Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 60 (9208 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: Skylink
Post Volume: Total: 919,430 Year: 6,687/9,624 Month: 27/238 Week: 27/22 Day: 0/9 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   The TRVE history of the Flood...
Pressie
Member (Idle past 225 days)
Posts: 2103
From: Pretoria, SA
Joined: 06-18-2010


Message 556 of 1352 (806517)
04-26-2017 6:30 AM
Reply to: Message 528 by Coyote
04-25-2017 11:11 AM


Re: More nonsense
Coyote, they will never discuss your research, because they can't find anything about it on some creationist website. The so-called "scientific" creationists deliberately ignore you while their sheep don't want to know anything about you or your reseach.
Edited by Pressie, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 528 by Coyote, posted 04-25-2017 11:11 AM Coyote has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 572 by CRR, posted 04-27-2017 7:59 AM Pressie has not replied

  
Pressie
Member (Idle past 225 days)
Posts: 2103
From: Pretoria, SA
Joined: 06-18-2010


Message 557 of 1352 (806519)
04-26-2017 6:44 AM
Reply to: Message 555 by Faith
04-26-2017 6:26 AM


Re: Erosion and unconformities in Cratonic Sequences
Faith writes:
Since you recognize these imaginary unconformities so easily,..
Unconformities are really easy to identify in all those rocks I've studied.
Faith writes:
... please identify the six that are supposedly represented on the chart of the Cratonic Sequences...
I'm not too sure why you think there's only six unconformities in the rocks I've studied deposited on the Kaapvaal Craton. I found many, many more.
Faith writes:
... and give their geographic location. Thank you.
Sure. It involves the Barberton, Wits, Transvaal, Gravelotte, Dwyka, Witteberg, Vryheid, Bokkeveld, Table Mountain, Vanrhynsdorp, Malmesbury, Vaalkoppies, etc. etc. All in South Africa.
Edited by Pressie, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 555 by Faith, posted 04-26-2017 6:26 AM Faith has not replied

  
Pressie
Member (Idle past 225 days)
Posts: 2103
From: Pretoria, SA
Joined: 06-18-2010


(1)
Message 558 of 1352 (806520)
04-26-2017 6:55 AM
Reply to: Message 550 by CRR
04-26-2017 4:29 AM


Re: Six "Flood" Arguments Creationists Can't Answer
This would be very interesting.
CRR writes:
OK, 5. Fossil Sequence. I'll do some research and get back to you.
I take it that CRR is going to unearth a fossil.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 550 by CRR, posted 04-26-2017 4:29 AM CRR has not replied

  
Admin
Director
Posts: 13107
From: EvC Forum
Joined: 06-14-2002


Message 559 of 1352 (806528)
04-26-2017 8:24 AM
Reply to: Message 543 by Faith
04-25-2017 4:18 PM


Re: Let's not keep arguing the same old basics
Faith writes:
Not according to Admin, when it's the foundational assumption for the arguments.
From my Message 433:
quote:
Please from this point on discuss the history of the flood, i.e., what happened during the flood and when, and how we know. The Bible can be used as a starting point, but corroborating real world evidence must also be supplied.

--Percy
EvC Forum Director

This message is a reply to:
 Message 543 by Faith, posted 04-25-2017 4:18 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 560 by Faith, posted 04-26-2017 8:30 AM Admin has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1694 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 560 of 1352 (806529)
04-26-2017 8:30 AM
Reply to: Message 559 by Admin
04-26-2017 8:24 AM


Re: Let's not keep arguing the same old basics
I've read this as meaning corroborating evidence for claims about the Flood -- although these may have originated in the Bible -- but not for the Bible itself.
Edited by Faith, : ATTEMPT AT GREATER CLARITY

This message is a reply to:
 Message 559 by Admin, posted 04-26-2017 8:24 AM Admin has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 561 by Admin, posted 04-26-2017 8:35 AM Faith has not replied

  
Admin
Director
Posts: 13107
From: EvC Forum
Joined: 06-14-2002


Message 561 of 1352 (806530)
04-26-2017 8:35 AM
Reply to: Message 560 by Faith
04-26-2017 8:30 AM


Re: Let's not keep arguing the same old basics
In this thread you can't argue that something is true because the Bible is true. You have to supply corroborating real world evidence.

