Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 86 (8925 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 08-21-2019 12:33 AM
24 online now:
DrJones*, dwise1, Tanypteryx (3 members, 21 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: Jedothek
Post Volume:
Total: 860,153 Year: 15,189/19,786 Month: 1,912/3,058 Week: 286/404 Day: 4/96 Hour: 4/4


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   The Geological Timescale is Fiction whose only reality is stacks of rock
Tangle
Member
Posts: 7011
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 3.8


(2)
Message 54 of 1257 (787946)
07-24-2016 4:45 AM
Reply to: Message 50 by Faith
07-24-2016 2:42 AM


Re: How we get from rock to landscape to rock, that's the question
Faith writes:

I want to know is the official explanation of how a landscape forms ON TOP OF A STRATUM, then how it comes to disappear so that all we have next is another stratum of sediment.

But you've been told all this several times in the few years I've been here. The explanations don't change, the text books and websites are still there for you to read.

The problem is not that the information isn't there or that you're hearing it for the first time, it's that you simply refuse to try to understand it. You reject everything you're told so you never get to even understand what the science says. I'm not saying you need to accept it, but you do need to understand it. You can't repeatedly and indefinately argue from ignorance and expect to be taken seriously.

What I find facinating is that you do this with all the science that contradicts your beliefs. Here it's geology, before it's palaeontology, evolution, dendrochronology, archaeology, radiometric dating, molecular biology, astrophysics etc etc.

You don't understand any of them, have never studied any of them, have no qualifications in any of them, yet are convinced that they are all wrong. This despite the millions of man-years of research effort by highly qualified researchers that has confirmed them.

The hardest thing for you though is not that the individual sciences tell stories of a very, very old earth and universe, but that they ALL AGREE. Each part of earth and biological science is consistent with the others. Results of observation and experiment match. No matter where we look, to fossils, rocks, DNA, radioactivity, space, trees, ice samples, varves, stalagtites, caves, wherever....we find the same results.

You can't overturn that with your pre-school understanding of each component.

And then we have the problem of what you want to replace that hard earned knowledge with. A myth. A childish story in a 2,000 year old book of stories. That's just absurd.

What's really daft is that you can't evidentially defend the thing you believe in. Instead of saying that it's all just a miracle you're forced to explain how the evidence of reality matches your story. And of course it doesn't. You can't even provide us with a mechanism that would explain the things we see like the sorting of fossils in the geology. You have absolutely nothing on your side of the discussion and nothing at all to contradict science's explanation.

I don't get it Faith, it doesn't make any sort of sense.

Let me rephrase that, of course I get it, you have a fixated belief that can't be shifted by any amount of evidence. As classic a case of delusion that it's possible to see. I just find that particular reality really hard to believe even though I'm looking at it. But unlike you, I can't ignore the evidence.


Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien.

Life, don't talk to me about life - Marvin the Paranoid Android

"Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."
- Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 50 by Faith, posted 07-24-2016 2:42 AM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 56 by Faith, posted 07-24-2016 8:44 AM Tangle has not yet responded

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 7011
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 3.8


Message 218 of 1257 (788306)
07-29-2016 7:17 AM
Reply to: Message 216 by mike the wiz
07-29-2016 7:03 AM


Re: How we get from rock to landscape to rock, that's the question
MtW writes:

and what about the diving-Ichthyosaur that had it's head buried in one million years worth of rock. The explanation for that, through gradual process, by the scientist that explained it, was basically SILLY.

You didn't read the scientific explanation did you? You just took what the creationist said as correct without trying to find out what the science actually said. Basically, they lied and misrepresented what the science says.

You can not read what the fossil's describer says about these claims again here if you don't want to. Which you won't, because it spoils your silly story.

http://plesiosaur.com/creationism/analysis.php?artiID=20


Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien.

Life, don't talk to me about life - Marvin the Paranoid Android

"Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."
- Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 216 by mike the wiz, posted 07-29-2016 7:03 AM mike the wiz has not yet responded

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 7011
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 3.8


(1)
Message 228 of 1257 (788327)
07-29-2016 12:43 PM
Reply to: Message 227 by edge
07-29-2016 11:28 AM


Re: How we get from rock to landscape to rock, that's the question
Edge writes:

Please document.

