|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,422 Year: 3,679/9,624 Month: 550/974 Week: 163/276 Day: 3/34 Hour: 1/0 |
Summations Only | Thread ▼ Details |
Member Posts: 3945 From: Duluth, Minnesota, U.S. (West end of Lake Superior) Joined: Member Rating: 10.0 |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Continuation of Flood Discussion | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
hooah212002 Member (Idle past 823 days) Posts: 3193 Joined: |
I have to get out of this loony bin for a while. I wish you'd stop teasing us with this. I'm getting major blue balls over here.Organic life is nothing but a genetic mutation, an accident. Your lives are measured in years and decades. You wither and die. We are eternal, the pinnacle of evolution and existence. Before us, you are nothing. Your extinction is inevitable. We are the end of everything.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 433 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Faith writes:
When I look at a set of books and notice that volume 6 is not there, I don't conclude like you do that the number 6 has ceased to exist. I conclude that the book has been removed. So if we have layers 1 to 12 elsewhere in the geological column but layer 6 is missing here, I likewise conclude that layer 6 has been removed here, say by erosion. Everyday logic.
Whole stack assumed even where gaps. Faith writes:
How is sediment being deposited on top of the geological column not part of the geological column? How is the present time not part of geological time?
Sediment depositing elsewhere is not the Geological Column OR the Geological Time Table.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1466 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
Faith writes: The point I was making about the Claron had nothing to do with its elevation, the point was that it was deposited at the TOP of the stack of strata of all the "time periods" before it [--"on top of" those beneath it, even if there were once layers above it]. That was my point about the whole Geologic Column, that it IS found as a STACK, which is what makes it a model for ascending time periods and evolution of life, so that if it is now supposedly continuing to deposit at the bottom of the sea...
You're describing two different locations. The Claron is one location, one stack of sedimentary layers. The bottom of the sea is a different location, a different stack of sedimentary layers. Exactly. The Claron is part of the Geo Time Scale, the other location is not. It would have to deposit ON the Claron to be that.
... it is no longer a continuous stack,...
Well, it both is and isn't a continuous stack, because even if they were once a continuous stack of layers stretching across a broad region, different parts of the stack will experience different tectonic forces. Which will not in any way affect the continuousness of the stack itself, just require reconstructing it.
Consider this flat stack of layers: [unable to get the illustration to reproduce correctly here.] Interesting hypothesis, haven't seen such a thing in reality, have you? Both sides having the same sequence of layers, the higher getting eroded down quite a bit and its eroded material neatly arranging itself in flat layers on the other side? For one thing you'd be getting the same sediments being deposited again on the lower side. If more than one layer erodes you'll get the sediments from all those depositing over the same sediments on the lower side. Are they going to maintain their layered formation; wouldn't they just pile up and jumble up? And if they did manage to sort out as layers, you'd then have just a repeat of the same layers already in the lower part of the stack. Two Clarons, one on top of the other over there for instance? Doubt there is any such situation anywhere, but also doubt that it could ever happen and maintain its layering.
...and it certainly is no longer accumulating fossils in the line of evolution.
It most certainly is "accumulating fossils in the line of evolution." As the eroded materials forms sediments in the subsided region, deceased life will become buried and gradually fossilize. I was thinking of the layers at the bottom of the ocean that are not continuous with the layers of the Geo Column. if you get fossils at all you have to get fossils more recent than those of the Holocene, but those tend to be mammals and human beings. Not going to find many of those at the bottom of the ocean. Also not going to find the same stack of strata there as is found in the Geo Column for the supposedly most recent addition to the time scale to add to. Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1466 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
May I respectfully suggest that you read through the whole sequence of posts on this subject starting at Message 898.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17825 Joined: Member Rating: 2.2 |
quote: Are you really claiming that only places where the Claron Formation exists are part of the Geological time scale ? If not, what DO you mean ?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 433 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Faith writes:
I don't see how reading through your befuddled posts again will make them clearer. Can't you just answer the simple question? How is sediment deposited on top of the geological column not part of the geological column? How is the present time not part of geological time? May I respectfully suggest that you read through the whole sequence of posts on this subject starting at Message 898. The deposition didn't stop. Time didn't stop. What stopped? Edited by ringo, : Added a silent but not invisible letter.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1466 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
Are you really claiming that only places where the Claron Formation exists are part of the Geological time scale ? If not, what DO you mean ? No, the Claron was just the example on the table at the moment of an actual formation that is part of the Geological Time Scale, so that to continue the time scale would require building the next layer on top of it.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1466 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined:
|
Gosh maybe they'll explode and obliterate EvC altogether.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1466 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
Time didn't stop.
History didn't stop. Sedimentation here and there didn't stop. Deposition ON the column stopped. abe: (It's now eroding). /abe The Geological Time Scale stopped. Edited by Faith, : No reason given. Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 433 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Faith writes:
How is that possible? Where is sediment deposited if not on top of the geological column?
Deposition ON the column stopped.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17825 Joined: Member Rating: 2.2 |
quote: So, according to you, every "elsewhere" where deposition is occurring will not have underlying sedimentary rocks of equivalent age to the Claron formation or older? If so, can you please explain how you could know such a thing. If not, we're back to what DO you mean ?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1466 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
Well, show me where it is depositing on top of the Holocene somewhere.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1466 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
Show me where anything like the strata of the Geological Column are now depositing on top of the layers called "Recent" time. The depositions now going on are willy-nilly, not depositing the way the strata obviously did, one on top of another so that time periods could be assigned to them. abe: Not in incredibly thick layers that span states and continents /abe. if the erosion going on now is collecting in piles or talus at the foot of eroding formations, it is NOT collecting on top of the Geologic Column as a layer of that column. If it is collecting at the bottom of the sea it is NOT collecting on top of the existing Geological Column. Sure it must be collecting on whatever there is of the column here and there but not as part of the column. I just think this is obvious.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 433 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Faith writes:
Is the Holocene on the top of the column? All deposition is on the top of the column, regardless of when the last layer on the top of the column was deposited. The Mississippi delta is being deposited on top of whatever was there when the Mississippi started to flow. Well, show me where it is depositing on top of the Holocene somewhere. So where is the "stop"?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1466 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
Well what WAS there? Do you even know?
I think you think you are saying it's depositing on top of the Geological TIME TABLE. It is certainly NOT depositing on top of the Geological Time Table unless what lies beneath the Mississippi delta is a Holocene layer. And I'm saying that if it is not depositing on top of the layer in the column called Holocene or Recent then it has nothing to do with the Geological Time Table at all.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024