Should intellectually honest fundamentalists live like the Amish?

How can we take what you say seriously when you can't justify it scientifically?Too bad...I was looking forward to another grand blunder(birds on dino shoulders,"pictures" of massive meteor strikes) when Jazzns crowds you into a corner.ABB

By having few corners if any the arguments can go circularly forever; locked in some paralell universe throwing intellectual dung at each other.If Faith wants to even pretend to play the science game, it would seem reasonable to most that she learn some science. The tiny bit she seems to know combined with her "logic" puts more importance to the saying... " A little knowledge is a dangerous thing"Not that it is important to science... I think geology has survived Faith's disagreement. But perhaps youngsters who lurk here will see that ignorance combined with circular rhetoric are a poor substitute for real world knowledge.ABB

It is hard to interpret evidence if you don't know the science. It is even more difficult to apply your brand of logic to this problem when you can't understand the premise. Precise logic with a faulty premise can lead to the exact opposite of the truth.ABB

Perhaps to your mind time periods are synonomous with locations, but to the geologists who put together this report https://www.ga.gov.au/bin/htsqr?file=oracle/provinces/web... they are clearly speaking about time periods.Note in the overview the two models that incorporate geologic time eras and depositional environments.ABB

Jazzns said... "Here is another one, what if I came up to you and said that Jesus was a tall east-asian roman soldier and I listed as my reference the Gospel of Brian which is right after Luke. Wouldn't I be completely betrying my complete ignorance about what is actually in the Bible?"Faith has failed to comment on similar Biblical analogies before. Perhaps the hypocrisy is too glaring even for her.ABB

It has been shown that geologists use deep age as a tool to figure how rock moved and changed over time to find valuable stuff. You seem to view the landscape as a static entity where things can be found by applying a recipe to the layers observed.What knowledgeable and experienced people are telling you is that the situation is more complex than one would expect from a scenario where all was layed down in a one short period. Your uninformed hunches count for little compared to the work of science.ABB

Yes. I have learned a fair amount about limestone formation as regards old age arguments since being here at EvC. I need to look at the chalk formation some more. Such formations indicate that rock was formed from the slow accumulation of sea creatures over a seabed. A nice steady depositional environment forming strata created by critters over time...amazing. Rates of accumulation that we can observe today that obviously extend back to deep time are even today forming the precursors to future rock...outstanding.I need to search the site and google 'reefs', as I seem to recall that some have been cored and exceed the YEC age limit.ABB