It's pure bullshit. Quelle surprise.

http://plesiosaur.com/creationism/analysis.php?artiID=20

Edited by Tangle, : No reason given.


Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien.

Life, don't talk to me about life - Marvin the Paranoid Android

"Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."
- Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 227 by edge, posted 07-29-2016 11:28 AM edge has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 229 by edge, posted 07-29-2016 1:00 PM Tangle has not yet responded

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 7011
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 3.8


Message 386 of 1257 (788949)
08-08-2016 1:13 PM
Reply to: Message 382 by Faith
08-08-2016 12:20 PM


Re: Where did the seafloor/landscape go?
Faith writes:

What's happened to the seafloor when it's become a rock? What's happened to the landscape when it's become a rock?

Surely you're not questioning the method by which sedimentary rock is formed?

You seem to have a picture in your mind that sediment gathers, then stops gathering and hardens into rock therefore changing the sea floor into rock with nothing on top of it; is that the case?


Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien.

Life, don't talk to me about life - Marvin the Paranoid Android

"Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."
- Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 382 by Faith, posted 08-08-2016 12:20 PM Faith has not yet responded

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 7011
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 3.8


(4)
Message 430 of 1257 (789054)
08-10-2016 5:55 AM
Reply to: Message 429 by Faith
08-10-2016 5:16 AM


Re: Where did the seafloor/landscape go?
Faith writes:

When a landscape gets buried the point is that anything still living would have no place to live because there is no longer a landscape to support life.

You still appear to hold the view that a landscape drops out of the sky in one piece 1,000 feet thick burying everything on it.

Can't you understand that landscapes build millimetre by millimetre over time so life goes on while it's happening? There are stone age sites near where I live that are now underground. The sky did not drop 10 feet of earth on them - it built up over 5,000 years. Meanwhile life went on ON TOP of the building landscape.

What is your problem???


Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien.

Life, don't talk to me about life - Marvin the Paranoid Android

"Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."
- Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 429 by Faith, posted 08-10-2016 5:16 AM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 434 by Faith, posted 08-10-2016 11:03 AM Tangle has not yet responded

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 7011
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 3.8


Message 553 of 1257 (789253)
08-12-2016 5:05 AM
Reply to: Message 517 by mike the wiz
08-11-2016 4:13 PM


Re: Good fit
Mike the Deceiver writes:

Ichthyosaurs don't go diving head first into the bottom of the ocean then get their heads stuck in the mud for a million years.

I'm calling you out on this Mike.

You have raised this Ichthyosaur lie several times now and each time I have given you a link to the scientist who descibed the fossil's comments on the claim. He totally debunks the crude creation lies which you continue to repeat. They're utter garbage Mike.

You haven't even read it have you? So you repeat the lies. Have you no shame? Doesn't it bother you that by contuing to repeat lies when those lies have been explained to you several times that that makes you a lier too? How do you think this affects your reputation? Do you think that it makes you more convincing or less?

You're doing terrible harm to the reputation of Christianity by behaving in this way. By you're own beliefs, you're offending your own god. How wrong can you get?


Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien.

Life, don't talk to me about life - Marvin the Paranoid Android

"Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."
- Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 517 by mike the wiz, posted 08-11-2016 4:13 PM mike the wiz has not yet responded

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 7011
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 3.8


(3)
Message 557 of 1257 (789258)
08-12-2016 7:34 AM
Reply to: Message 555 by Faith
08-12-2016 6:48 AM


Re: A helpful reminder for Fai
Faith writes:

YOU ARE TOTALLY MISSING THE POINT. The problem for the standard theory is NOT recovery, the problem is getting from a landscape to a rock to a landscape to a rock to account for all the time periods.

But Faith we know how what you call a landscape turns to rock and how there are 'landscapes' on top of rocks. What on earth is your problem? You are missing something absolutely fundamental. God knows how and why. What you are saying about geology is totally screwed up, you simply don't understand the process.

