Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,806 Year: 3,063/9,624 Month: 908/1,588 Week: 91/223 Day: 2/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   The TRVE history of the Flood...
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.3


Message 1131 of 1352 (812655)
06-19-2017 8:11 AM
Reply to: Message 1130 by Faith
06-19-2017 8:01 AM


Re: Evidence for the Flood revisited
quote:
That's explained by the horizontal movement between the strata and the Supergroup, which abraded it down flat and kept the fault from going any further than that contact.
That might be how you try to explain it, but it doesn't exactly make a lot of sense. Especially as your "mounding" is supposed to be taking place at about the same time.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1130 by Faith, posted 06-19-2017 8:01 AM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1132 by Faith, posted 06-19-2017 8:29 AM PaulK has replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.3


Message 1133 of 1352 (812657)
06-19-2017 8:36 AM
Reply to: Message 1132 by Faith
06-19-2017 8:29 AM


Re: Evidence for the Flood revisited
quote:
Yes, "flat" should probably be "smoothed" because of the mounded rise over the Supergroup
That is not at all my point. The point is that it is extremely odd to have the same rock strongly resistant to deformation in one case and happily accommodating - in your opinion, quite rapid - deformation at about the same time.
quote:
I'm aware of all this and I know you are going to invent any old semantic problem you can to try to debunk everything I say but I can't keep up with all your tiwsts and turns all the time.
By which you mean that you are going to resort to lying to "win". Well I've been arguing with creationists long enough to be used to it.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1132 by Faith, posted 06-19-2017 8:29 AM Faith has not replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.3


(1)
Message 1135 of 1352 (812664)
06-19-2017 9:07 AM
Reply to: Message 1134 by Faith
06-19-2017 8:45 AM


Re: Evidence for the Flood revisited
quote:
The rising had to occur after the strata were all in place no matter how you deny it,
I will simply point out that the post that you are replying to does not bother to deny it.
quote:
...and the movement of the boulder nicely fits the abrading of the Supergroup, the cutting off the faults, the confinement of the granite and the schist beneath the GU and etc.
Or in other words you are just assuming your "explanation" despite the evidence.
At least that shows that I was right to dismiss that argument.
quote:
I can
Then perhaps you can tell us what it is. (And if you need the context just look back at your message. It's easy)
quote:
Strata wouldn't lay down over that curve, the curve that exists in the entire stack.
That is obviously irrelevant. (Technically you are completely wrong, but I'll assume that you mean the tilting). You can't show a relationship between the tilt and the mounding by only talking about the mounding. Your argument in this point cannot possibly be valid for that reason alone.
quote:
They were eroded by the movement between the strata and the tilted group. The strata were all in place, the lower strata were tilted by tectonic force, raising the whole stack above, shown by the curving of the stack over the Supergroup, showing that it was all pushed up by the tectonic force, the fault lines were cut off by the abrasion at the contact etc.
Assuming a single event doesn't show that it is a single event, no matter how hard you try to explain away the evidence. Even a good explanation wouldn't be positive evidence - and an explanation this bad weighs against you.
quote:
The vertical movement was abruptly halted by the horizontal movement at the GU contact, cutting off the fault and its step.
As I have pointed out that seems inconsistent with the mounding. And the idea of the erosion happening underground is rather daft when you consider the evidence. How, for instance would the monadnocks be formed ?
quote:
The erosion and the movement of the boulder, the cutting off of the fault and its step, the confinement of the magma -- granite, schist etc. The horizontal movement would easily accomplish all that and without it you'd probably have your step and the magma would have penetrated up into the strata.
You call it easy, I call it impossible. That's why I asked for evidence, not your opinion.
quote:
Why should it? The forces weren't necessarily perfectly equal, there was enough force below to push up the stack which caused the curved rise in it.
I can't think of any reason to expect things to behave completely differently in this case.
quote:
Evidence? Ha! There's a river at the bottom of the canyon, that's your evidence. The canyon is far too huge to have been cut by that river, it would have taken cataracts of receding Flood water to do that. And the river is what's left of all that.
Forgetting about inconvenient evidence hardly helps your case Faith. My evidence that the river carved the Canyon are the meanders - features of a mature river, not raging floodwaters.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1134 by Faith, posted 06-19-2017 8:45 AM Faith has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1136 by jar, posted 06-19-2017 9:30 AM PaulK has not replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.3


Message 1232 of 1352 (813487)
06-28-2017 12:50 AM
Reply to: Message 1230 by CRR
06-28-2017 12:39 AM


