Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,819 Year: 3,076/9,624 Month: 921/1,588 Week: 104/223 Day: 2/13 Hour: 1/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Buz's seashell claim
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1467 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 16 of 23 (43082)
06-16-2003 9:59 PM
Reply to: Message 14 by mike the wiz
06-16-2003 8:45 PM


i've just looked at some pics at (photos)Noahsarksearch.com .
ok , i admitt no one is certain but there have been eyewitnesses,make what you will of it.
eh, I took a look - all I saw were some rocks. Eyewitnesses for what, exactly? Eyewitnesses to the flood? Eyewitnesses to some rocks?
Perhaps I was hasty in my survey - did you have a particular ark site to discuss? Why don't you start a new topic on it; that could be fun.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 14 by mike the wiz, posted 06-16-2003 8:45 PM mike the wiz has not replied

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


Message 17 of 23 (43092)
06-17-2003 12:43 AM
Reply to: Message 14 by mike the wiz
06-16-2003 8:45 PM


quote:
i've just looked at some pics at (photos)Noahsarksearch.com .
ok , i admitt no one is certain but there have been eyewitnesses,make what you will of it.
Quite astounding that no one has been able to photograph this 'arc' that is so plain to see. Maybe we should take up a collection to buy these 'researchers' a camera.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 14 by mike the wiz, posted 06-16-2003 8:45 PM mike the wiz has not replied

  
Gzus
Inactive Member


Message 18 of 23 (43101)
06-17-2003 6:24 AM
Reply to: Message 14 by mike the wiz
06-16-2003 8:45 PM


eye-witnesses? you mean tourists, goat herders? elaborate.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 14 by mike the wiz, posted 06-16-2003 8:45 PM mike the wiz has not replied

  
IrishRockhound
Member (Idle past 4437 days)
Posts: 569
From: Ireland
Joined: 05-19-2003


Message 19 of 23 (43108)
06-17-2003 7:50 AM


Here's the geological deal - in uplift and plate tectonics, bits of the sea floor can be caught between the two plates and end up on top of mountains. The fact that Mt. Everest is made of marine limestone is perfectly logical - the Himalayas were formed by the collision of India with the Eurasian plate. Before this, there was a shallow sea in between them where limestone could easily form.
If this is true then there should be evidence in the Himalayas of severe deformation. Anyone know if this is the case?
The Rock Hound

Replies to this message:
 Message 20 by PaulK, posted 06-17-2003 10:09 AM IrishRockhound has not replied
 Message 21 by Percy, posted 06-17-2003 10:41 AM IrishRockhound has replied

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


Message 20 of 23 (43121)
06-17-2003 10:09 AM
Reply to: Message 19 by IrishRockhound
06-17-2003 7:50 AM


Aren't the Himalayas still rising ? If there is no uplift going on I would like to see the explanation for that.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 19 by IrishRockhound, posted 06-17-2003 7:50 AM IrishRockhound has not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22394
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 21 of 23 (43125)
06-17-2003 10:41 AM
Reply to: Message 19 by IrishRockhound
06-17-2003 7:50 AM


IrishRockHound writes:
If this is true then there should be evidence in the Himalayas of severe deformation. Anyone know if this is the case?
This webpage has some information about deformation in the Himalayas, including some excellent pictures:
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 19 by IrishRockhound, posted 06-17-2003 7:50 AM IrishRockhound has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 22 by IrishRockhound, posted 06-19-2003 4:49 PM Percy has not replied

  
IrishRockhound
Member (Idle past 4437 days)
Posts: 569
From: Ireland
Joined: 05-19-2003


Message 22 of 23 (43440)
06-19-2003 4:49 PM
Reply to: Message 21 by Percy
06-17-2003 10:41 AM


And there you have it. The Himalayas are still moving today.
I wonder - how does this fit in with Genesis?
The Rock Hound
------------------
"Science constantly poses questions, where religion can only shout about answers."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 21 by Percy, posted 06-17-2003 10:41 AM Percy has not replied

  
NosyNed
Member
Posts: 8996
From: Canada
Joined: 04-04-2003


Message 23 of 23 (186559)
02-18-2005 1:54 PM


Bump For Faith.
In another thread on strata Faith brought up fossils in mountains as evidence for a flood.
NN writes:
If the marine fossils in mountains are evidence for the flood what would your global, one year, catastrophic model predict those fossils would be like? Do the actual fossils match that?
Faith writes:
As your links hint, this thread is not about the Flood, but I brought up the underwater example in answer to someone else's originating it somewhere in this discussion and underwater formation of sedimentary layers has to be acknowledged as evidence for it.
But the brief answer to your question is that if they are marine creatures I would expect that's all they have to be "like" for the point to be made.
Perhaps you can start by clarifying what you mean by "like" in this case.

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024