--Percy
EvC Forum Director

This message is a reply to:
 Message 560 by Faith, posted 04-26-2017 8:30 AM Faith has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 571 by CRR, posted 04-27-2017 7:57 AM Admin has seen this message but not replied

  
edge
Member (Idle past 1956 days)
Posts: 4696
From: Colorado, USA
Joined: 01-09-2002


Message 562 of 1352 (806587)
04-26-2017 2:46 PM
Reply to: Message 551 by Faith
04-26-2017 5:03 AM


Re: Erosion and unconformities in Cratonic Sequences
Both of which are imaginary, interestingly enough.
So, you assert.
Perhaps you could offer some specific evidence for these?
You have been given the facts of paleosoils, plant root horizons, trackways, etc., etc. If you deny that they exist, that is another problem.
Where for instance have these unconformities been identified?
Well, the Grand Canyon has several of them.
Unlikely they all exist in any one geo column, right? So you must have to jump around to locate them.
It is even more unlikely that any geologists would expect them to exist in one location.
And what about those "emergent" mountains?
Do you not understand the term 'emergent'?
The Rockies did form rather dramatically to the west of the Cretaceous Seaway, but not until after all the strata were laid down as I think of it, ...
Sure, all of the strata present in the area were affected.
While you are thinking, think up a reason why younger sediments in the Rocky Mountains are unaffected.
... and since your evidence is going to be more imaginary conjurings there's no reason to think it any better than mine.
Again, you base this on an assertion that is not in evidence.
I think of course of the imaginary mountains Geology has erected from the angular unconformity at the base of the Grand Canyon.
It is not clear what you mean here.
Nothing but airy fantasy but you expect us all to treat Geology as evidenced Science.
If you have a better explanation for the evidence, this would be a good time to present it.
I've given more reasonable evidence for the Flood over my time at EvC.
Sorry, I missed it. All I've seen is wishful thinking on your part, an attempt to prop up your religious mythology. You do not explain evaporites, or dinosaur nests forming in the middle of a flood. In fact, there are a lot of things you have failed to explain, but we can start with some of the things that have been mentioned on this thread. I know that Coyote is waiting on you.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 551 by Faith, posted 04-26-2017 5:03 AM Faith has not replied

  
edge
Member (Idle past 1956 days)
Posts: 4696
From: Colorado, USA
Joined: 01-09-2002


Message 563 of 1352 (806590)
04-26-2017 3:10 PM
Reply to: Message 555 by Faith
04-26-2017 6:26 AM


Re: Erosion and unconformities in Cratonic Sequences
Since you recognize these imaginary unconformities so easily, please identify the six that are supposedly represented on the chart of the Cratonic Sequences and give their geographic location. Thank you.
Well, I am familiar with some of them having worked in the areas; and I have mentioned some to you already in different context.
One is the Zuni sequence which ended with the formation of an unconformity on which dinosaurs walked and the coal fields of the eastern Rocky Mountains and the high plains.
Another is your favorite, the Sauk Sequence which started with inundation of the unconformity at the base of the Tapeats Sandstone. This one is not called the 'Great Unconformity' for nothing. It is truly continental in scale.
Another that I am familiar with is the Absarokan Sequence which started during the Pennsylvanian Period, in 'guess where.' Do you remember what I said about that?
If you click on the links for each sequence located on the Wikipedia page that I posted earlier, you can go to a description of each sequence with more detail. I may try to do that again later when I have some time.
Once again, I refer you to Coyote's questions. What you see here is personal experience with actual data and it is all being presented to you by Pressie, Coyote and myself. With what can you match that experience?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 555 by Faith, posted 04-26-2017 6:26 AM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 564 by Faith, posted 04-26-2017 6:54 PM edge has replied
 Message 567 by Faith, posted 04-26-2017 10:46 PM edge has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1694 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 564 of 1352 (806599)
04-26-2017 6:54 PM
Reply to: Message 563 by edge
04-26-2017 3:10 PM


