Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 86 (8915 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 07-20-2019 3:43 PM
25 online now:
DrJones*, Larni, PaulK, Percy (Admin), Sarah Bellum, Tangle (6 members, 19 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: 4petdinos
Upcoming Birthdays: anglagard
Post Volume:
Total: 857,179 Year: 12,215/19,786 Month: 1,996/2,641 Week: 505/708 Day: 64/135 Hour: 2/5


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   The Geological Timescale is Fiction whose only reality is stacks of rock
herebedragons
Member
Posts: 1513
From: Michigan
Joined: 11-22-2009
Member Rating: 10.0


Message 230 of 1257 (788331)
07-29-2016 1:30 PM
Reply to: Message 215 by mike the wiz
07-29-2016 6:25 AM


But if the global flood story is true, we should see highly organized sediments and fossil sequences that are structured into discrete, systematic units

I'm not sure who said this but it is a prime example of an untested conditional probably based on an strawman version of the flood.

I said it and I am glad that you agree with me that it is a ridiculous expectation for the flood since I was making the point that it seems as if Faith's ideas about what we should expect to observe were a global flood true are backwards. Essentially, her contention is that if a global flood were true we should expect the geological record to look exactly like it does which is highly ordered and sorted - both fossils and sediments. Yet... she seems to be at a loss as to HOW the flood could produce the order in the geological record.

What we actually see from experimental testing with flumes, is that uniform principles do not apply to flowing currents which provably show that facies can be created quickly, and they break both the principle of superposition and continuity.

IOW, when strata, under experimental conditions, are formed quickly, it can be shown that they are created by direction of the current and are laid down vertically and laterally, SIMULTANEOUSLY.

You do realize that if you consider results of experiments or processes that can be conducted and observed today and apply them to past events, you are essentially operating under the assumption of uniformitarianism? We assume that processes we observe today are the same processes that operated in the past and that those processes are sufficient to explain Earth's geology. Uniformitarianism doesn't assume there was not a global flood, but assumes that if there was, we would be able to predict the consequences and examine the effects. Catastrophism, on the other hand, assumes that major cataclysmic events occurred in the past that relied on processes that are for the most part not operating today. Flood geology generally relies on the catastrophism principle, suggesting that, for example, there was some mysterious process that sorted fossils and sediments in the manner which it did. No one is able to adequately explain that mysterious process.

The Coconino sandstone in the Grand Canyon has many track-ways (animals), but is almost devoid of plants. Implication: these rocks are not ecosystems but are evidence of catastrophic transportation.

A good example of an unexplained, mysterious mechanism/process - "catastrophic transportation."

Here is a paper that explores the implications of such "catastrophic transportation" of the Coconino Sandstone.

Sediment Transport and the Coconino Sandstone: A Reality Check on Flood Geology

quote:
These calculations indicate a slab of sand 25 m high,
1,600 km wide, and 1,000 km long would have to be
continuously sliding southward across the boundary
at one meter per second to form the Coconino Sandstone
in twelve days. This corresponds to a sediment
transport rate of 4.8 x 104 kilograms (48 metric tons)
per second per meter!

HOW could that happen? What is the mechanism to transport that quantity of material, Mike? Are there any experimental results indicate that it's even possible? Or do we rely on the idea that we just can't understand the mechanisms of such a catastrophic event?

HBD


Whoever calls me ignorant shares my own opinion. Sorrowfully and tacitly I recognize my ignorance, when I consider how much I lack of what my mind in its craving for knowledge is sighing for... I console myself with the consideration that this belongs to our common nature. - Francesco Petrarca

"Nothing is easier than to persuade people who want to be persuaded and already believe." - another Petrarca gem.

Ignorance is a most formidable opponent rivaled only by arrogance; but when the two join forces, one is all but invincible.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 215 by mike the wiz, posted 07-29-2016 6:25 AM mike the wiz has not yet responded

  
herebedragons
Member
Posts: 1513
From: Michigan
Joined: 11-22-2009
Member Rating: 10.0


Message 246 of 1257 (788390)
07-30-2016 10:50 PM
Reply to: Message 241 by edge
07-30-2016 9:51 AM


Re: and multiple shore lines
Faith writes:

What's so odd about the idea that the Flood should have left shorelines?

