|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1445 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: The Geological Timescale is Fiction whose only reality is stacks of rock | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NoNukes Inactive Member
|
New sediment is depositing, plants start growing, crawly-walky creatures start proliferating. A few thousand years go by and the sediment is burying this landscape As I see things, this the point at which you make your error when you are considering terrestrial environments. The Director's posts suggest a similar problem. A small fraction of an inch of sediment added to a large landscape per year might not make the landscape uninhabitable even if that deposition continues over thousands of years. That tiny top layer of sediment simply becomes topsoil. The rate of growth is slow enough that even worms and most plants can avoid being buried in it. As long as the rate of sedimentation is slower than the rate at which the deposited sediment can become a soil layer there is simply no danger to plants and animals. No loss of habitat at all. It is underneath all of that soil that rock formation occurs. 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
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NoNukes Inactive Member |
Eventually the landscape itself becomes the rock. If there is soil on top of it, that too is going to have to become rock or be eroded away, both of which destroy habitat. Rock forms below the surface where there is pressure. The top surface cannot become rock while it is still the stop surface. Accordingly, the soil on top never becomes rock while until it is under the surface. Not an issue. Erosion can indeed produce a rock surface which is no longer a habitat. So what? Aren't there large uninhabitable surfaces now? 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
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NoNukes Inactive Member |
So of course it's "not an issue," because I never said it. The sediment burying another landscape either has to become rock or be eroded away. Only in situations where there is exposed rock must this be true. Sediment burying a landscape does not have to become rock or be eroded away. Your response ignores the train of the discussion. If you agree that rock forms under the surface, then you should appreciate that your post does not conflict with what I described regarding sedimentation not destroying the landscape. Only surface erosion of the landscape necessarily removes topsoil and exposes rock. Your major difficulty still exists. Namely your inability to address the possibility of sediment slowly accumulating on a landscape without interfering with plants and animals living there. It can become simply more soil onto which living organisms can continue to thrive. 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
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NoNukes Inactive Member |
The problem is getting from your soil and landscapes to the strata that is the starting point of all this pondering. If the soil above the rock is not represented in the strata then it's going to have to get eroded away before the next rock is established above the one you mention that is deep in the earth. You are glossing over the issue here. But at least you are trying to address the issue being raised. Is this the first time you've made this argument? Yes, if ultimately the upper surface is rock, then of course the soil gets eroded away. But that process need not happen right away. If the dirt becomes soil and plants grow into it, and there is a net deposition, then the soil does not go away. During that period the soil is part of the landscape, and animals can continue to live there. Of course if the top soil does eventually erode away to bare rock because there is more erosion than deposition, then you are right, that the area is no longer suitable for plant life, but lots of history can happen in between the time soil is deposited and the time when erosion over comes deposition. During that period of time rocks can form under the soil. But you've agreed that there is no issue with rocks forming under a surface. Given that, there would seem to be no obstacle to you understanding what folks are proposing. If your admissions so far are correct, you would seem to have no remaining point to make. I too am going to stop here. 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
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NoNukes Inactive Member |
quote: 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
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NoNukes Inactive Member |
You are calling a general critique of the thinking in a field "name calling? Faith writes: Epistemopathy. That’s a term that was used by a "maverick" psychologist back in the sixties with the wit and the insight to expose the field of Psychology as generally sick with "epistemopathology, " suffering from symptoms that would in any other context be considered schizophrenia. 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
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NoNukes Inactive Member |
ALL THE TERMS REFER TO THE THEORY, NOT TO PERSONS. Yikes. So if I were to identify the thinking of YEC 'theory' as being schizophrenic, then that would not imply anything personal? Good to know. 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
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NoNukes Inactive Member
|
And even if that problem were solved, if decay rates were greater in the past, won't samples again date much older than they should? And isn't it impossible to know past decay rates? Just to help out, I will mention that there is independent evidence that decay rates were not greater in the past along several lines on inquiry. 1) Direct observation of decay rates from at least 170,000 years ago via observation of distant supernova. 2) Experimental results indicating that decay rates are essentially unaffected by extreme heat, pressure, magnetism etc. 3) Quantum mechanical modeling of atom which relates decay rates to things like the speed of light which is also verified to be constant over time based on a number of lines of inquiry, including the fact that such things affect processes like nuclear reactions. See cited results discussed by edge on natural nuclear reactors. 4) Formation of halos which require a very specific energy level of the alpha particle emitted by polonium. A changed decay rate would directly affect the energy level. This particular method provides verification of constant decay rates over millions of years. 5) RATE study conducted by YEC folks which raised the issue of the effect of the release of heat at rates large enough to reduce dating from billions of years even into the 100 thousand year range. No such heat effects exist. The effect on speeding up the decay rate of potassium would have produced radiation that killed all of life. So this rapid rate would have to have preceded life on earth making it a useless argument for someone who believes all life was created in just two-three days. I assume that it was okay to respond to your message. I'll also point out that there is an entire thread devoted to this particular question. That thread has had one creationist since it opened six weeks ago, and that post did not deal with the topic. Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given. Edited by Adminnemooseus, : Added some blank lines. 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 Seems to me if its clear that certain things that require ancient dates couldn't possibly be true, we are on our way to throwing out all those ancient dates on the basis of the actual evidence. -- Faith
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NoNukes Inactive Member
|
From start:
Faith writes: No, what I'm saying is that what is actually seen is stacks of rocks that make it impossible for there ever to have been any such landscape as is inferred from the contents and qualities of those rocks To finish:
Faith writes: "How it looks to me" may not be Grade A evidence but it IS evidence. 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 Seems to me if its clear that certain things that require ancient dates couldn't possibly be true, we are on our way to throwing out all those ancient dates on the basis of the actual evidence. -- Faith |
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024