|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,913 Year: 4,170/9,624 Month: 1,041/974 Week: 368/286 Day: 11/13 Hour: 0/0 |
Summations Only | Thread ▼ Details |
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Why the Flood Never Happened | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1474 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
Yeah I'm sure the deluded evos here all agree with you but after the utterly insane straw man arguments you've made against me they should be ashamed of themselves.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1474 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
Remember, meanders are formed by slow flow, and they are approximately the same width as the river. If the walls were not well along in lithification, the walls would collapse. If the walls were lithified or well along in the process, you don't have anywhere near enough time for the GC to form. Perhaps you've just provided the explanation: as the river formed the meanders and decreased in depth over time, the walls along the sides did collapse and that accounts for the slopes.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1474 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
We have glimpses of the perehistoric past, we have fossils, we have samples from ice cores, ... We have observations we dont have any observations about your god. We have the same observations of the past and we see do the Flood there, everywhere as I've said, as you should too, but you are seeing through your Theory, not with open eyes. I haven't claimed that you should see God in nature.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
shalamabobbi Member (Idle past 2879 days) Posts: 397 Joined: |
It's the way the quote is presented that makes it appear to be attributed to me. That's how I originally saw it and I still ask you to make it clearer that it's a quote from Morton.
Ok, it's quoted from Morton. The reference to your other posts was about the salt post.
That paragraph of Morton's is full of stuff that begs a ton of questions, but it's just typical stuff that delusional OE believers swallow whole.
Like Morton? Who was a YEC??
First of all, as usual it's nothing but interpretation.
Of evidence.As opposed to Faith's interpretation. Of scripture. Shouldn't science present what is actually observed, in enough detail for others to investigate the claims? You can't do laboratory experiments on such phenomena so at least you should be careful to give other researchers the information needed to come to their own conclusions. That seems to be a huge failure of evo and OE "science" in general
As opposed to *creationist researchers* who bring absolutely nothing to the table, who provide no evidence of anything, who whine and demand to be spoon fed basic physics and chemistry so that they too can properly interpret evidence that is simple and very straight forward?
Thick layers. What EXACTLY is he seeing? We need DESCRIPTION. We need EVIDENCE.
Who is this we? Is it wee little you that is too lazy to look up references and investigate anything on her own?
I see NOTHING in what he's said that requires time. What is the matter with you people that you can't see through this?
Poof, an earth, poof stars and sun, poof Adam complete with memories to walk and talk and get into trouble with Eve. Clearly you see NOTHING that requires time.We DO see through this. His remarks about faults lose me. What's the problem here?
More problems with cracks? You have attributed all tectonic activity to one small window of time. A couple of streets in the town of Pushover, North Dakota.
I would continue this discussion but I've spied a homeless person rambling on incoherently into the air. Bye.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1474 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
Of course you managed to add to the obscurity of the Morton assertions rather than clarifying anything I asked. It's becoming a pattern.
The ex-YECs may be the worst since they caved in to the ridiculous excuse for science of the OE and ToE. That ought to be obvious.
Of evidence. As opposed to Faith's interpretation. Of scripture. This is a lie. I've stuck to the physical facts for my arguments on this thread. As I've said before this whole argument is about interpretation on both sides, it can't be any other way with the unwitnessed past. Do wish you'd pay attention. I've "poofed" nothing here, that's your really inadequate imagination at work. I've argued from the physical facts. Nothing Morton said requires millions of years. There is no poofing involved, the actual physical events do not require millions of years. And the objection to Morton is not that he HAS interpretations but that he fails to give the facts from which he arrived at them and that is either unintelligent or underhanded of him, and of you not to have recognized it and acknowledged it. This should have been quite clear from what I said but you are too busy trying to find silly comebacks to bother trying to understand what I'm saying. It's typical of this kind of "science" that just about every article on every phenomenon starts with something like "Five hundred million years ago the blah blah did blah blah and the blah blah ate blah blah and blah blah happened." That's the evo fairytale, that is not science, but none of you seems to know the difference. As for your criticism that I don't follow up all your wearying challenges, sure, make me research every little hiccup from the evos, that'll keep me busy so you don't have to think about anything I've said. Which obviously you don't know HOW to do anyway. Why do I bother answering you? The thread wasn't stellar before you arrived but it's taken a dive since. Edited by Faith, : No reason given. Edited by Faith, : No reason given. Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taq Member Posts: 10085 Joined: Member Rating: 5.6 |
We have the same observations of the past and we see do the Flood there, everywhere as I've said, as you should too, but you are seeing through your Theory, not with open eyes. I haven't claimed that you should see God in nature. You may have the same observations, but you don't use them to reach your conclusions. In fact, you ignore the observations. We observe that slow moving rivers on flat plains produce meanders. You ignore this observation, and claim that rivers with incised meanders were formed by catastrophic, fast flows. We observe that rocks have ratios of isotopes consistent with millions of years of decay. You ignore these observations and claim that the Earth is young, despite these observations. It would be a refreshing moment if you actually did start with the same observations.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1474 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
[qs] I NEVER SAID IT WAS A FAULT LINE. IF FAULT LINES DON'T RUN EAST-WEST THEN IT WASN'T A FAULT LINE AND I NEVER SAID IT WAS ANYWAY. THE IDEA IS THAT IT WAS CRACKS THAT FORMED EAST-WEST BECAUSE THAT PARALLELS THE MOUNDED PART OF THE UPLIFT,.