Re: Erosion and unconformities in Cratonic Sequences
Your posts are too cryptic for me to follow, and I think you should post the link again instead of asking me to go find it.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 563 by edge, posted 04-26-2017 3:10 PM edge has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 565 by edge, posted 04-26-2017 7:56 PM Faith has replied

  
edge
Member (Idle past 1956 days)
Posts: 4696
From: Colorado, USA
Joined: 01-09-2002


Message 565 of 1352 (806602)
04-26-2017 7:56 PM
Reply to: Message 564 by Faith
04-26-2017 6:54 PM


Re: Erosion and unconformities in Cratonic Sequences
Your posts are too cryptic for me to follow, and I think you should post the link again instead of asking me to go find it.
Okay, it's going to take more work than I thought. I had thought that there were direct links, but I've been to too many Wiki sites to remember properly
Here is an example:
Lets talk about the Tippecanoe Sequence, mid-Ordovician to early Devonian in age.
Here is a quote from John Morris, of all people:
quote:
"Each sequence begins with a basal sandstone containing sand grains of lessening diameter as one moves upward through the layer. This is typically covered by shale or siltstone composed of tiny particles, which in turn is covered by extremely tiny, precipitated particles. The lowest megasequence is the Sauk Megasequence, which was followed by an erosional unconformity. The overlying megasequence is called the Tippecanoe Megasequence. The pure quartz sandstone at its base is called the St. Peter Sandstone, and above that lie shale and limestone beds, also followed by an unconformity.
(bold added for emphasis) The St. Peter Sandstone | The Institute for Creation Research
So, the Tippecanoe Sequence, as described by Morris is bound at top and bottom by unconformities. The basal unit, overlying the lower boundary is the Saint Peter Sandstone.
In that case, where ever we see the Saint Peter Sandstone, it should overlie an unconformity which is the lower bound to the Tippecanoe Sequence.
Here is a diagram showing the Saint Peter Sandstone and equivalent sandstone formations across North America.
http://www.icr.org/i/articles/af/st_peter_sandstone_wide.jpg
So, if you want to find that unconformity, just go to any location within the brown-colored area on the map. Drill a borehole if necessary. You will find the unconformity.
I'm not sure, but the basal Tippecanoe (St. Peter Sandstone) may correlate with parts of the Old Red Sandstone in northern Europe, attesting to the intercontinental status of the Tippecanoe Sequence.
Now, do you really want me to do this for each sequence and each boundary in the chart that you presented?
Edited by edge, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 564 by Faith, posted 04-26-2017 6:54 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 566 by Faith, posted 04-26-2017 9:18 PM edge has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1694 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 566 of 1352 (806608)
04-26-2017 9:18 PM
Reply to: Message 565 by edge
04-26-2017 7:56 PM


Re: Erosion and unconformities in Cratonic Sequences
OK, what do these unconformities look like? How would I recognize it?
And tell me again what the significance of these unconformities is understood to be?
Now, do you really want me to do this for each sequence and each boundary in the chart that you presented?
Not if there is reason to think they all follow pretty much the same pattern Morris described.
ABE: By the way, the link to the St Peter Sandstone article only goes to a tiny map of the US.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 565 by edge, posted 04-26-2017 7:56 PM edge has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 568 by edge, posted 04-27-2017 12:10 AM Faith has not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1694 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 567 of 1352 (806627)
04-26-2017 10:46 PM
Reply to: Message 563 by edge
04-26-2017 3:10 PM