Re: ‘Peleg: for in his days was the earth divided’.
quote:
Ancient documents are consistent with the total accuracy of the Bible’s chronoloby
Not in any significant way. If you assume that Babylon is not Babel, then it must be founded at some time after the birth of Peleg. But archaeology makes it clear that by the time Babylon was founded there were people all over the Earth, and had been for a long time - hardly consistent with Babylon being founded shortly after the division.
As for ancient documents perhaps you would like to look at the Sumerian Kings List and work out when Eridu was founded. Or perhaps you will trust archaeology instead.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1230 by CRR, posted 06-28-2017 12:39 AM CRR has not replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.3


Message 1264 of 1352 (813949)
07-03-2017 3:30 AM
Reply to: Message 1263 by NoNukes
07-03-2017 3:11 AM


Re: Flood waters receeded into depths
Indeed. If ICANT had bothered to check his concordance he would see that the word translated as "tongue" can mean "language".

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1263 by NoNukes, posted 07-03-2017 3:11 AM NoNukes has not replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.3


Message 1298 of 1352 (814812)
07-13-2017 12:19 AM
Reply to: Message 1294 by Faith
07-12-2017 11:58 PM


Re: Strata (2)
quote:
The layers themselves and their fossil contents, no matter how sorted, speak of a worldwide water event.
Only in the sense that they could not possibly be created by a single short-term worldwide water event. Which has been shown again and again.
(And even making that claim is contrary to your assertions that we can't know what the Flood would do and that it is impossible to work out what happened in the past through physical evidence)
quote:
That and the obvious impossibility of a slab of rock that covers thousands of square miles ever representing a period of long ages in which anything lived,
Oh this is your silly strawman about the "fact" that nothing can live in a depositional environment - despite all the creatures living in depositions environments today ?
quote:
...that's enough evidence to make all the details irrelevant.
Not quite. The fact that your "evidence" points against the Flood is damning, of course. However fairness requires us to go further before rejecting the Flood altogether.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1294 by Faith, posted 07-12-2017 11:58 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1300 by Faith, posted 07-13-2017 12:42 AM PaulK has replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.3


(1)
Message 1301 of 1352 (814815)
07-13-2017 12:46 AM
Reply to: Message 1295 by Faith
07-13-2017 12:13 AM


Re: Strata (2)
quote:
Second thought: Rather than such impressive regularity of the appearance of particular fossils in particular layers being any kind of support for the ToE, it suggests something mechanical about their deposition.
The big problem for that idea is that the sorting does not correlate with any properties that would support mechanical sorting.
quote:
Why should evolution produce particular generations of any creature in such an orderly fashion? That doesn't happen in real time, why should it have happened over the time span of the Geological Time Scale
It seems rather obvious to me. Descendants must live after their ancestors. Thus evolution predicts a temporal order related to the taxonomic tree of life. And naturally this temporal order must show up in the fossil record if it is a long-term history of life on Earth.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1295 by Faith, posted 07-13-2017 12:13 AM Faith has not replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.3


Message 1303 of 1352 (814817)
07-13-2017 12:54 AM
Reply to: Message 1300 by Faith
07-13-2017 12:42 AM


Re: Strata (2)
quote:
Um, nothing could have lived in a "depositional environment" that became a rock in a stack of rocks. Think think think thinkity think.
Go on explain it to me. Or maybe you should try thinking about it first.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1300 by Faith, posted 07-13-2017 12:42 AM Faith has not replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.3


(1)
Message 1305 of 1352 (814819)
07-13-2017 1:00 AM
Reply to: Message 1302 by Faith
07-13-2017 12:51 AM


Re: Strata (2)
quote:
Oh, and show me those "depositional environments" on which things are living today that are composed of just one particular sediment without mixture, as so many of the strata are, and flat as a pancake too, just as the strata are.
Walther's law should help you answer that. If you understood why the sequences associated with transgressions and regressions are associated with those events.
Deserts are pretty flat. River deltas, too.
quote:
nd you could also point out the singularity of the living things living there as well, since what we get in the strata are a select bunch of organisms, a bunch of trilobites, a bunch of dinosaurs and whatnot, rather the range of living things we see today.
If you can find trilobites living alongside non-avian dinosaurs today I'd like to see it. However your point is false. At most locations a whole range of different life forms are found. E.g. At one of my favourite sites - when I was young - I found plentiful remains of sea urchins, crinoids, assorted bivalves and other molluscs.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1302 by Faith, posted 07-13-2017 12:51 AM Faith has not replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.3


(1)
Message 1331 of 1352 (814901)
07-13-2017 3:33 PM
Reply to: Message 1325 by Faith
07-13-2017 2:54 PM


