|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,890 Year: 4,147/9,624 Month: 1,018/974 Week: 345/286 Day: 1/65 Hour: 0/1 |
Thread ▼ Details |
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Did the Flood really happen? | |||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1473 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
Christians HERE? Who said that to you?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1473 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
Wouldn't one expect the trace fossils to occur in the strata where the creature that made them got overtaken by the Flood?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 422 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
Yes, Christians here. Don't remember the name but from England, Buz for another, you quite a few times.
As I have often said, the greatest threat today in the US is Fundamental Christianity.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 422 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
No, one would expect to find fossils in the area near where they died.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1473 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
Said you should be shot? You can't just accuse people of something like that without evidence.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1473 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
The trace fossils should be found in a place where the Flood would have overtaken and buried them.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17827 Joined: Member Rating: 2.3 |
quote: I wouldn’t expect the Flood to sort all the other dinosaurs - including the ones that died earlier or later - into the same groups of strata. That’s the point. So which is it. Did the Flood sort the fossils or does the order of the fossils represent the order of death ? I can’t see either option working for you.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 22502 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 4.9 |
Faith writes: As I said above, I'm not aware of any scientific discussion of the fact of the separate identifiable sediments as a really unlikely way for geological history and all the various time periods to have unfolded. What facts make it seem unlikely to you? Completely different sediments, straight and flat and all neatly stacked up for miles. For starters. That's what Walther's Law says should happen, that lateral movement of depositional environments across a landscape will leave behind horizontal strata.
Or the fact of their flatness and straightness, which I'll get to farther down where you bring it up. And again I can't absurd1 of a scientific way of talking about these things either. "Absurd" is the best I can do. Then maybe you need to go find some facts. I'd just think to have a better word for it. No, you have to find some facts. A thesaurus website suggests synonyms for "absurd" like crazy, foolish, goofy, illogical, irrational, laughable, ludicrous, nonsensical, preposterous, silly, stupid, unreasonable and wacky, but inability to find the right word isn't your problem. Your inability to find facts supporting your views is your problem.
Well, these ARE facts and I would think that somebody might have noticed that there's something very odd about them in the context of the standard explanation. Since you're the one who noticed there's something very odd about the strata, why don't you tell us what that is?
I'd be thrilled if anybody like6 that the way the sediments are stacked is a bit on the crazy side in relation to the time periods system. And can you describe for us the evidence and chain of logic that leads to this conclusion?
Totally lost me. All I want is another term for "absurd" and a comment on whether anybody thinks the geological column stack of sediments is an unlikely fit with the time periods interpretation. Stop seeking new ad hominem. No one thinks your ideas have any merit, and most of them are impossible anyway. Would you please stop messing with your disallowed words?
I put together a whole presentation based on the Grand Canyon/Grand Staircase cross section to demonstrate how it all demonstrates a young earth and defies the usual Old Earth interpretations. And little of it fit the evidence and most of it wasn't even possible.
The tilting of the Supergroup was a necessary way of extending that observation into the basement rocks as formed after the strata were all laid down. So I'll defend it still if I get back to it. It's part of showing that the Flood really happened. We're back to it, so defend it. How did the Supergroup tilt while deeply buried without disturbing the overlying layers, and where did the cubic miles of missing rock go?
I was using the term "uniform" to refer to the regularity of the form of the strata as straight flat slabs of separate sedimentary content. No you were not using the term "uniform" that way. You're gaslighting again. What you said was "straight strata often of a single more-or-less single uniform sediment." But the sediment isn't uniform, as I showed with the sandstone image. It's not singular, either, as there is there can be blending at the interface between strata, interbedding, for just one example. It's already been explained many times how floods do not deposit sediments and fossils in anything that resembles the geologic column. And how do all the strata that are not straight and flat show us that the Flood really happened?
Steno's Law has been modified by more recent science, something else you reject. Yes I do reject it. Because...
