Understanding through Discussion

Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 66 (9049 total)
472 online now:
dwise1, PaulK (2 members, 470 visitors)
Newest Member: Wes johnson
Happy Birthday: Astrophile
Post Volume: Total: 887,602 Year: 5,248/14,102 Month: 169/677 Week: 28/26 Day: 0/10 Hour: 0/0

Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Author Topic:   The TRVE history of the Flood...
Member (Idle past 726 days)
Posts: 4696
From: Colorado, USA
Joined: 01-09-2002

Message 465 of 1352 (806211)
04-23-2017 8:03 PM
Reply to: Message 446 by Faith
04-23-2017 4:08 AM

Re: Berthault's experiments are modeling stream flow deposits
I was about to post that same image myself. The ultimate point for me, of course, is that moving water lays down strata at whatever rate it is moving.

Actually, moving water creates laminations not strata.

You do understand the difference between the Walther's Law diagram and the cross-bedded sediments of Berthault, do you not?

So I'd see the flume experiments applying to rising sea water too since layers are being deposited with its movement.

The flume experiments have nothing to do with rising water. In fact, I'd say that the water stayed at the same level for the entire experiment.

It could be that the sea water doesn't deposit the layers simultaneously as we see in the flume (but I'm not sure).

Once again, you have some problems to work out. what direction is that water moving and how do flume experiments relate to rising sea level?

But if the water is rising fast enough to cover the earth to some depth within five months then we are certainly talking about rapid deposition and not millions of years.

Not really.

We have been over this a number of times all ready. It is easily possible to have rapid sedimentation events ... millions of years ago. In fact, that is how geology has been taught, probably for a century at least. Rapid events are one of the first things that one learns in Geology 101.

The point about superposition is about timing: if the layers are being deposited pretty much simultaneously then the upper is not younger than the lower which is the usual understanding of the principle of superposition.

What do you mean by 'pretty much'? I cannot imagine a grain of sand settling into a position without another grain below it. AFAIK, a bed of cross-laminated sandstone is considered to be a single unit or stratum.

In any case, in either model, this is very rapid deposition and not slow formation of strata that mark long time periods.

Rapid deposition, as related above, is not a problem in an old age scenario. There have been millions of rapid deposition events in the history of the earth.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 446 by Faith, posted 04-23-2017 4:08 AM Faith has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 474 by Pressie, posted 04-24-2017 5:00 AM edge has not yet responded

Member (Idle past 726 days)
Posts: 4696
From: Colorado, USA
Joined: 01-09-2002

Message 466 of 1352 (806212)
04-23-2017 8:14 PM
Reply to: Message 451 by Davidjay
04-23-2017 11:42 AM

Re: Continental Separation after Flood Confirmed
Bacause no one could respond to the delusion of Continental Drift inch by inch versus continental separation after the Floof, we shall deem it confirmed and a principle to be noted and hyperlinked to as a POST FLOOD geological truth.

Hunh? What are you talking about. This is an unsupported assertions as far as I can tell. Where is your evidence that no one could respond? Do you have any awareness of the literature regarding plate tectonics (I assume this is what you mean by 'continental drift')?

That should get your layers grinding ....

Not sure. There isn't much to grind on here.



Okay, where does the Bible talk about volcanoes and earthquakes and the enormous amount of heat shed by this recent event?

In His Geological Service

You are kidding ...

This message is a reply to:
 Message 451 by Davidjay, posted 04-23-2017 11:42 AM Davidjay has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 469 by JonF, posted 04-23-2017 8:23 PM edge has not yet responded

Member (Idle past 726 days)
Posts: 4696
From: Colorado, USA
Joined: 01-09-2002

Message 467 of 1352 (806213)
04-23-2017 8:16 PM
Reply to: Message 460 by CRR
04-23-2017 6:04 PM

Re: Six "Flood" Arguments Creationists Can't Answer
An interesting article, Coyote. Out of those six, which do you think is the best, the strongest, the most unanswerable?

