|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,767 Year: 4,024/9,624 Month: 895/974 Week: 222/286 Day: 29/109 Hour: 2/3 |
Thread ▼ Details |
iceage  Suspended Member (Idle past 5941 days) Posts: 1024 From: Pacific Northwest Joined: |
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Seashells on tops of mountains. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Adequate Member (Idle past 310 days) Posts: 16113 Joined: |
If this is the level of intellect, curiosity, education and honesty you bring to the debate ... ... then he may be a creationist. Damnit, even if he has forgotten all the physics he learnt in high school, which evidently he has, then he could still have looked it up.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
iceage  Suspended Member (Idle past 5941 days) Posts: 1024 From: Pacific Northwest Joined: |
iceage writes: bioturbation rules out rapid burial
TheWay writes: I honestly fail to see how. Your explanation is:You cannot have organism burrowing, nesting, disturbing layers when rapidly being covered by tens, hundreds or thousands of feet of overburden. Yet I wonder how you know this? I am not saying your wrong, it just seems that it could be possible. Active animal burrows only extend a few inches to maybe a foot from the bottom of a seabed. This can be observed in modern environments. These animals could not burrow under 10's, 100's or 1000's of feet of sediment due to the pressure , the subsequent resistance to burrowing and the lack of oxygen. If there is any evidence to the contrary let's hear it. The two excellent images of worm casts in the prior post are from two different formations in a sequence separated by several hundred feet. Not only that, there are signs of biotrubation several thousand above those! It is difficult to support a claim that these animals were extremely rapidly deposited in this deposition column all the while be rained down my massive sediments and with supposed high energy current flows. Just what do you propose in feet/day would be required to deposit the massive sedimentary deposits of the Grand Canyon, Rocky Mountains, or Himalayas in a flood of a few months or weeks?
Iceage writes: To create metamorphic rock you need pressure and heat
TheWay writes: Could tectonic plates slamming into each other create enough pressure and heat? Depending on the grade you also need time - but I will leave that for another day. Think about this for a while. What is being proposed is this sequence of events. Deposition, (sometimes bioturbation), lithification, (sometimes metamorphic conversion) and massive uplift of the order of miles - in just how many months or years? I say just invoke the supernatural and done with it!
iceage writes: And remember these sediments have to be lithified/metamorphosed prior to uplift so there is an order sequence of events that are required each involving durations of time.
TheWay writes: Perhaps they do not? I am only asking you to please humor me, Is it possible? I say this simply because a rigid structure is necessary to form vertical peaks and ridges like Everest or the Canadian Rockies. Also a formation cannot become metamorphic once uncovered or near the surface. Forget the heat generated by fault slip it was a diversion I should not have brought up. And we or I will get rightfully whacked by the mods.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
bluescat48 Member (Idle past 4215 days) Posts: 2347 From: United States Joined: |
I said I apply reason and logic to all the corroborating evidence for the Biblical historical record. Since you vehemently deny that we Bible-creos use reason and logic, there's no logical reason for us to discuss it. what was asked was explain the reason and logic.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
bluescat48 Member (Idle past 4215 days) Posts: 2347 From: United States Joined: |
What do you do with the corroborative evidence of the credibility of the Biblical historical record? Perhaps if you took the time to assimilate and assemble it all, you would think about reconsideration. OK where do I find that?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 420 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
If you use the Little Green Reply button at the bottome right of a message, it will link your reply. Please consider that so folk have a clue what message it is you are replying to.
Aslan is not a Tame Lion
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1431 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
From Message 53 - the unanswered part is in yellow:
At face value, seashells found at great heights is evidence of the Great Flood. How do you explain the same evidence? At face value the explanation is that they grew in the sedimentary deposit before it was lithified, while it was shallow water, and then they died, were fossilized when the sediment was lithified, and then transported to the location where they were found by plate tectonics.
At face value the clams in question are more than a year old, every single one of them, so they could not have grown during your hypothetical flood event. None of the clams found as fossils anywhere on earth could have grown during your hypothetical flood event. How do you explain that evidence? http://oceanlink.island.net/ask/mollusca.htmlhttp://www.chesapeakebay.net/info/hard_clam.cfm Those rings on the shells are growth rings, ray, annual growth rings (you know like tree rings). You don't even get past the larval stage before the big dryout, so where do all those OLD clams come from ray? we are limited in our ability to understand by our ability to understand RebelAAmericanOZen[Deist ... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ... to share.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Peg Member (Idle past 4955 days) Posts: 2703 From: melbourne, australia Joined: |
Off topic material hidden. Use "Peek" to read.
if the bible really is the word of God, you would expect it have some insight into the natural world. Here is what a textbook on geology says: “From Pre-Cambrian times down to the present, the perpetual process of building and destroying mountains has continued. ... Not only have mountains originated from the bottom of vanished seas, but they have often been submerged long after their formation, and then re-elevated.”2
Off topic material hidden. Use "Peek" to read.
