Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
10 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Glenn Morton's Evidence Examined
petrophysics1
Inactive Member


Message 16 of 427 (790971)
09-08-2016 5:43 PM
Reply to: Message 5 by NoNukes
09-08-2016 4:36 PM


I agree to some extent that what geologist know can be condensed into a set of rule that would allow even a YEC person to find oil
This is not true.
Edited by petrophysics1, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by NoNukes, posted 09-08-2016 4:36 PM NoNukes has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 23 by edge, posted 09-08-2016 7:34 PM petrophysics1 has not replied

  
petrophysics1
Inactive Member


(1)
Message 17 of 427 (790972)
09-08-2016 6:00 PM
Reply to: Message 9 by Faith
09-08-2016 5:03 PM


Finding it has indeed been contested by Old Earthers here, from petrophysics to Pressie and probably edge as well among others
So explain to me your reasons for drilling an oil and gas prospect at a certain place. No YEC can do this........you included.
In fact for over a year you have not been able to tell me your method, procedure to determine the depositional environment of rocks. A Flood is a depositional environment....so tell us HOW you determined that.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 9 by Faith, posted 09-08-2016 5:03 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 18 by Faith, posted 09-08-2016 6:09 PM petrophysics1 has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 18 of 427 (790973)
09-08-2016 6:09 PM
Reply to: Message 17 by petrophysics1
09-08-2016 6:00 PM


First I think you need to explain to us how Old Earth dating is necessary to locating oil. You and others have many times asserted that this is the case but never explained it.
As kbertsche said on the other thread YECs say it is possible to locate oil by relative dating of the rocks and a knowledge of their morphology. I don't see that the ancient dates add a thing to this formula. Those dates would locate the same rocks relative dating would locate and you still need to explore the morphology or arrangements of those rocks to know where the oil is.
If you believe this is not the case please explain how adding millions of years to the mix changes things.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 17 by petrophysics1, posted 09-08-2016 6:00 PM petrophysics1 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 20 by Minnemooseus, posted 09-08-2016 6:31 PM Faith has not replied
 Message 22 by petrophysics1, posted 09-08-2016 6:46 PM Faith has not replied
 Message 37 by Pressie, posted 09-09-2016 6:04 AM Faith has replied

  
petrophysics1
Inactive Member


Message 19 of 427 (790974)
09-08-2016 6:20 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Faith
09-08-2016 3:28 PM


I was surprised to find out that kbertsche accepts that YECs can find oil with just the basic idea of relative dating and knowledge of the morphology of the rocks.
kbertsche doesn't know shit about sedimentation or stratigraphy.
Ask him ,if he thinks he knows about it more than I do.
I don't know that kbertsche said this. I doubt it as he doesn't strike me as a person who makes statements out of his area of expertise.
Edited by petrophysics1, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Faith, posted 09-08-2016 3:28 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 21 by Faith, posted 09-08-2016 6:31 PM petrophysics1 has not replied
 Message 32 by kbertsche, posted 09-09-2016 1:53 AM petrophysics1 has not replied

  
Minnemooseus
Member
Posts: 3941
From: Duluth, Minnesota, U.S. (West end of Lake Superior)
Joined: 11-11-2001
Member Rating: 10.0


(2)
Message 20 of 427 (790975)
09-08-2016 6:31 PM
Reply to: Message 18 by Faith
09-08-2016 6:09 PM


Adding up a lot of relative dating = a lot of time
...it is possible to locate oil by relative dating of the rocks and a knowledge of their morphology.
I'm inclined to believe that the above is true, but...
Understanding the processes that resulted in the geology and the relative dating and morphology leads to the conclusion of an old Earth.
You have a huge compilation of "this happened, then this happened, etc., etc., etc.", which can't happen by realistic processes, in a YEC time framework.
Moose

This message is a reply to:
 Message 18 by Faith, posted 09-08-2016 6:09 PM Faith has not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 21 of 427 (790976)
09-08-2016 6:31 PM
Reply to: Message 19 by petrophysics1
09-08-2016 6:20 PM


I quoted him in the OP and linked to the original statement. You can check it out.
Since you do have expertise in sedimentation and stratigraphy, I think you should explain to us how you need the millions of years along with that expertise to find oil. I've many times wondered what the great ages could possibly add to what is basically a physical problem, but so far nobody has explained it. I hope you can.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 19 by petrophysics1, posted 09-08-2016 6:20 PM petrophysics1 has not replied

  
petrophysics1
Inactive Member


Message 22 of 427 (790977)
09-08-2016 6:46 PM
Reply to: Message 18 by Faith
09-08-2016 6:09 PM