A fault is a crack that relieves stress in the earths crust. Your crack is described as relieving the stress from uplift, ergo it is a fault by definition. The fact remains that cracks that relieve the stress of uplift are observed in the north-south orientation not in an east-west orientation. The fact remains that the evidence is counter to your fantasy in this as in so many other ways. The fantasy as usual is yours. As with most of you here you just make up stuff without bothering to think about what I'm saying. Science forbid the creationist might be right about something but we can garble it up so well nobody would ever know anyway. The MOUND determines the direction of the cracks I have in mind and its summit runs EAST-WEST. Go look at the canyons and cliffs in the GS on that cross section way back there. THEY RUN EAST-WEST, as did the stress cracks in the upper surface of the VERY SAME STRATA that were originally over the GC. You don't know what you're talking about. All through this thread I've been making very simple reasonable points that you either refuse to grasp or can't grasp. Couldn't let the Flood really be true, could we?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1474 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
You've of course selected an observation about which I speculated at one point on the thread about meanders, and the radioisotope flimflam which I reject, ignoring all the other observations I've drawn my conclusions from. Just another cheat. I'm learning here that scientists lie and cheat and invent straw man arguments to make their case against creationists.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given. Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taq Member Posts: 10085 Joined: Member Rating: 5.6 |
ou've of course selected an observation about which I speculated at one point on the thread about meanders, and the radioisotope flimflam which I reject, Then don't pretend that you are starting from the same observations. You aren't.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1474 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
As I asked back in Message 1675:
Why are salt beds so often associated with petroleum and to some extent also coal deposits? I understand the salt domes may become traps for oil but that doesn't explain why they occur together in the first place so that the petroleum could so frequently find its way into the domes. I've done some reading on the subject but haven't yet found that question answered. I'd really like to know what the usual idea is. I'd really rather not hear from shalamabobbi who hasn't said anything of value for some time.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1474 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
Oh for crying out loud. The same information is available to everybody and you guys make use of it too for your own explanations. Use your head.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taq Member Posts: 10085 Joined: Member Rating: 5.6
|
Oh for crying out loud. The same information is available to everybody and you guys make use of it too for your own explanations. Use your head. The point is that you don't use it, contrary to your claims. The information we have available is how rocks form with relation to inclusion and exclusion of specific isotopes. We also have observations of how radioactive isotopes decay, and what they decay into. Then we have the observations of the ratio of isotopes that rocks have in them. How do you use these observations to determine the age of a rock? You claim to be using the same observations, so show us. We observe that slow moving rivers form meanders. How do you use these obervations? We observe that fossil bearing limestone forms very slowly. How do you use these observations? The answer is that you ignore the observations. You don't use them. You don't have a different interpretation of the same facts. You have an interpretation devoid of facts.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Pollux Member Posts: 303 Joined: |
Hi Faith,
You have said it is a matter of interpreting the evidence. Several times I and others have presented evidence to you that seems to strongly refute a recent Flood. This includes the consilience between C14 dates and tree rings then Suigetsu varves, plus that between sea mount ages and distance travelled supporting other RM dating. All you have done is say you REJECT RM dating, but you have done nothing to REFUTE it, except to say it is not Biblical.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Pollux Member Posts: 303 Joined:
|
Geveram canyon is a buried canyon in Israel. It is at least 16km long, up to 7 wide and 1 deep. It is in Jurassic rocks and overlain by Cretaceous sediments.
So the Flood would have had to lay down deposits up to Jurassic, then stop to erode the canyon, then add the later layers. Glenn Morton has information on buried rivers and canyons which I have yet to look at.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1474 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
I didn't say I try to interpret ALL THE EVIDENCE, I've clearly said I stick to the information I know I can answer. Good grief, PAY ATTENTION. I've also said that since I KNOW the Flood occurred I know some of the evidence has to be understood in a different way though I may not be up to doing it personally. I do not feel I have to deal with all the evidence, and I do feel I've made a good case on what evidence I do have. I DO NOT DEAL WITH RADIOMETRIC DATING AND DO NOT CONSIDER IT EVIDENCE ANYWAY, BECAUSE THE METHOD CANNOT BE VERIFIED. PAY ATTENTION.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024