By your lack of a counter argument, I'd suggest all of them. Why do you ask?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 460 by CRR, posted 04-23-2017 6:04 PM CRR has not yet responded

Member (Idle past 726 days)
Posts: 4696
From: Colorado, USA
Joined: 01-09-2002

Message 468 of 1352 (806214)
04-23-2017 8:22 PM
Reply to: Message 439 by Faith
04-22-2017 10:16 PM

Re: Walther's Law shows simultaneous deposition & disproves principle of superposition
If this is the way the Geo Column was deposited, it would disprove radiometric dating. How? By being right and radiometric dating wrong.

Or it could be that parts of the geological column were deposited this way. In fact, it shows the construction of a single bed which may take many years or just minutes. How long it took is completely irrelevant to the length of the geological record.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 439 by Faith, posted 04-22-2017 10:16 PM Faith has not yet responded

Member (Idle past 726 days)
Posts: 4696
From: Colorado, USA
Joined: 01-09-2002

Message 470 of 1352 (806216)
04-23-2017 8:30 PM
Reply to: Message 429 by Davidjay
04-22-2017 11:30 AM

Re: Continental Drift is written about in Days of Peleg
Okay, now I see why no one responded. This all just silly.

First of all, the flood came from the depths of the Earth and covered all mountains included Aararat, and then rushed downwards created the flood plains etc, the Grand Canyon etc etc..... all observed phenonemun not of slow inch by inch, billion years by billion years, but catastrophic events. Again observed by Darwin and Viekosky (Spelling etc.........)

Hmmm, not very detailed stuff.

You realize that when geologists say 'it came from great depth', they are always telling a joke.

Can you do a little better than a joke?

So atheists and evolutionists please FIRST tell us about your inch by inch tetonic plates, and then from your incorrect observations, please do calculate falsely the number of years the continents have been inch by inch separating.

Well, we can tell you that this is what is happening today.

So we know that it does happen.

On the other hand, catastrophic plate tectonics has consequences that would sterilize the planet by shedding a huge amount of heat in a short time. The oceans would probably boil away.

Begin now.

Sorry, you're still on the launch pad.

Remember you evolutionists are suppose to be able to debate and prove your theory upon theory, or at least answer questions, besides saying I dont know, evolution doesnt tell us anything about geology, we make it up as we go semantics.

No on said that they don't know. Most of them are probably wondering where you came up with this stuff.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 429 by Davidjay, posted 04-22-2017 11:30 AM Davidjay has not yet responded

Member (Idle past 726 days)
Posts: 4696
From: Colorado, USA
Joined: 01-09-2002

Message 471 of 1352 (806217)
04-23-2017 8:33 PM
Reply to: Message 413 by Faith
04-22-2017 3:10 AM

Re: All means all
My view is that the high mountains were pushed up after the Flood by the tectonic force that started Continental Drift.

And this came from where in the Bible?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 413 by Faith, posted 04-22-2017 3:10 AM Faith has not yet responded

Member (Idle past 726 days)
Posts: 4696
From: Colorado, USA
Joined: 01-09-2002

Message 510 of 1352 (806292)
04-24-2017 11:27 AM
Reply to: Message 504 by Faith
04-24-2017 9:35 AM

Re: A New Topic: The Cratonic Sequences
First, shouldn't there be some evidence of subsidence?

Subsidence would be a pretty violent physical event wouldn't it? On the order of tectonic violence at least? And if it occurred with each transgression then there ought to be evidence of the most recent, which reaches into the present. Is there any?

First, there is plenty of evidence that subsidence occurs. For instance, we know that the continental crust of Greenland is depressed below sea level. We also know that there are new islands forming in the Baltic Sea due to rebound after subsidence during the last ice age.

We could also discuss loading and depression of the oceanic crust under the Mississippi Delta, and under the island of Hawaii. In other words, we know that we can sink both continental and oceanic crust into the mantle by loading with ice or sediment or volcanic rocks.

As to why other continents do not show the same cratonic sequences as North America, there are a number of reasons. For one, the rest of the world need not have the same tectonic environment at the same time. An old, thick continental crust might show less effect. And, if you look closely, the diagram of sequences only shows the center (left side) and margins (right side) of the continents. It really has nothing to do with mountains or other highlands because sediments are being eroded from there and not deposited. I would also suggest that erosion is a factor in reducing the amount of available material for study.