So if you can find oil and gas using YEC geology...tell me how you do it.
Explain to me how you use the relative dating and the "morphology" to find an unknown and undiscovered oil and gas deposit.
I am sitting here waiting for the explanation of the methodology you use.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 18 by Faith, posted 09-08-2016 6:09 PM Faith has not replied

  
edge
Member (Idle past 1706 days)
Posts: 4696
From: Colorado, USA
Joined: 01-09-2002


Message 23 of 427 (790978)
09-08-2016 7:34 PM
Reply to: Message 16 by petrophysics1
09-08-2016 5:43 PM


This is not true.
Well, you know what they say about " ... even a blind squirrel...".
My viewpoint that it is possible, but the reason for using geology is to improve your chances of finding oil. And that has worked in the modern era, particularly with some of the new techniques and basin analysis.
My only direct use of radiometric dating and oil exploration was as part of the study of the thermal history of a basin. Without a radiometric date, a given intrusive could not be fit into the story.
Another direct use of evolutionary theory and old ages would be in palynology where we depend on evolutionary changes to provide data about target zones in drilling. The YEC geological interpretation would make this impossible.
It would be hard to imagine oil exploration these days without some kind of understanding of sedimentary sequences. As we have seen on the last few threads, such things certainly don't fit into Faith's version of geology.
Glad you're back, by the way...

This message is a reply to:
 Message 16 by petrophysics1, posted 09-08-2016 5:43 PM petrophysics1 has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 28 by Faith, posted 09-09-2016 12:13 AM edge has not replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


(1)
Message 24 of 427 (790979)
09-08-2016 8:21 PM
Reply to: Message 8 by Faith
09-08-2016 4:59 PM


f Morton believed the OE explanation that the GC was carved by the Colorado River then of course he's tortured by it. That idea ought to be ridiculous to anyone in my opinion.
Again, the idea that you personally find some proposed geological process ridiculous is an opinion without the least bit of persuasive power.
Morton wanted to believe that the grand canyon was formed during the flood, but the evidence he encountered did not support such a belief. That, and not some story about what atheists believed was the source of Morton's dilemma. So the question remains, what is the basis of your belief that the grand canyon was formed in a matter of months? Morton was unable to find among his fellow YEC believers anyone who was able to say their experience in the field looking at the evidence that they saw with their own two eyes was explained using Flood geology.
Yet your claim is essentially that Morton did not know what you know about what really happened. Such hubris.
Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)
History will have to record that the greatest tragedy of this period of social transition was not the strident clamor of the bad people, but the appalling silence of the good people. Martin Luther King
I never considered a difference of opinion in politics, in religion, in philosophy, as cause for withdrawing from a friend. Thomas Jefferson

This message is a reply to:
 Message 8 by Faith, posted 09-08-2016 4:59 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 25 by jar, posted 09-08-2016 8:31 PM NoNukes has seen this message but not replied
 Message 33 by Faith, posted 09-09-2016 2:51 AM NoNukes has replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


(2)
Message 25 of 427 (790981)
09-08-2016 8:31 PM
Reply to: Message 24 by NoNukes
09-08-2016 8:21 PM


NoNukes writes:
So the question remains, what is the basis of your belief that the grand canyon was formed in a matter of months?
Faith's position is even sillier. She is claiming that all the layers are sediment deposited by the flood and then the canyon created by outflow after the flood. She's got to present a model that will bring in (from ??? ) the sediments, sort them by type, deposit them in layers, somehow tilt up parts and erode parts away from between layers and the after all the layers are stratified have some run off form the canyon itself.
That's gonna be interesting. Then maybe she can also 'splain the marine deposits raise over a mile above sea level.
Old Earth and the Biblical Flood are simply to ludicrous to take seriously.

My Sister's Website: Rose Hill Studios My Website: My Website

This message is a reply to:
 Message 24 by NoNukes, posted 09-08-2016 8:21 PM NoNukes has seen this message but not replied

  
nwr
Member
Posts: 6408
From: Geneva, Illinois
Joined: 08-08-2005
Member Rating: 5.1


Message 26 of 427 (790982)
09-08-2016 8:35 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Faith
09-08-2016 3:28 PM


I was surprised to find out that kbertsche accepts that YECs can find oil with just the basic idea of relative dating and knowledge of the morphology of the rocks.
I'm not a geologist. But yes, that seems possible.
But what you would lose, would be the ability to make sensible inferences about the age of strata and what that implies about the likelihood of finding oil. So while I expect it could work, a YEC would have a serious handicap compared to an OEC.
In any case, I'm glad you are looking into this. I hope you will be honest with yourself as you do so. I was an OEC Christian, before I gave it up. It doesn't really require compromising any important theology, though you probably see that differently.
I won't be pressuring you to change. But I do hope you will spend the effort to fully examine OEC.

