Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 0/13 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
jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 496 of 1257 (789165)
08-11-2016 11:57 AM
Reply to: Message 495 by Faith
08-11-2016 11:36 AM


Re: let's take Baby steps... to Nowhere
Faith writes:
Woopsy, changing the subject again. No idea what theory could replace the Geo Timescale of course. Because there isn't one. Only the Flood.
Yet another utterly stupid assertion from Faith.
Until there is any reason to replace the conventional theories of course no one can suggest what that new theory might be. Except of course those folk who want to promote mythology.
But I am not trying to change the subject it seems; please look at the actual content of the post to which you are replying?
quote:
Yet you offered as usual absolutely no support or reasoning for your position.
In addition there is still the fact that there is lots of evidence of regional and local floods, some actually more powerful than the ones described in the Biblical flood myths but there is NO evidence of a world-wide flood at anytime humans might have been alive.
Note too that no human fossils have EVER been found in the layer where dinosaur fossils are found.
That damn ordering and evidence that there really were landscapes and not just stacks of rocks yet again.
The find is yet again more evidence that there were landscapes and not just slabs of rock.
Have you finally realized that your topic really is unsupportable, false, futile, absurd and jess plain silly?
Again, have you finally realized that your topic really is unsupportable, false, futile, absurd and jess plain silly?

My Sister's Website: Rose Hill Studios

This message is a reply to:
 Message 495 by Faith, posted 08-11-2016 11:36 AM Faith has not replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


(2)
Message 518 of 1257 (789200)
08-11-2016 4:27 PM
Reply to: Message 517 by mike the wiz
08-11-2016 4:13 PM


Re: Good fit
MtW 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.
We have "seen" a mini grand canyon cut out in days at Mt St Helens. We have seen flume experiments prove that stratification can happen quickly.
Nor has anyone else Mike. Those are just more lies and misrepresentation from the con-men. No one has seen a mini Grand Canyon cut out in days at Mt St Helen's and to even suggest that shows either wilful ignorance or more likely just lies.
You have not seen a quick way to produce anything resembling the Green River varves and to make that claim is either wilful ignorance or more likely just lies.
Those are all just examples of the utter crap Creationists present because they know their audience is not bright enough or willing to question such nonsense.

My Sister's Website: Rose Hill Studios

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

Replies to this message:
 Message 522 by Faith, posted 08-11-2016 4:45 PM jar has replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 532 of 1257 (789218)
08-11-2016 5:15 PM
Reply to: Message 522 by Faith
08-11-2016 4:45 PM


Re: Good fit
It was not I who brought up the absolute falsehoods and lies published by those claiming to be creation scientist so I do not see how I could be said to be the person changing the subject.
So have you realized yet that your topic "The Geological Timescale is Fiction whose only reality is stacks of rock" is not simply wrong but silly and unsupportable?

My Sister's Website: Rose Hill Studios

This message is a reply to:
 Message 522 by Faith, posted 08-11-2016 4:45 PM Faith has not replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 533 of 1257 (789219)
08-11-2016 5:16 PM
Reply to: Message 524 by Faith
08-11-2016 4:51 PM


Re: Good fit
Faith writes:
The actual situation of getting from one time period to the next from nothing but a rock which is imagined to once have been a landscape is not possible, as I keep trying to show, and answering that problem with the usual scientific generalizations totally misses the point.
Well, no Faith, you simply keep asserting that which is quite different than trying to show.

My Sister's Website: Rose Hill Studios

This message is a reply to:
 Message 524 by Faith, posted 08-11-2016 4:51 PM Faith has not replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 559 of 1257 (789261)
08-12-2016 9:03 AM
Reply to: Message 555 by Faith
08-12-2016 6:48 AM