Btw, I can see how a 'landscape' is being laid down in my own back yard. 12 years ago, I laid a path level with the lawn so I could mow over it. Last week I had to relay it because the lawn was over an inch higher. The root mass and earthworm work combined with sediment flowing down the hill is rising the land.

This is why archaelogical works are called digs. You have to dig down through accumulated sediment to find what you call the landscapes below. At every point in time there was a landscape with stuff living on top of it. Just as I lived on top of my lawn 12 years ago, but now I'm living on top of it an inch higher. It's a gradual process.

Time is what you're missing. An inch in ten years is 83 feet in ten thousand. In some places that will be faster and in others there will be an erosion. If nothing changes, in 1 million years my lawn will be 8,333 feet under the 'landscape'. At each point in time something will be living on it.

Eventually the pressure on the old 'landscape' will begin the lithification process and form rock. That's all there is to it.

"Essentially, lithification is a process of porosity destruction through compaction and cementation."


Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien.

Life, don't talk to me about life - Marvin the Paranoid Android

"Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."
- Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 555 by Faith, posted 08-12-2016 6:48 AM Faith has not yet responded

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 7011
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 3.8


Message 600 of 1257 (789314)
08-13-2016 3:10 AM
Reply to: Message 598 by Faith
08-13-2016 2:56 AM


Faith writes:

I'm not aware of any "confusion" over burial and lithification.

Well, you finally said something right.


Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien.

Life, don't talk to me about life - Marvin the Paranoid Android

"Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."
- Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 598 by Faith, posted 08-13-2016 2:56 AM Faith has not yet responded

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 7011
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 3.8


(2)
Message 610 of 1257 (789331)
08-13-2016 11:33 AM
Reply to: Message 605 by Faith
08-13-2016 10:46 AM


Faith writes:

As the discussion has proceeded it's seemed to me that there has always been a point where there must have been an absence of livable landscape and nothing but an unlivable bare surface of sediment. This I'm judging simply from the fact of the rock in the strata today and considering what events must have occurred to get from a landscape to a rock.

And you're flat out wrong.

At the moment I'm at my parents place overlooking a wide estuary. 20 years ago the sea came in against a man-made Victorian promenade. In the 1800s there was a pier and ferry terminal to the other side of the bay. When the tide was out there is a wide expanse of sand and it's possible to walk the several miles across if you know what you're doing.

Today though there's a quarter of a mile expanse of various grasses in place of the sea and sand. One terrestrial environment is replacing another in real time. I've watched it grow outward over the years. It's now so terrestrial that it's grazed by sheep.

In a few thousand years, if you dig down you'll find the boundary between a sea bottom landscape and the terrestrial landscape. Both sustained a huge amount of life. What's the problem?


Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien.

Life, don't talk to me about life - Marvin the Paranoid Android

"Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."
- Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 605 by Faith, posted 08-13-2016 10:46 AM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 611 by Faith, posted 08-13-2016 11:39 AM Tangle has responded

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 7011
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 3.8


(1)
Message 614 of 1257 (789337)
08-13-2016 11:54 AM
Reply to: Message 611 by Faith
08-13-2016 11:39 AM


Faith writes:

Stating the uniformitarian party line using examples from the present does absolutely nothing to clarify the issues I've been trying to talk about, which are based on the facts as I find them in the strata and encountered in the discussion. Most of the posts here are irrelevant in exactly this sense.

Jesus Christ Faith. The party line is the fucking evidence. You're not impressed by 200 years of scientific endeavor by hundreds of thousands of real scientists so I'm trying to give you some real life, verifiable, observable, evidence for how landscapes develop and change to back up what we see in the rocks that are finally formed by them.


Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien.