Fundamentalism - the anti-American, anti-Christian branch of American Christianity

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Faith, posted 09-08-2016 3:28 PM Faith has not replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 27 of 427 (790985)
09-09-2016 12:00 AM
Reply to: Message 14 by Faith
09-08-2016 5:35 PM


Well that pretty much confirms my thought - you wouldn't get a canyon. The material above, being unconsolidated and under pressure would hardly wait for a canyon to form before collapsing.
And that leaves aside the question of how you get the river drainage pattern - that makes sense for water flowing down from mountains or hills to join a river in a valley or canyon, but that scenario hardly applies without a solid surface - or the relative elevations.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 14 by Faith, posted 09-08-2016 5:35 PM Faith has not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 28 of 427 (790986)
09-09-2016 12:13 AM
Reply to: Message 23 by edge
09-08-2016 7:34 PM


Interesting that the thread has a lot of people agreeing that it's possible for YECs to find oil through relative dating and morphology of the rocks. I didn't expect that much agreement. That would be kbertsche, NoNukes, CatSci, Moose, nwr, even you.
But of course most of you think a knowledge of OE dating methods is necessary for understanding how the rocks got that way, or in your case improves the chances of finding oil.
Nothing yet has been explained about HOW it helps in the finding of oil though.
My viewpoint that it is possible, but the reason for using geology is to improve your chances of finding oil. And that has worked in the modern era, particularly with some of the new techniques and basin analysis.
My only direct use of radiometric dating and oil exploration was as part of the study of the thermal history of a basin. Without a radiometric date, a given intrusive could not be fit into the story.
Another direct use of evolutionary theory and old ages would be in palynology where we depend on evolutionary changes to provide data about target zones in drilling. The YEC geological interpretation would make this impossible.
This doesn't explain enough for me to grasp why any of it is needed.
It would be hard to imagine oil exploration these days without some kind of understanding of sedimentary sequences. As we have seen on the last few threads, such things certainly don't fit into Faith's version of geology.
That's a very odd thing to say. Sedimentary sequences would certainly be part of a YECs knowledge that should be useful for finding oil.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 23 by edge, posted 09-08-2016 7:34 PM edge has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 29 by Coyote, posted 09-09-2016 12:23 AM Faith has not replied
 Message 30 by Minnemooseus, posted 09-09-2016 12:34 AM Faith has not replied

  
Coyote
Member (Idle past 2106 days)
Posts: 6117
Joined: 01-12-2008


(1)
Message 29 of 427 (790987)
09-09-2016 12:23 AM
Reply to: Message 28 by Faith
09-09-2016 12:13 AM


Epic fail!
Don't get your hopes up: young earth (YE) is a failed belief, and has been for a couple of hundred years.
The ability of some to find oil using relative dating does not prove YE. When you consider the results of real dating, YE fails miserably no matter how much you might need to believe in it. Dozens of different methods, using different materials, all show the same thing: epic fail for YE!
Even the simple radiocarbon dating I do shows YE to be false.
[If you don't like the assumptions behind these dating methods, please explain why on the appropriate thread I started over a month ago just for that purpose.]

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.
Belief gets in the way of learning--Robert A. Heinlein
In the name of diversity, college student demands to be kept in ignorance of the culture that made diversity a value--StultisTheFool
It's not what we don't know that hurts, it's what we know that ain't so--Will Rogers
If I am entitled to something, someone else is obliged to pay--Jerry Pournelle
If a religion's teachings are true, then it should have nothing to fear from science...--dwise1
"Multiculturalism" demands that the US be tolerant of everything except its own past, culture, traditions, and identity.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 28 by Faith, posted 09-09-2016 12:13 AM Faith has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 31 by Tanypteryx, posted 09-09-2016 1:00 AM Coyote has not replied

  
Minnemooseus
Member
Posts: 3941
From: Duluth, Minnesota, U.S. (West end of Lake Superior)
Joined: 11-11-2001
Member Rating: 10.0


(2)
Message 30 of 427 (790989)
09-09-2016 12:34 AM
Reply to: Message 28 by Faith
09-09-2016 12:13 AM


Understanding how the rocks got that way is an old Earth dating method
... a knowledge of OE dating methods is necessary for understanding how the rocks got that way...
It's much more a mater of "understanding how the rocks got that way is an old Earth dating method".
I think I'll use that as the message subtitle.
Moose

This message is a reply to:
 Message 28 by Faith, posted 09-09-2016 12:13 AM Faith has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024