Re: Erosion and unconformities in Cratonic Sequences
You mention Coyote's questions. I can't find them. Please keep in mind that sometimes I can't digest everything in your posts; probably often. Sometimes it's a big accomplishment to get any of it and the rest has to be ignored. I'm used to Coyote mostly making remarks about radiometric timing and may not have read the post you are talking about in the first place. And I usually regret having any conversation at all with Pressie so I wouldn't get that reference either. You're hard enough to deal with hut there are others who are actually harder.
AND: I don't expect to match anybody's experience. If it's clearly articulated it can be very helpful to hear about it, but sometimes people are good workers in their field but not good with words. If I get a clear picture of what someone is talking about then it may raise questions that help organize my Flood point of view, not that such a result would please you of course.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 563 by edge, posted 04-26-2017 3:10 PM edge has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 569 by edge, posted 04-27-2017 12:22 AM Faith has replied

  
edge
Member (Idle past 1956 days)
Posts: 4696
From: Colorado, USA
Joined: 01-09-2002


Message 568 of 1352 (806634)
04-27-2017 12:10 AM
Reply to: Message 566 by Faith
04-26-2017 9:18 PM


Re: Erosion and unconformities in Cratonic Sequences
OK, what do these unconformities look like? How would I recognize it?
You have been shown a number of unconformities, mostly denied by yourself. Some are only known by mapping large areas, others by age dates. I have already explained to you about erosional surfaces, paleosoils and trace fossils.
And tell me again what the significance of these unconformities is understood to be?
They represent missing geological record and are boundaries between major geological events.
Not if there is reason to think they all follow pretty much the same pattern Morris described.
Eventually they would. This one was relatively easy, however.
ABE: By the way, the link to the St Peter Sandstone article only goes to a tiny map of the US.
I believe there are two links in the post.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 566 by Faith, posted 04-26-2017 9:18 PM Faith has not replied

  
edge
Member (Idle past 1956 days)
Posts: 4696
From: Colorado, USA
Joined: 01-09-2002


(4)
Message 569 of 1352 (806636)
04-27-2017 12:22 AM
Reply to: Message 567 by Faith
04-26-2017 10:46 PM


Re: Erosion and unconformities in Cratonic Sequences
You mention Coyote's questions. I can't find them. Please keep in mind that sometimes I can't digest everything in your posts; probably often. Sometimes it's a big accomplishment to get any of it and the rest has to be ignored.
Well, like with so many disciplines, people spend years studying these things at university. I can't apologize for it being a complex science.
I'm used to Coyote mostly making remarks about radiometric timing and may not have read the post you are talking about in the first place. And I usually regret having any conversation at all with Pressie so I wouldn't get that reference either. You're hard enough to deal with hut there are others who are actually harder.
Well, Pressie is a bit impatient, but it wouldn't hurt to learn something from his posts. Coyote has a different approach being an archaeologist, but the tools and reasoning are very similar to geology. I understand both.
AND: I don't expect to match anybody's experience. If it's clearly articulated it can be very helpful to hear about it, but sometimes people are good workers in their field but not good with words. If I get a clear picture of what someone is talking about then it may raise questions that help organize my Flood point of view, not that such a result would please you of course.
The impression is that you are not learning anything; in fact it seems more that you refuse to learn anything. That is frustrating to people who have spent their careers studying a scientific profession. In fact, in many cases, it is insulting.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 567 by Faith, posted 04-26-2017 10:46 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 570 by CRR, posted 04-27-2017 7:55 AM edge has not replied
 Message 583 by Faith, posted 04-30-2017 10:41 AM edge has not replied

  
CRR
Member (Idle past 2492 days)
Posts: 579
From: Australia
Joined: 10-19-2016


(1)
Message 570 of 1352 (806654)
04-27-2017 7:55 AM
Reply to: Message 569 by edge
04-27-2017 12:22 AM


Learning
People learn easier if they are taught rather than abused for being ignorant.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 569 by edge, posted 04-27-2017 12:22 AM edge has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 578 by Taq, posted 04-27-2017 10:42 AM CRR has not replied
 Message 580 by ringo, posted 04-27-2017 12:42 PM CRR 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