Re: Strata (3)
quote:
I've argued for the Flood sufficiently already, the rest will eventually fall in place.
Indeed you have shown that the Flood is a ridiculous falsehood. For the rest of us everything else had fallen into place - the old Earth and evolution make sense of what we see where the Flood utterly fails.
quote:
We've got a stack of flat sedimentary rocks originally about three miles deep, clearly deposited in water as individual layers and not accumulated over time, many covering thousands of square mile
In reality we have rocks - which are sometimes far from flat even in areas we have discussed, and not all deposited by water. We have clear evidence that they were deposited over long periods of time. Maybe you will some day catch up with the exciting new developments of the 19th Century
quote:
We know there was a Flood. We know roughly when it occurred. We know its purpose was to kill all things that lived on the land except the few preserved on a large boat. All the evidence shows exactly that.
Perhaps you can tell us what evidence gives us even a "rough" date for the Flood in line with your expectations. As for the rest the evidence that you refer to clearly does not show any such thing.
quote:
Imputing millions of years of living things to a rock is nonsensical. There really is no need to consider other factors.
Your evidence "for" the Flood clearly supports the old Earth and evolution. That certainly seems worth considering to me.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1325 by Faith, posted 07-13-2017 2:54 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1332 by Faith, posted 07-13-2017 3:38 PM PaulK has replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.3


(2)
Message 1333 of 1352 (814903)
07-13-2017 3:54 PM
Reply to: Message 1332 by Faith
07-13-2017 3:38 PM


Re: Strata (3)
I note that you do not offer any evidence for even roughly dating the Flood to the time you suppose it happened. You claimed to have it. What is it ?
quote:
All the strata were originally laid down flat. Many were distorted afterward by tectonic forces that bent and twisted them -- all in blocks that show it occurred after they were all laid down.
Unfortunately for you there are places where later strata were clearly laid down after the strata were folded - sometimes long after. And we have discussed examples.
quote:
Sorry, the Flood is the best explanation for it all no matter what delusions have captured your imagination.
We have solid dating evidence, you dismiss it on grounds that are clearly invalid.
We have the order in the fossil record, which you have no sensible explanation for.
We have clear evidence of tectonic forces bending the rocks before later strata were deposited - and large amounts of erosion between the events.
We have desert deposits.
We have evapourites deposited during your "Flood"
We have lava flows that spread under the air, not the water.
It is those who would try to pretend that this evidence does not exust who are deluded.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1332 by Faith, posted 07-13-2017 3:38 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1334 by Faith, posted 07-13-2017 4:03 PM PaulK has replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.3


(1)
Message 1335 of 1352 (814905)
07-13-2017 4:10 PM
Reply to: Message 1334 by Faith
07-13-2017 4:03 PM


Re: Strata (3)
quote:
All I need is the Bible for the timing. God's word you know. I give other kinds of evidence where there is no Biblical information.
In other words you claimed to have evidence you did not have.
quote:
The only places there seem to be strata laid down after tectonic disturbance are angular unconformities which I've explained as occurring after those strata were laid down.
Well, you invented crazy nonsense to avoid admitting that you were wrong, but that's all.
And then there's all the other evidence that the Flood fails to explain - and more than I listed in my previous post. Dismiss it if you want to put your interpretation of the Bible first, but at least be honest about it.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1334 by Faith, posted 07-13-2017 4:03 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1336 by Faith, posted 07-13-2017 4:29 PM PaulK has replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.3


(1)
Message 1337 of 1352 (814908)
07-13-2017 4:37 PM
Reply to: Message 1336 by Faith
07-13-2017 4:29 PM


Re: Strata (3)
So all you've got is falsehood and a refusal to a knowledge the evidence.
Hardly a great case.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1336 by Faith, posted 07-13-2017 4:29 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1338 by Faith, posted 07-13-2017 4:43 PM PaulK has replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.3


Message 1339 of 1352 (814913)
07-13-2017 4:48 PM
Reply to: Message 1338 by Faith
07-13-2017 4:43 PM


Re: Strata (3)
Laugh at the truth all you like. You still don't have a case.
That's why you don't even try to discuss the evidence.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1338 by Faith, posted 07-13-2017 4:43 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1340 by Faith, posted 07-13-2017 4:49 PM PaulK has replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.3


Message 1343 of 1352 (814919)
07-13-2017 4:59 PM
Reply to: Message 1340 by Faith
07-13-2017 4:49 PM


Re: Strata (3)
The fact that you have to ignore the evidence proves that you lost.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1340 by Faith, posted 07-13-2017 4:49 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1344 by Faith, posted 07-13-2017 5:01 PM PaulK has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024