Reality vs Faith's fantasy
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.
Uh, NO Faith, that is simply not a problem as has been explained to you many, many, many times.
Faith writes:
The Flood does not have that problem. The earth is destroyed and a new landscape grows up on top of the whole stack of sediment. There would be a period of recovery, boosted by the pre-Flood vitality among the other things I mentioned, (probably begun and even well along before Noah and all exited the ark) so rapid enough to sustain what was preserved on the ark. (Dinosaurs apparently needed more than that and eventually died out. The fact that they no longer exist for whatever reason suggests to me that getting rid of them completely was probably a major goal of the Flood.)
Again, sorry Faith but reality says that too is simply wrong and nothing but dogma and proselytizing. All of the evidence (and it is massive and conclusive) shows there was no pre-flood vitality just as there was no Biblical Flood.
But as has also been pointed out to you that is irrelevant, as irrelevant as the mythological floods to this topic.
Faith writes:
Because of the peculiar situation of the strata -- enormous slabs of rock BETWEEN WHICH these landscapes are postulated, and which are assigned great blocks of time. There wouldn't be any problems then either as long as the landscapes persisted (though of course I regard them as totally imaginary anyway), it's getting them down to rock that poses the problems, as it would today too if any of this had any reality at all.
Again Faith, you are simply once again misrepresenting what everyone has explained to you in as simple a fashion as possible. No one is postulating that there are landscapes between two slabs of rock except you.
Faith writes:
The answers are woefully inadequate.
Again, reality simply shows you are once again wrong. The conventional theories adequately explain all of the geological and biological samples that have been found.
What you might have meant to say is "Faith will not accept those answers" and if so, we understand and it is your right to be willfully ignorant and continuously wrong.
Faith writes:
But that means a persisting landscape, or a constantly regenerating landscape like the settlements on top of settlements in a tell. Nothing lives on the surface of sediments, a landscape is necessary, and you are imagining such a landscape without accounting for it or facing the problems I keep raising about it. You want to think in terms of continuous gradual change, landscapes changing, living things changing and adapting, but you are having to impose that idea on the actual facts: the STACK OF ROCKS.
And yet once again reality insists on intruding into Faith's fantasy. The Rio Grande Valley is a vast sediment plain formed by shallow seas and rising land with all the meandering rivers that resulted. Folks live on that sediment. Plants live on that sediment. There is a good chance the oranges you eat grew on that sediment.
Faith writes:
I know this is an artificial problem, but that's because the geo theory is based on a false idea that you can have a stack of rocks signifying time periods that are in themselves the landscapes / depositional environments they represent. There is no other record of a particular time period than a particular formation of rocks at a certain level in the stack of rocks, no record of any intervening landscapes or new forms of creatures between formations or rocks, only the just-so appearance of particular collections millions of years apart in rock that IS the landscape/depositional environment it represents. But this is a different problem I guess. (There's no end to them really).
Damn. Reality intrudes again. If we look at what is in those rocks and at the composition of those rocks we find that they are the product of landscapes and landscapes that can be dated to particular distant past times.
Edited by jar, : fix sub-title

My Sister's Website: Rose Hill Studios

This message is a reply to:
 Message 555 by Faith, posted 08-12-2016 6:48 AM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 560 by Faith, posted 08-12-2016 9:07 AM jar has replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 561 of 1257 (789264)
08-12-2016 9:18 AM
Reply to: Message 560 by Faith
08-12-2016 9:07 AM


Re: Reality vs Faith's fantasy
Faith writes:
You can "explain" what is nothing but your own misinterpretation forever and it will never be anything but your own misinterpretation, so you might as well stop that particular drumbeat.
Once again, reality intrudes into Faith's fantasy.
What I "explain" is really the same stuff everyone else is trying to "explain" to you and unfortunately for your fantasy, the explanation really does explain what is seen in reality.
What you need to do is come up with an alternative explanation that also explains what is seen. The Biblical Flood simply fails miserably at explaining anything found in reality so that is a non-starter, DOA line of inquiry.

My Sister's Website: Rose Hill Studios

This message is a reply to:
 Message 560 by Faith, posted 08-12-2016 9:07 AM Faith has not replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 569 of 1257 (789279)
08-12-2016 3:24 PM
Reply to: Message 567 by Faith
08-12-2016 3:07 PM


It's a SCIENCE forum not a pulpit.
Faith writes:
And it shouldn't have been too long after the Flood that plants were growing everywhere, keeping in mind that there would still be a great deal of the pre-Flood vitality that would produce more plants faster and better than ours today for the first hundred years or so, and animals could spread out across the planet.
There you go again posting absolute nonsense. There is absolute conclusive evidence that there is no such thing as Pre-Flood Vitality. There is also absolute positive evidence that plants, soil and animals from tens of thousands of years before the date of any Biblical flood were very much like those after such a date.
Stop claiming stuff that exists only in your imagination.
Faith writes:
Does anything live on the Great Salt Lake?
Of course things live on the great Salt Lake.
quote:
Although it has been called "America's Dead Sea", the lake provides habitat for millions of native birds, brine shrimp, shorebirds, and waterfowl, including the largest staging population of Wilson's phalarope in the world.
Faith writes:
But at each time period in the geo scenario there has to come a point where there is nothing but sediment/rock on the very site where there had been a landscape with life flourishing in it. Has to end there, with the flat featureless horizon in my OP cartoon, because that's what we see in the strata.
Once again reality intrudes into Faith's fantasy. As pointed out in Message 380 every geological column has a surface at the top. The is and has never been the scenario of your imagination.