But obviously water encroaching onto land that is gradually increasing in elevation could not deposit sediments horizontally. Whether such strata are seen as tilted or not depends upon what angle you view them from. If you take a vertical cross section parallel to the shoreline then the strata boundaries will appear horizontal. If you take a vertical cross section perpendicular to the shoreline then the strata boundaries will be tilted, dipping down toward the sea along with the land they were deposited upon. Not getting your point. Steno's law refers to original horizontality and that's apparent everywhere there are strata in whatever condition they happen to be. I was pretty sure you wouldn't get this one, let me try again. In general, land increases in elevation the further you get from the coast, right? It might look flat and horizontal at the coast, but it's actually tilted slightly upward away from the sea. For example, the elevation of land at the New Hampshire seacoast is zero, but if you travel inland a hundred miles the elevation might be 500 feet. So obviously the land is tilted slightly upward away from the sea. With me so far? Therefore, if there's a transgressing sea pressing slowly inland over thousands of years and depositing sediments whose type depends upon distance from shore and in a way in accordance with Walther's Law, the boundary between the land and the sediments deposited upon that land would also have to be tilted. It couldn't be horizontal. How much different would it be from the horizontal? That would vary greatly, because the land doesn't actually rise in elevation smoothly and continuously from the sea. There are hills and valleys and plains and so forth. But the bottom line is original horizontality will not happen when sediments are deposited on already existing land, and we see this in the strata, such as the boundary between the Muav and Redwall Limestone in this diagram of the Grand Canyon strata:
The other point that's difficult to grasp is that the tilt of layers cannot be seen from all angles. If you view a cross section parallel to the coastline then there will be no tilt. The more the viewing angle deviates from parallel to the coastline the more the tilt will be apparent. Also, the tilt and other irregularities will often only be apparent over great distances. As I said, here in New Hampshire the land rises only about 500 feet over a distance of a hundred miles. This isn't a tilt that would be apparent visually, just as it is not readily apparent at most places around the Grand Canyon. If this still isn't clear just let me know, or maybe someone else can explain it more clearly. --Percy
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1473 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
Sorry, not following you.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17827 Joined: Member Rating: 2.3 |
It’s really simple. The order of the fossil record is the same whether we’re talking about trace fossils or physical remains.
Now, if some dinosaur remains were sorted by the Flood, why would those remains end up in the strata where we find dinosaur tracks ? Likewise for other creatures. If the order is the product of two separate mechanisms why would they agree ? But if there was only one mechanism, which is it ? Sorting by the Flood, or just the order of deaths ?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
JonF Member (Idle past 196 days) Posts: 6174 Joined: |
The trace fossils should be found in a place where the Flood would have overtaken and buried them.
Which, of course, would not produce the order we see. E.g. grasses grow pretty much everywhere. Yet their pollen is only found in relatively high parts of the fossil record, starting around the layers we measure as 70 million years old
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
dwise1 Member Posts: 5952 Joined: Member Rating: 5.2 |
Percy writes:
In other words stop being a YEC. If you want people to believe you're doing science you have to: a) Stop talking about the Bible; and b) Stop making ignorant and impossible scientific claims. YEC means "young earth creationist." They base their beliefs entirely only their fallible human interpretation (with inevitably must be wrong since they are, after all, fallible humans) of what they think that the Bible says. Just being a YEC does not require you to not talk about the Bible, since what you have fallibly interpreted about the Bible is the sole basis for your position and beliefs. Then there's a subset of YEC which is "creation science" (CS). CS is a deliberately crafted deception designed to circumvent court decisions in the early 70's which no longer allowed religious reasons for barring of the teaching of evolution in the public schools. So with CS, the YECs scrubbed their materials of all overt biblical references (AKA "the game of 'Hide the Bible'") and explicit Christian terminology (eg, God became "some undefined Creator (wink, wink, nudge, nudge, know what I mean?") and pretended to the courts and to the general public that CS had nothing to do with religion and that they opposed evolution "for purely scientific reasons". It is CS that requires creationists to pretend to use science and "scientific evidences" to support their claims and to falsely claim that their claims do not rely on the Bible. Not only are CS claims blatantly and transparently false, but CSists' position is made even more worse by their general lack of knowledge about science (AKA ignnurance). So Percy is not asking you to stop being a YEC (even though that would be of immense benefit to you), but rather to stop doing "creation science."
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 422 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
Well, if I thought today's Fundamental Christians worth the effort I'd search back to find the posts. But they aren't.
I did find it and the member was iano in Message 102. Classic Fundamental Christian call to violence. Like saying folk should be strangled. Edited by jar, : found the post.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 422 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
There was no flood.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1433 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
If you understood geology, you would see that what you describe is a stratigraphic column, showing only the sedimentary rocks ina given area. Correct me if I'm wrong (geology not my strong suit) but this column is specific to an area, they can be different in different places, and they could include all the rock layers down to molten core.
quote: Enjoyby our ability to understand RebelAmericanZenDeist ... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ... to share. Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024