will be at the hands of things that are true, not made up. --percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1050 by Faith, posted 09-04-2016 2:30 AM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 1053 by Faith, posted 09-04-2016 2:56 AM Tanypteryx has responded
 Message 1059 by Faith, posted 09-04-2016 7:06 AM Tanypteryx has not yet responded

    
Tanypteryx
Member
Posts: 2250
From: Oregon, USA
Joined: 08-27-2006
Member Rating: 5.3


Message 1055 of 1257 (790735)
09-04-2016 3:21 AM
Reply to: Message 1053 by Faith
09-04-2016 2:56 AM


Re: What is in the Landscape?-correction
You really ought to stay out of a discussion you don't understand.

I know BS when I see it.

So still no evidence and still no coherent description of your imaginary problems for geology.

If you can't refute the obvious conclusion that geological processes have taken hundreds of millions of years, with actual evidence, you will never convince anyone that you have found a flaw in the science that everyone else studying geology and a bunch of other sciences missed.

If you actually knew what you are talking about you'd be pretty amazing.


What if Eleanor Roosevelt had wings? -- Monty Python

One important characteristic of a theory is that is has survived repeated attempts to falsify it. Contrary to your understanding, all available evidence confirms it. --Subbie

If evolution is shown to be false, it will be at the hands of things that are true, not made up. --percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1053 by Faith, posted 09-04-2016 2:56 AM Faith has not yet responded

    
Tanypteryx
Member
Posts: 2250
From: Oregon, USA
Joined: 08-27-2006
Member Rating: 5.3


Message 1240 of 1257 (792113)
10-03-2016 8:42 PM
Reply to: Message 1235 by Pressie
09-30-2016 8:23 AM


I think it makes a bit of sense to note that human activities are affecting the whole planet and to mark it at the point when it will show up in the geological record in the future.

The radionuclides and daughters will appear in the sediments that have been deposited since we started detonating thermonuclear devices.

Plastics are being deposited in sediments around the globe. I have thought that an hypothetical intelligent species millions of years from now might suspect that some sort of plastic asteroid struck the earth during this period and caused a major extinction event.

Human also have refined vast amounts of metals that may survive without oxidation or corrosion for many millions of years. Zirconium, titanium, hafnium, niobium, tantalum are just a few of these metals that can only be dissolved in certain acids and can only be oxidized by burning at high temperatures.

There will also be an odd bio-geographical redistribution of species around the globe, that will not fit the patterns we have seen in the past that are explained by plate tectonics.


What if Eleanor Roosevelt had wings? -- Monty Python

One important characteristic of a theory is that is has survived repeated attempts to falsify it. Contrary to your understanding, all available evidence confirms it. --Subbie

If evolution is shown to be false, it will be at the hands of things that are true, not made up. --percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1235 by Pressie, posted 09-30-2016 8:23 AM Pressie has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 1241 by Coyote, posted 10-03-2016 9:44 PM Tanypteryx has acknowledged this reply

    
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019