My Sister's Website: Rose Hill Studios

This message is a reply to:
 Message 567 by Faith, posted 08-12-2016 3:07 PM Faith has not replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 581 of 1257 (789294)
08-12-2016 8:39 PM
Reply to: Message 577 by Faith
08-12-2016 6:19 PM


Faith writes:
But if I'm wrong, point me to the article or textbook where the questions I'm raising have been considered.
Often textbooks simply fail to address the really stupid vapid dumb inane asinine idiotic silly questions you ask. This is one such example.
Edited by jar, : soften language

My Sister's Website: Rose Hill Studios

This message is a reply to:
 Message 577 by Faith, posted 08-12-2016 6:19 PM Faith has not replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 608 of 1257 (789329)
08-13-2016 11:28 AM
Reply to: Message 605 by Faith
08-13-2016 10:46 AM


and once again reality shows Faith is simply wrong.
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.
And, as been pointed out to you many, many, many, many, many, many, many times even in just this thread that is simply incorrect, utter nonsense and absolutely false.
As pointed out to you back in Message 8 all the evidence shows the layers of what is now rock also contain absolute positive conclusive evidence that at one time the layer was at the surface and under conditions similar to those seen today.
The process was explained to you in Message 19 and is repeated yet again here.
quote:
But of course that is utter nonsense. Some areas were barren and some areas were fertile. Also, one period did not end and then another begin but just as today change was continuous.
Weathering and erosion are going on constantly just as the process of building up goes on constantly, just like today.
The reality is that if we look at the surface of the earth today we see very old rocks exposed in some places and brand new rocks being created in others. Today's great mountain chains like the US West Coastal range are being raised up today while old mountain ranges like the US East Coastal range are being worn down.
But as humans we examine and catalog what we find and what is found is evidence of billions of years of change; and, since we are humans we also tried to make sense of what we saw.
For a really brief moment, a few thousand years out of the hundreds of thousand years modern humans have existed on Earth the Biblical Flood was accepted as the explanation. So that explanation lasted until more detailed examination of reality showed it was simply impossible as a valid explanation.
While that was going on humans noticed certain uniform and universal traits that allowed the list of what exists to be grouped into smaller segments; that in this catalog we can group these things together.
One method was to use the first appearance of a particular anatomical feature; the first signs of life, the first appearance of back bones, the first appearance of reptiles, the first appearance of conifers, the first appearance of flowering plants, the first appearance of mammals, the last appearance of dinosaurs, the first appearance of grasses.
There were other groupings, cycles of hot and cold; repeated great die-offs where a large percentage of lifeforms suddenly (in geological terms) disappeared.
There was specific evidence of landmasses being created and broken up. And of new material surging up from within the planet and old material being pushed back down into the planet.
But only in a very very few cases was the whole planet relatively barren.
Just as today, the landscape changed. Usually the change was slow as mountains got pushed up, inches higher each year and other areas worn down becoming sediment that when worked by living things and mixed with the waste products of living things became soil.
Today, much of the US and Europe and Asia are rising up. Most folk don't notice but it's still happening. It is the surface of the earth that was scraped bare by the Glaciers that covered it until about 10,000 years ago. That glaciation happened several times, each incursion wiping the soil away leaving only a barren surface of bare rock, rock carved and scored by the glacier. With the weight of those thousands of feet of ice removed the land has been rising slowly back up. And in most places that had been just barren rock soil has formed and some of the most fertile land around.
Change is continuous Faith. It is not one landscape being created and then worn down before another landscape gets started; it is both processes going on continuously and simultaneously; The Rockies and Cascades going up while the Appalachians and Blue Ridge and Adirondack and Catskill chains are worn down to just stubs, the roots of what they once were. The San Joaquin Valley in California has subsided nearly 50 feet just since the 1920 while much of the Northern Hemisphere is seeing land rising in the post-glacial rebound that began 10,000 years ago and will likely continue for another 10,000 years.
But as I pointed out in Message 8 when we examine the content of the rocks from earliest to most recent what we do find is conclusive evidence of the life and lifeforms that lived on the landscape during every period for several billion years.
The reality was also pointed out in Message 352 and that is:
quote:
If we look at the geology what we find is unordered layers of similar materials. We find sedimentary layers and igneous layers and organic layers and marine layers and aeolian layers all stacked vertically with different ordering depending on the location examined.