These are thoughtful questions, Faith. However, I am concerned that you ask them with a conclusion already in mind. These are very complex systems.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 504 by Faith, posted 04-24-2017 9:35 AM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 514 by Faith, posted 04-24-2017 6:23 PM edge has not yet responded
 Message 517 by Faith, posted 04-24-2017 9:18 PM edge has responded

Member (Idle past 726 days)
Posts: 4696
From: Colorado, USA
Joined: 01-09-2002

Message 512 of 1352 (806295)
04-24-2017 11:35 AM
Reply to: Message 509 by Davidjay
04-24-2017 11:20 AM

Re: Nonsense again
Explain your no flood theory, ...

Only after you explain the lack of objective evidence for a biblical flood.

... no castrophic event theory, ...

Only after you explain your use of this straw man argument.

... your one inch at a time theory.

Only after you explain the lack of evidence for kilometers-at-a-time theory.

You must learn how to answer questions, ...

But that is what you are doing with your post.

... that is the name of the game, the proof of the pudding, the point of the exercise, the aim of the debate...

I suppose you will pass along this morsel of information to the other anti-evos in this forum?

Ready set, GO..

You are still at the station.

PST... evolutionists complain about the race because they never hget out of the starting blocks, and just talk the talk about racing without ever racing or running

So, you are unfamiliar with the voluminous literature about the topic?

Edited by edge, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 509 by Davidjay, posted 04-24-2017 11:20 AM Davidjay has not yet responded

Member (Idle past 726 days)
Posts: 4696
From: Colorado, USA
Joined: 01-09-2002

Message 527 of 1352 (806388)
04-25-2017 10:57 AM
Reply to: Message 517 by Faith
04-24-2017 9:18 PM

Re: The Cratonic Sequences Chart
It helped a lot for you to explain that the left side represents the center of the continent and the right side the margins (I kept asking myself "center of what?")

So that got me as far as understanding that the horizontal dimension represwents the land, or space, and the vertical dimension represents time, but I still have to fight the tendency to see the shape of the water figure as representing the amount of space it covers.

So the transgression only covered the center of the continent for a relatively short period of time, covering the rest of the continent out to the margins for progressively longer periods. The rest of the time the dry land was eroding.

{It doesn't seem to take into the account the possibility that the center of the continent could be lower and the water could stay there a longer time than at higher elevations? Such as would be the case with the Inland Sea?

But I need to think about this more. I still don't really understand it.

The Cratonic Sequence theory is one of those 'big ideas' in geology that has huge explanatory power but doesn't fill in a lot of the details.

For instance, there really is no 'center' of a real continent. This would be an idealized 'continent' where the center is also the highest point going down to the sea in all directions. We know this isn't true.

However, the chart clearly leaves out the highest parts of the continents where there are mountains such as on the west side of the Cretaceous Seaway. In other words the chart does not show 100% of the planet's surface. We can see the same thing for the ocean basins which are substantial and always under water; but the chart shows them shrinking down to almost nothing. The chart is diagrammatic,

Nontheless, the chart is very powerful in pulling together some diverse observations such as the Cretaceous Seaway in the North America and the chalk deposits of Europe essentially occurring at the same time during the Zuni transgression. It also explains the first major transgression, the Sauk Sequence which laid down the basal sandstone that we see in so many parts of the world.