Compare this with the poetic language of the psalmist: “With a watery deep just like a garment you covered [the earth]. The waters were standing above the very mountains. Mountains proceeded to ascend, valley plains proceeded to descend”to the place that you have founded for them.””Psalm 104:6,8. mountains rise and fall and wen we find sea shells on the tops of mountains, we see evidence of that process Edited by AdminNosy, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1431 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
Thanks Peg,
mountains rise and fall and wen we find sea shells on the tops of mountains, we see evidence of that process Fair enough, that is what plate tectonics shows ... and the fossils in ordered layers on those mountains ... with evidence of the succession of life from generation to generation ... all showing mature development of the whole marine environment in which they lived, with roots and burrows as well as shells.
if the bible really is the word of God, you would expect it have some insight into the natural world. So how long do you think this takes? Enjoy. by our ability to understand Rebel American Zen Deist ... 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) • • •
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
obvious Child Member (Idle past 4141 days) Posts: 661 Joined: |
Off topic material hidden. Use "Peek" to read.
quote: At the risk of being off topic, it does. Dietary laws are quite relevant especially back in the day. And I think you miss something. Was God more interested in the moral actions of its creations verse giving an accurate description of how he made the world? Given the whole Jesus thing, to me it seems that morals trump story of origin. Therefore, the bible isn't a good science book and shouldn't be treated as such. The issue with that scripture is that the Earth was never flooded. Be careful that this message doesn't shoot you off on an off-topic tangent. - Adminnemooseus} Edited by Adminnemooseus, : Topic drift alert message. Edited by AdminNosy, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
mark24 Member (Idle past 5221 days) Posts: 3857 From: UK Joined: |
Edited- Off Topic
Edited by mark24, : No reason given. There are 10 kinds of people in this world; those that understand binary, & those that don't
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Peg Member (Idle past 4955 days) Posts: 2703 From: melbourne, australia Joined: |
you're right
the bible is not a science book and doesnt claim to bebut when it does touch on science, its always accurate
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
bluescat48 Member (Idle past 4215 days) Posts: 2347 From: United States Joined: |
Off topic material hidden. Use "Peek" to read.
Show me one place in the Bible that, touching on science, is accurate.
Edited by AdminNosy, : No reason given. There is no better love between 2 people than mutual respect for each other WT Young, 2002 Who gave anyone the authority to call me an authority on anything. WT Young, 1969
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1431 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
Thanks Peg,
the bible is not a science book and doesnt claim to be but when it does touch on science, its always accurate So when it matches something we know from science it is accurate, and when it doesn't, then that is because it doesn't claim to be a science book? How can you tell if this is just a ad hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy or not? I noticed you did not answer about the length of time needed to form the marine deposits on mountaintops - is that one of the areas where it doesn't claim to be a science book? Enjoy. Edited by RAZD, : / by our ability to understand Rebel American Zen Deist ... 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) • • •
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Peg Member (Idle past 4955 days) Posts: 2703 From: melbourne, australia Joined: |
the Bible says that our earth hangs upon nothing and is round. (Job 26:7 "He is stretching out the north over the empty place,
Off topic material hidden. Use "Peek" to read.Hanging the earth upon nothing" Isaiah 40:22"There is One who is dwelling above the circle of the earth" Although Moses was bought up in egypt in an egyption household he wrote that man was formed, not out of Ra’s tears but “out of dust from the ground.” (Gen. 2:7; Acts 7:22) Modern science would agree that all the minerals in the earth are found in our bodies. there are more, such as the bible mentioned the skin on the teeth for instance..something that wasnt known until it was first seen through a telescope in the 15th century Edited by AdminNosy, : off topic hidden
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Peg Member (Idle past 4955 days) Posts: 2703 From: melbourne, australia Joined: |
actually i recall mentioning how mountains rise and fall of mountains into the sea... the earth is always moving as we know and there are are mountains deep down in the ocean beds and some have been pushed up to above the surface
i also posted a scripture that described this process seriously, i dont claim to understand it all, but i am 100% convinced that their is a Creator and the bible is his word and hence I would always first assume that scientists may have the wrong idea... they have been known to change their opinions on things as their knowledge increases just as a non believer would do in reverse when it comes to creation
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024