But when we look at the fossil evidence we find an entirely different pattern.
Biological samples are ordered and in a non-repeating pattern whether we are discussing animals or plants. What we see is a clear evolution of lifeforms that is similar across the whole record. We never find latter forms mixed with earlier forms. The ordering of the biological samples, the record of landscapes, is laid out like a storyboard, like a series of time lapse pictures. The oldest samples show no critters with skeletons. Next we find exoskeletons, then backbones. The first plants are all asexual, then we find sexual reproduction by spores then seeds then pollen.
The ordering in biological samples always is evolutionary, changing over time; the types of materials seen in the geological samples are pretty constant over all time. Sedimentary rocks are made the same way they always were. Shale, limestone, lava, ash... the processes simply repeat.
The fossils are absolute evidence of a succession of landscapes over vast periods of time where the geological processes continued and repeated but the biological processes themselves changed producing new and unique specimens.
and yet again in Message 433
quote:
Think.
What buries a landscape is another landscape Faith.
We seldom find living critters (we do but only a limited spectrum of living critters) inside buried landscapes.
The process (and this was the enlightenment, the light bulb moment that showed the Biblical accounts and young earth we simply wrong and they died) is that the processes go on continuously, that critters evolve continuously and that there is no other possible way to explain what is seen unless all this happened over long, long periods of time.
The fossils we find were at the time just critters that lived on the surface where they are found while it was just like the surface today.
They died.
They were not fossils when they died but rather just leaves and insects and dead dinosaurs.
They got buried in soil, in sediment, in ash, in mud, in a bog, in forest litter, in a sand storm, in a stream, in a watering hole ... but buried.
Time passes.
Other stuff piled on top of the still soil with the sample buried in it.
Eventually enough material is above the sample and its surrounding sediment to turn both the sample and the sediment from soil & dirt to rock.
More time passes.
The now lithified rock gets pushed up and as it gets pushed up the not yet lithified material that had gathered over it is weathered and eroded away.
Eventually it is once again on the surface but now as lithified rock.
Weathering and erosion now go more slowly than before the material was lithified.
One day a boy living on the farm near the outcrop of rock sees what looks like bones and so runs and tells his dad.
They call the police who come and look at the site and decide its not a murder in their jurisdiction and so call the museum three towns over.
The museum sends some one out who declares "That's a fossil!"
But for the whole time involved in this scenario there is still a landscape at the surface, still critters living and evolving at the surface.
The real issue is that on the side of science is all the evidence, every study, every branch of science, every discovery and on your side nothing but stories written by man that contain multiple contradictory descriptions, factual errors and impossibilities.
Edited by jar, : appalin spallin in sub-title fixed

My Sister's Website: Rose Hill Studios

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

Replies to this message:
 Message 609 by Faith, posted 08-13-2016 11:32 AM jar has replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 623 of 1257 (789346)
08-13-2016 1:40 PM
Reply to: Message 609 by Faith
08-13-2016 11:32 AM


Re: and once again reality shoes Faith is simply wrong.
Faith writes:
I no longer pay attention to long insulting lectures that start out with how I've been told this or that many times.
And that willful ignorance on your part will only result in your continued ignorance.
Try to actually learn a little.

My Sister's Website: Rose Hill Studios

This message is a reply to:
 Message 609 by Faith, posted 08-13-2016 11:32 AM Faith has not replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 633 of 1257 (789356)
08-13-2016 8:58 PM
Reply to: Message 632 by Faith
08-13-2016 8:15 PM


Re: A HUMBLE REQUEST FOR CLARIFICATIONS
On point 1: You can say "livable landscape" but unfortunately experience has shown that almost any landscape is livable. There are almost no known landscapes where we do not find life.
On point 2: There is a problem there as well since there is no particular order or type of material that is unique to any period of time.
On point 3: Nope, you cannot say that a particular rock is a time period. The problem is that any given rock is the result of what has happened to it over all of the period of time since it was originally at the surface.
On point 4: You can say whatever you want but the reality is that the layers and intersections between layers are not like you see when viewed from a great distance. Your claim of flat or even relatively flat layers simply is not true most of the time if ever.
Edited by jar, : appalin spallin
Edited by jar, : last ---> originally...many locations have been buried and lithified but are now back at the surface.