You will also notice the irregular detail in the dividing line between land and sea on the chart. The base of the Absarokan transgression has a large number of 'thin' secondary transgressions. These are the ones that are well documented in the 'cyclothems' that we find in the Appalachian coal fields. I think these are also found in some other parts of the world at the same time. Most of the line locations are not as precise as this. It all has to do with the availability of data.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 517 by Faith, posted 04-24-2017 9:18 PM Faith has not yet responded

Member (Idle past 726 days)
Posts: 4696
From: Colorado, USA
Joined: 01-09-2002

Message 529 of 1352 (806398)
04-25-2017 11:39 AM
Reply to: Message 519 by Faith
04-25-2017 3:55 AM

Re: Cratonic Sequences Timing Complications/Implications: Rodinia, Pangaea
It's easy to get caught up in thinking about the Cratonic Sequences in relation to the continental positions as they are now, but in fact, according to Geology for most of the Phanerozoic Eon North America was part of a loosely organized Supercontinent called Rodinia:

It looks loosely organized on that illustration anyway, but from what I've read its history isn't yet completely understood. But it is said to have existed throughout the Paleozoic and into the Mesozoic when another Supercontinent formed, known as Pangaea.

Actually, Rodinia broke up before the Phanerozoic.

"Rodinia (from the Russian "Родина", ródina, meaning "The Motherland")[2] is a Neoproterozoic supercontinent that was assembled 1.13–1.071 billion years ago and broke up 750–600 million years ago." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rodinia

For most of the Paleozoic, there was no supercontinent.

For a a short time period after Rodinia there was a supercontinent called Pannotia.

"When Pannotia had formed Africa was located at the centre surrounded by the rest of Gondwana: South America, Arabia, Madagascar, India, Antarctica, and Australia. Laurentia, who 'escaped' out of Rodinia, Baltica, and Siberia kept the relative positions they had in Rodinia." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pannotia

Further (same ref):

"The break-up of Pannotia was accompanied by sea level rise, dramatic changes in climate and ocean water chemistry, and rapid metazoan diversification."

You will note that this 'sea level rise' coincides with the start of the Sauk Sequence in North America. It also coincides with the 'Cambrian Explosion'.

I would submit that some of the Cratonic Sequence theory explains this part of the history of Africa. Hence, another example of the explanatory powers of the Cratonic Sequence chart that you presented. (And there is even more that we could discuss in that chart).

We also see a disconnect of the southern continental masses from the northern in the reconstruction of Pannotia. So ... perhaps they do not match the exact history of the northern continents.

The whole gist of your argument seems to be that we do not have complete knowledge of the world geology and that we cannot explain 'everything', therefor your precious doubts regarding mainstream geology can be maintained.

It is regrettable that we cannot know everything, but we do know some things and it is our job to explain those things.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 519 by Faith, posted 04-25-2017 3:55 AM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 532 by Faith, posted 04-25-2017 12:29 PM edge has not yet responded
 Message 534 by Faith, posted 04-25-2017 1:29 PM edge has responded

Member (Idle past 726 days)
Posts: 4696
From: Colorado, USA
Joined: 01-09-2002

Message 531 of 1352 (806415)
04-25-2017 12:27 PM
Reply to: Message 526 by Davidjay
04-25-2017 10:56 AM

Re: Faith's Graphs are a start
Faith posted a one land mass artists representation above, so lets discuss it EVEN though continental drift or land splitting or land dividing into the continents is AFTER the Worldwide FLOOD.
It happened 130 years later in the days of Peleg as stated exactly by the True Geological Record Book.

Lets begin

Earth Divided in the Days of Peleg
(Continental Drift)

(text snipped for the cause of sanity)

I hate to say it, but even Faith's quirky geological history makes more sense than this.

There's nothing here to discuss.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 526 by Davidjay, posted 04-25-2017 10:56 AM Davidjay has not yet responded

Member (Idle past 726 days)
Posts: 4696
From: Colorado, USA
Joined: 01-09-2002

Message 538 of 1352 (806430)
04-25-2017 1:58 PM
Reply to: Message 534 by Faith
04-25-2017 1:29 PM

Re: Cratonic Sequences Timing Complications/Implications: Rodinia, Pangaea
Not exactly. The Cratonic Sequences look to me like evidence for the Flood that has been broken up by incidental details that prevent the whole story from coming together. Not intentionally, just because that's how geologists think, so I keep trying to think through the geological information from a floodist perspective. I don't particularly expect to find errors, but in this case it seemed that I did. It's not essential to anything I'm thinking about unless it helps further the Flood interpretation (which it doesn't seem to in this case).

(text snipped)

No worries. I knew where you were headed with this.

