Flood not the Cause of the Grand Canyon -- Not a Biased Opinion

Addressing rebuttals is explicitly addressed in the Forum Guidelines:

4. Points should be supported with evidence and/or reasoned argumentation. Address rebuttals through the introduction of additional evidence or by enlarging upon the argument. Do not repeat previous points without further elaboration. Avoid bare assertions.

That you were ignoring rebuttals was why others began speculating whether you were a troll. It's why the same questions were asked of you again and again. If you don't follow rule 4 there's no reason for you to be here.This is not a negotiation, so I'm suspending you for 24 hours. Whether you continue to post here or not is up to you, but if you don't like suspensions of posting privileges that will gradually increase in length then follow the Forum Guidelines, argue the evidence and not person, and stop posting nonsensically with items like "cliffs the color of coal". The moderators are not here to tutor you on how to do this. Arguing rationally and forthrightly is not rocket science, you should be able to figure it out.

---

--	Percy
	EvC Forum Director

Here's the photo you're referring to: In other words, though there's no mention in any of the literature of coal at the Grand Canyon, you're going to argue that rocks that are dark are former trees that have turned to coal. No one has ever found coal in the layers of the Grand Canyon. Not all dark rocks are coal, not by a long stretch. A couple hundred years of people visiting the Grand Canyon, including a large number of geologists, have somehow failed to note that these dark rocks are coal.You are continuing the same line of argument as earlier. This is no different than the journalism student's "cliffs the color of coal" phrase that you promoted earlier as evidence of coal, only this time it is you looking at pictures and saying, in effect, "They're the color of coal, therefore they're coal."If you weren't so obviously sincere I would give you another 24-hour suspension, but please get a clue. The Grand Canyon is under no obligation to conform itself to your preconceptions. Whether or not the Grand Canyon layers were deposited by the flood, there's no coal there. Please stop arguing as if the Grand Canyon had been discovered just last week and we know nothing about it. It is probably one of the most studied geological structures in the world.If you've been following the General discussion of moderation procedures: The Sequel thread then you know I believe that explaining things like this to people doesn't help, but some people think I'm wrong. Please help prove me wrong and drop this coal argument until you have actual evidence.

---

--	Percy
	EvC Forum Director

Hi Peace,Your efforts to base your arguments upon evidence are admirable, but the evidence has to make sense. I don't think I could be any more successful than anyone else in this thread at persuading you of the ridiculousness of some of your arguments. If you don't see this yourself then you don't belong here. If you do see this then you are a troll and you don't belong here.I don't believe rational thinking can be explained to inherently chaotic thinkers. I believe this would be a worthless exercise. All I can do is try to motivate you to offer evidence in a rational way. If you'd like to remain here on a consistent basis then please stop wasting people's time with silly evidence.You're suspended for 24 hours.

---

--	Percy
	EvC Forum Director