The TRVE history of the Flood...

Faith writes:Let me see if I can make the point clearer. It's become a broken record that doesn't further the debate in the slightest. We've been exchanging the same opinions over and over but this can never go anywhere because they are basic premises that aren't going to be changed. The debate is, or should be, BASED on them, not ABOUT them. It's just a huge waste of time to keep getting this same old same old stuff about the Bible being a myth and dating methods being the last word on the discussion. Or jar's endless carrying on about his ridiculous interpretations of the Bible. Or my statements about the absurdity of the OE/ToE assumptions or that the Bible's dates trump the dating methods. They can be stated as a conclusion from an argument but too often they are just stated over and over and over and over and over in the place of an argument.

Faith writes:But that could be asked of your model too. The real issue isn't that either model can't account for this or that but that we dispute the validity of the theories on both sides that account for this or that. And that's the whole debate.

Faith writes:Well, I'm now taking the position that the Bible is evidence. It's God's word, it's the truth, it trumps all the contradictory dating claims. I see no point in repeating this basic conflict ad nauseam.

Faith writes: If the Bible is the truth . . .

Faith writes:Not according to Admin, even on this same thread.

CRR writes:People learn easier if they are taught rather than abused for being ignorant.

CRR writes:In this thread you can't argue that something is true because the Bible is true. You have to supply corroborating real world evidence.
Archeological and historical evidence has consistently confirmed the Bible is true. That is corroborating real world evidence

Faith writes:. . . and that the stack of lithified sediments is good evidence for a worldwide Flood.

Faith writes:It's just wonderful how good you are at ignoring the obvious fact that a stack of sedimentary rocks is the highly unlikely outcome of time periods in which creatures supposedly lived.

Faith writes:The strata that make up what is traditionally called the Geological Column, that also is the basis of the Geological Time Scale, covers HUGE amounts of territory, huge, some of them whole continents -- such as the layer called St. Peter Sandstone -- climbing two miles in some cases.

Faith writes:Beecuzz they are buried usually in families within very thick flat sedimentary rocks stacked very very neatly and very deep under ideal conditions for fossilization, and not buried willy nilly.

CRR writes:Fossils have turned up in the gwrongh place many times and this continues today.

There are several mechanisms that separately and together could provide a Creationist explanation for the sequence in the fossil record.
— Ecological zonation
— Differential escape
— Hydrodynamic sorting
— Biogeographic provincialism

Faith writes:What, it didn't cover some part of the continent so I can't say "all?"

It stretches across the entire continent and is also found in the UK.

Where did I say there were?

Faith writes:The Flood wouldn't have had to cover every square inch of land with a sediment layer. Surely there would have been gaps in the load carried in the water, suirely there would have been areas eroded away after deposition.

Faith writes:The point is that there is no way to tell if the past was the same as the present,