My Sister's Website: Rose Hill Studios

This message is a reply to:
 Message 632 by Faith, posted 08-13-2016 8:15 PM Faith has not replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 636 of 1257 (789380)
08-14-2016 9:31 AM
Reply to: Message 632 by Faith
08-13-2016 8:15 PM


On Steno's law's
I did not address point 5 for some unknown reason so let me try that how.
Remember Steno lived a fair time ago during the Medici period before geology reached the level of knowledge we have today. His four principles are good basics and hold true "generally" but only if the fact that they are generalities and not specifics is understood.
What is called the "Law of Horizontally" means that those layers of sediment that you might find in lakes or sea bottom were laid down horizontally. The reason is that the deposition is mediated by material falling through water. It meant that they would be flat.
Of course we have learned a whole lot more then Steno knew about the conditions on sea floors and even on lakes. We now know that while the mechanism is generally correct the reality is slightly more complex.
Just as Steno's Second Law does not hold true for land as opposed to water sedimentation deposition there are similar surfaces in lake and sea beds that prevent the simple flat deposition Steno envisioned.
Where Steno's Second Law does hold true is seen in varves and similar deposition. Where it does not hold true is in deposition on slopes, aeolian sedimentation, marine sedimentation created by flow such as ripples.
It is precisely those details that help geologists determine how a particular sample was originally produced.
Trying to apply Steno's Second Law to all examples simply does not work.
Edited by jar, : add "is understood" in 2nd. paragraph.

My Sister's Website: Rose Hill Studios

This message is a reply to:
 Message 632 by Faith, posted 08-13-2016 8:15 PM Faith has not replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


(1)
Message 637 of 1257 (789394)
08-14-2016 10:52 AM
Reply to: Message 634 by NoNukes
08-13-2016 10:59 PM


Re: A HUMBLE REQUEST FOR CLARIFICATIONS
NoNukes writes:
We all agree that you cannot live on rock.
Kinda, sorta, maybe, sometimes, some folk ...
Then there are the endoliths that live inside rocks and the mosses and lichens that live on bare rocks.
AbE: This is important because pioneer critters like these are a big part of returning colonization.
Edited by jar, : see AbE:

My Sister's Website: Rose Hill Studios

This message is a reply to:
 Message 634 by NoNukes, posted 08-13-2016 10:59 PM NoNukes has seen this message but not replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 641 of 1257 (789435)
08-14-2016 8:01 PM
Reply to: Message 640 by Faith
08-14-2016 7:56 PM


Re: A HUMBLE REQUEST FOR CLARIFICATIONS
Faith writes:
I would just like to have a way of referring to the phenomena of strata wherever they are that are assigned a time period name and date in the Geological Timescale.
The way to do that is to simply refer to the time period. All you need to do for that is then show proof that that time period did not exist.
AbE:
Let me try to expand for you.
What you need to do would be to show the evidence that the material surrounding an Abydosaurus find actually dates to about 4500 years ago instead of 150 to 100 million years ago.
Edited by jar, : see AbE;
Edited by jar, : t0 ---> to

My Sister's Website: Rose Hill Studios

This message is a reply to:
 Message 640 by Faith, posted 08-14-2016 7:56 PM Faith has not replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 647 of 1257 (789441)
08-14-2016 8:43 PM
Reply to: Message 645 by Faith
08-14-2016 8:31 PM


Re: A HUMBLE REQUEST FOR CLARIFICATIONS
Faith writes:
But then I don't assume as you do that the upper strata were deposited on the lower as presented.
Remember that guy called Steno; when you tried to use his Second Law?
Well he actually proposed four laws and the very first one is the Law (or principle which is closer to what it really is) of Superposition. It pretty much says that at the time a lower layer is being deposited an upper layer does not yet exist.

My Sister's Website: Rose Hill Studios

This message is a reply to:
 Message 645 by Faith, posted 08-14-2016 8:31 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 648 by Faith, posted 08-14-2016 8:45 PM jar has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024