Life, don't talk to me about life - Marvin the Paranoid Android

"Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."
- Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 611 by Faith, posted 08-13-2016 11:39 AM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 615 by Faith, posted 08-13-2016 12:56 PM Tangle has responded

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 7011
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 3.8


Message 622 of 1257 (789345)
08-13-2016 1:32 PM
Reply to: Message 615 by Faith
08-13-2016 12:56 PM


Faith writes:

YOUR PARENTS' LANDSCAPE ISN'T GOING TO BECOME AN ENORMOUS FLAT ROCK ON THE SURFACE

Now you have to explain why not because what I've explained is how sedimentary deposits are formed. It's a necessary first step to forming sedimentary rock.

AS HAS TO BE THE CASE IN THE GEO SCENARIO OF THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE ROCK STRATA FROM LANDSCAPES.

Correct

THE STRATA SITUATION IS UNIQUE;

No it's not.

YOU CAN'T ANSWER IT WITH STANDARD EXPLANATIONS.

Yes we can.


Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien.

Life, don't talk to me about life - Marvin the Paranoid Android

"Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."
- Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 615 by Faith, posted 08-13-2016 12:56 PM Faith has not yet responded

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 7011
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 3.8


(5)
Message 820 of 1257 (790066)
08-24-2016 5:20 PM
Reply to: Message 818 by Faith
08-24-2016 4:56 PM


Faith writes:

It's futile to keep trying to explain of course, but oh well. Yes I can't make the case because it's too unwieldy, but what I said about my attempts is nevertheless true -- I kept running into insurmountable problems. But it's too much, too unwieldy to spell it out completely. So I gave up, yes, can't prove the case so gave up. Nevertheless I do think if anybody sincerely tried to do what I tried to do you'd run into the same problems I did. There's always the chance you could find a way that doesn't run into such problems, and prove me wrong, but you'd have to actually do it and nobody has.

Are you genuinely surprised by this? You're taking on 200 years of knowledge and research by hundreds of thousands of scientists without training, you do no fieldwork and have an inability to accept facts that deny your dogma. You can't do this from your armchair and Wikipedia. Science is rather detailed and all joined up. It's a web of interlocking knowledge. You haven't even touched it. You don't have the faintest clue the work that's gone into amassing this knowledge, yet think you have an insight that no-one else has. You probaly do, but it's a thoroughly wrong one.

You attempt to do the same in molecular biology, radiophysics, paleontology and god knows what else.

At some level you have to be admired for the effort, but you have no idea how utterly deluded it makes you look.

Ah well.


Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien.

Life, don't talk to me about life - Marvin the Paranoid Android

"Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."
- Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 818 by Faith, posted 08-24-2016 4:56 PM Faith has not yet responded

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 7011
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 3.8


Message 1195 of 1257 (791702)
09-20-2016 4:02 AM


One date
Can someone remind me what the counter to the flood 'geology' dating problem is - if the geological column was created all at the same time any/all of our normal dating methods would produce the same result for each layer.

And if the YEC ideas were correct, they would all read <10,000.

If you believe that the dating methods are broken - for whatever daft reason - they would each have to be broken in different ways for them to read different dates from the same age rocks.


Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien.

Life, don't talk to me about life - Marvin the Paranoid Android

"Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."
- Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.


Replies to this message:
 Message 1197 by edge, posted 09-20-2016 10:02 AM Tangle has responded

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 7011
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 3.8


Message 1208 of 1257 (791755)
09-21-2016 4:51 AM
Reply to: Message 1197 by edge
09-20-2016 10:02 AM


Re: One date
edge writes:

You are exactly correct. They would all have to be broken in diverse ways to all be corrected back to a 6ka planet.

So we have YECs claiming that the earth's rocks are all the same age; c6000 years.

But we have multiple, different and independent dating methods which says that they are not, all of which must be wrong in different ways for their daft ideas to be true.

And the different dating methods all corroborate each other, which would be impossible if they were all broken.

This just piles impossibilities upon each other.

And it ignores other evidence - lack of genetic bottleneck in all living species, lack of fossil sorting mechanism, lack of flood evidence etc etc.

The human mind's ability to deceive itself is quite extraordinary.


Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien.

Life, don't talk to me about life - Marvin the Paranoid Android

"Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."
- Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1197 by edge, posted 09-20-2016 10:02 AM edge 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