The details, however, will obliterate your conclusions as usual.

You see, for each of these transgressions, there is always erosion in progress to provide sediment for the sedimentary sequences. As I have said before, the Cratonic Sequence idea does not consider either mountains and erosion, nor ocean basins and deep-sea sedimentation. They only apply to non-tectonic areas (at the time) out to the continental shelves.

In fact, these sequences are completely based on the presence of unconformity-bounded sedimentary packages identified in North America. As I remember, you doubt the presence of unconformities in the geological record.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 534 by Faith, posted 04-25-2017 1:29 PM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 541 by Faith, posted 04-25-2017 3:59 PM edge has responded

Member (Idle past 726 days)
Posts: 4696
From: Colorado, USA
Joined: 01-09-2002

Message 540 of 1352 (806435)
04-25-2017 2:08 PM
Reply to: Message 536 by Davidjay
04-25-2017 1:38 PM

Re: ReGiza center of land mass
Seeing we are not allowed to talk about the Continental Splitting in the Days of Peleg in a separate topic, allow me as directed to post its truths HERE.
Giza is center of One Land Mass

The Lord created the heavens and the earth, for He not evolution was the Creator. And it seems Jesus created not the
many separated continents that we see now, but had just one land mass surrounded by water in the Beginning. With only
one continent centered at the Giza co-ordinates, of latitude and longitude, it made the Garden of Eden, East of Giza. (SEE
Location of Eden) SEE also Christos Angle and Petra and Athens.

For Here at Giza, the Lord had placed his sockets, His foundation, his granite plateau as the only place on
earth, that would support His Prophecy in Stone, the Great Pyramid. Was this by accident, NO, it was by Design, for it
was meant to last and be a witness to ALL in the Last days Why, because the Great Pyramid was built by the Lord,
using the Lord’s power in His Earth (SEE Levitation by Alignment and Laying on of Hands) and (Enoch built the

And His Prophecy was to show the End Time World that He was COMING again, but this time in POWER. For via a
direct co-relation between the exact linear measurement down and then up the pyramid passageways, it shows major
world events until His Culmination of ALL HISTORY with His 2nd Coming (SEE Great Pyramid Prophecy)

For the Great Pyramid was built 100 Years before the Great Flood, of 2348 B.C. (SEE Timeline to Flood) ...and was
able to endure through the Flood and remain on its foundation AFTER the Flood as the center of the whole land mass of
the Earth. Right ? Right !!! And from the sons of Noah, Shem, Ham and Japeth, their lineage traveled overland until the
days of Peleg…. 129 years later. SEE Continental Drift and Peleg

For then because of the pride of Man in trying to reach the heavens with his own man made constructions like the
Tower of Babel, (Nimrod) the Lord split up the languages of the earth, as well as splitting up the great one continent of
the Earth. Hence continental drift happened quickly in the Days of Peleg, a descendant of Noah.

This is why the continents can now be seen to have fit together as ONE at one time, because literally they were all ONE
in the Beginning. And where was their central point or ‘Center of MASS’ of all the land MASS, right where it still
remains today, Right at the Great Pyramid location. For do the research today, The Great Pyramid sits in the center of
the world’s land masses, and sits right on the greatest land mass latitude lengths and longitude lengths of anywhere on
Earth. Why, simple, its because from this central center of mass, the Lord drifted the land masses away from His central
point, keeping the Earth is balance and harmony.

This is why the Lord chided Job, when Job thought Heknew so much ….

Job 38 : 3 Gird up now thy loins like a man; for I
will demand of thee, and answer thou me.

4 Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the
earth? declare, if thou hast understanding.
(Foundations of the earth at Giza)

5 Who hath laid the measures thereof, if thou
knowest? or who hath stretched the line upon it? (SEE
The Lord made the distances and Architecture of the

6 Whereupon are the foundations thereof fastened? or
who laid the corner stone thereof (The four
cornerstones or sockets at Giza on the granite

7 When the morning stars sang together, and all the
sons of God shouted for joy?

8 Or who shut up the sea with doors, when it brake
forth, as if it had issued out of the womb? ( A direct
reference to the doors that opened up from below, that
created the worldwide flood in the days of Noah Genesis 7 : 11).