Correct me if I am wrong here, but aren't those "shorelines" erosional, not depositional? In other words, those stepped features are caused by eroding existing materials?

This is just typical YEC silliness. The receding flood waters are depositing millions of tons of sediment... rapidly... very rapidly, but at the same time they are eroding those very same materials that have already hardened. How does this stuff make sense to them???

HBD


Whoever calls me ignorant shares my own opinion. Sorrowfully and tacitly I recognize my ignorance, when I consider how much I lack of what my mind in its craving for knowledge is sighing for... I console myself with the consideration that this belongs to our common nature. - Francesco Petrarca

"Nothing is easier than to persuade people who want to be persuaded and already believe." - another Petrarca gem.

Ignorance is a most formidable opponent rivaled only by arrogance; but when the two join forces, one is all but invincible.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 241 by edge, posted 07-30-2016 9:51 AM edge has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 249 by Faith, posted 07-31-2016 7:24 AM herebedragons has not yet responded
 Message 261 by edge, posted 07-31-2016 9:59 PM herebedragons has not yet responded

  
herebedragons
Member
Posts: 1513
From: Michigan
Joined: 11-22-2009
Member Rating: 10.0


Message 288 of 1257 (788679)
08-03-2016 3:30 PM
Reply to: Message 287 by Faith
08-03-2016 2:57 PM


Re: Tracks in the strata
The only landscape was the original one being buried by the Flood layer by layer.

Can you point to this original landscape on some cross sections?

The Flood took about five months to rise to its height, and then a couple months standing at its height, during which time I'm assuming all the strata were laid down. Which would mean that as the sediments were not yet all laid down there should have been unflooded land remaining, but it depends on the location -- some locations could have been completely covered by the earlier layers. But it's not important. 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.

At what stage is the sediment being stripped form the land? Where is all this sediment coming from?

Also, I don't think 150 days of rising water jives with a clear reading of the text.

quote:
Gen 7:12 And the rain was upon the earth forty days and forty nights.

Gen 7:17 - 19 And the flood was forty days upon the earth; and the waters increased, and bare up the ark, and it was lift up above the earth. And the waters prevailed, and were increased greatly upon the earth; and the ark went upon the face of the waters. And the waters prevailed exceedingly upon the earth; and all the high hills, that were under the whole heaven, were covered.

... all living things are dead...

Gen 7:24 And the waters prevailed upon the earth an hundred and fifty days


Waters rose in 40 days and stayed covering the earth for 150 days is a more clear reading of the text. And in support of that reading, the first verses in Gen 8:

quote:

Gen 8:1 - 3 And God remembered Noah, and every living thing, and all the cattle that was with him in the ark: and God made a wind to pass over the earth, and the waters asswaged; the fountains also of the deep and the windows of heaven were stopped, and the rain from heaven was restrained; And the waters returned from off the earth continually: and after the end of the hundred and fifty days the waters were abated.

The inputs of water (ie. the fountains of the deep and the window of heaven) stopped after 40 days. How would the water continue to rise so significantly?

This still creates the problem of stripping off all the land and depositing miles deep of sediment in 150 days! Your scenario doesn't even allow for an entire year of deposition. It would make more sense to have all the sediments being stripped off in the first 150 days and then deposited in the remaining time of the flood, but then that creates other problems right?

Strange idea.

Yeah.

It all hangs together.

No it doesn't.

HBD


Whoever calls me ignorant shares my own opinion. Sorrowfully and tacitly I recognize my ignorance, when I consider how much I lack of what my mind in its craving for knowledge is sighing for... I console myself with the consideration that this belongs to our common nature. - Francesco Petrarca

"Nothing is easier than to persuade people who want to be persuaded and already believe." - another Petrarca gem.

Ignorance is a most formidable opponent rivaled only by arrogance; but when the two join forces, one is all but invincible.


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 290 by edge, posted 08-03-2016 3:39 PM herebedragons has not yet responded
 Message 298 by Faith, posted 08-03-2016 7:06 PM herebedragons has not yet responded
 Message 301 by Faith, posted 08-03-2016 9:22 PM herebedragons 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 © 2019