For there is no doubt that the land MASS of the Earth was one continent in the Beginning, and the Great Pyramid’s
center of the world’s land masses today is a further witness of this fact.

David Jay Jordan

PS) And for further proof and a direct connection as to End Time Calamites, consider the fact that the Ring OF FIRE,
which will be exploding in the End Time is exactly on the other side of the Earth from Giza, the center of the Land Mass
of the Earth. This easily explaining the volatility and shallow crusts around the Pacific Ring of Fire, if you consider that
the land masses and plates expanded outward from this central point in Egypt.
(End of article)

So again you must study the signifcance of Giza, the Lords prophetic Marker and cornerstone to be able to comprehend more and more truths, step by step til the GREAT STEP, ascending ascending rather than evolutionary descent into the abysss

So, basically, your argument is "Goddidit".

That's nice.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 536 by Davidjay, posted 04-25-2017 1:38 PM Davidjay has not yet responded

Member (Idle past 726 days)
Posts: 4696
From: Colorado, USA
Joined: 01-09-2002

Message 546 of 1352 (806464)
04-25-2017 8:10 PM
Reply to: Message 541 by Faith
04-25-2017 3:59 PM

Re: Erosion and unconformities in Cratonic Sequences
No comment on my preoccupation with the level of the water eh?

As per the chart, the actual water level is not important. Partly because every one of the dividing lines between continent and ocean is an unconformity.

And also the fact that the chart does not address emergent mountain ranges.

I did keep reading that the sequences are marked by such unconformities but couldn't make sense of it and don't see its significance now either. Yes, those "unconformities" that are the supposed complete absence of a whole layer from the Geological Column, yes, I definitely doubt the presence of those absent layers, yes indeed.

In that case, you will never understand the chart.

And there is so much more that we haven't even touched upon ...

We are apparently at an impasse.

Edited by edge, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 541 by Faith, posted 04-25-2017 3:59 PM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 551 by Faith, posted 04-26-2017 5:03 AM edge has responded

Member (Idle past 726 days)
Posts: 4696
From: Colorado, USA
Joined: 01-09-2002

Message 562 of 1352 (806587)
04-26-2017 2:46 PM
Reply to: Message 551 by Faith
04-26-2017 5:03 AM

Re: Erosion and unconformities in Cratonic Sequences
Both of which are imaginary, interestingly enough.

So, you assert.

Perhaps you could offer some specific evidence for these?

You have been given the facts of paleosoils, plant root horizons, trackways, etc., etc. If you deny that they exist, that is another problem.

Where for instance have these unconformities been identified?

Well, the Grand Canyon has several of them.

Unlikely they all exist in any one geo column, right? So you must have to jump around to locate them.

It is even more unlikely that any geologists would expect them to exist in one location.

And what about those "emergent" mountains?

Do you not understand the term 'emergent'?

The Rockies did form rather dramatically to the west of the Cretaceous Seaway, but not until after all the strata were laid down as I think of it, ...

Sure, all of the strata present in the area were affected.

While you are thinking, think up a reason why younger sediments in the Rocky Mountains are unaffected.

... and since your evidence is going to be more imaginary conjurings there's no reason to think it any better than mine.

Again, you base this on an assertion that is not in evidence.

I think of course of the imaginary mountains Geology has erected from the angular unconformity at the base of the Grand Canyon.

It is not clear what you mean here.

Nothing but airy fantasy but you expect us all to treat Geology as evidenced Science.

If you have a better explanation for the evidence, this would be a good time to present it.

I've given more reasonable evidence for the Flood over my time at EvC.

Sorry, I missed it. All I've seen is wishful thinking on your part, an attempt to prop up your religious mythology. You do not explain evaporites, or dinosaur nests forming in the middle of a flood. In fact, there are a lot of things you have failed to explain, but we can start with some of the things that have been mentioned on this thread. I know that Coyote is waiting on you.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 551 by Faith, posted 04-26-2017 5:03 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