Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
5 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 13/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Growing the Geologic Column
Percy
Member
Posts: 22392
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.3


(1)
Message 586 of 740 (734893)
08-03-2014 9:52 AM
Reply to: Message 423 by Faith
07-30-2014 8:05 AM


Re: An important admission
Faith writes:
I think it's just plain glaringly obvious that the strata and the fossils HAVE to be explained by the worldwide Flood.
Instead of telling us it's "plain glaringly obvious" you must explain the interpretation of the evidence that makes clear how it's "plain glaringly obvious." This would require providing an explanation consistent with what we already know about geologic processes and with known physical laws, something you've never been able to do.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 423 by Faith, posted 07-30-2014 8:05 AM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 587 by Faith, posted 08-03-2014 9:54 AM Percy has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 587 of 740 (734895)
08-03-2014 9:54 AM
Reply to: Message 586 by Percy
08-03-2014 9:52 AM


Re: An important admission
It's obvious, take it or leave it.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 586 by Percy, posted 08-03-2014 9:52 AM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 589 by PaulK, posted 08-03-2014 10:03 AM Faith has not replied
 Message 650 by Percy, posted 08-04-2014 11:46 AM Faith has not replied

  
Coragyps
Member (Idle past 734 days)
Posts: 5553
From: Snyder, Texas, USA
Joined: 11-12-2002


Message 588 of 740 (734896)
08-03-2014 9:56 AM
Reply to: Message 585 by Faith
08-03-2014 9:28 AM


Re: New depositions strangely different from old strata
That Gulf Coast diagram most assuredly shows present-day sedimentation. Iowa and Illinois send new dirt down the Mississippi every day to pile up there in the light yellow "Plio-pleistocene" in that diagram. It isn't "the muddy Mississip" for no reason.

"The Christian church, in its attitude toward science, shows the mind of a more or less enlightened man of the Thirteenth Century. It no longer believes that the earth is flat, but it is still convinced that prayer can cure after medicine fails." H L Mencken

This message is a reply to:
 Message 585 by Faith, posted 08-03-2014 9:28 AM Faith has not replied

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


(1)
Message 589 of 740 (734897)
08-03-2014 10:03 AM
Reply to: Message 587 by Faith
08-03-2014 9:54 AM


Re: An important admission
quote:
It's obvious, take it or leave it.
It's obvious that YEC has no viable explanation for the geological and fossil records. That's why you need to insist that the Flood did it, against all reason.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 587 by Faith, posted 08-03-2014 9:54 AM Faith has not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 590 of 740 (734898)
08-03-2014 10:03 AM
Reply to: Message 573 by edge
08-02-2014 11:54 PM


Re: whatever
Abrasion with the upper layer as it tilted and slid beneath it.
You can say whatever you want, but there is no evidence for this.
Sure there is, the very erosion you attribute to millions of years of wearing down a former mountain range.
Quartzite layer protruding upward simply too hard to erode so it must have cut into the sandstone.
Again, zero evidence.
Sure there is. Huge quartzite boulder buried in the Tapeats sandstone well above the contact line.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 573 by edge, posted 08-02-2014 11:54 PM edge has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 593 by edge, posted 08-03-2014 10:17 AM Faith has not replied

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


(1)
Message 591 of 740 (734899)
08-03-2014 10:04 AM
Reply to: Message 584 by Faith
08-03-2014 9:25 AM


Re: other evidence the strata were all in place before the faulting
It certainly does no such thing, and the analysis I gave of the order of the strata in relation to the faults shows the opposite.
Maybe you could try again. I know about your claim that the strata a 'paralle' (which is demonstrably untrue), but other than that, you do not explain how major faults affect the lower strata, but not the upper strata, nor how the deformation increases downward.
You also ignore the fact that none of the major faults penetrate the Tertiary on this diagram.
You just blow these observations off.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 584 by Faith, posted 08-03-2014 9:25 AM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 592 by Faith, posted 08-03-2014 10:06 AM edge has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 592 of 740 (734900)
08-03-2014 10:06 AM
Reply to: Message 591 by edge
08-03-2014 10:04 AM


Re: other evidence the strata were all in place before the faulting
I don't ignore anything, I've talked about it and if you can't see what I mean by parallel you have no ability to see or think at all and why should I talk to someone who makes such a mess of a simple communication. End of contact with you.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 591 by edge, posted 08-03-2014 10:04 AM edge has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 594 by edge, posted 08-03-2014 10:22 AM Faith has replied

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


(1)
Message 593 of 740 (734901)
08-03-2014 10:17 AM
Reply to: Message 590 by Faith
08-03-2014 10:03 AM


Re: whatever
Sure there is, the very erosion you attribute to millions of years of wearing down a former mountain range.
Have you ever seen one of these detachment zones? The deformation is rather obvious creating very distinctive rock types. We don't see them at the Great Unconformity. We see an irregular surface produced by erosion with rounded cobbles of the lower unit incorporated into the upper unit. We we basal conglomerates and sandstones, channeling and recessive weathering of softer units. We even see overlap of the Tapeats sands on high ground formed by resistant knobs of Shinumo Quartzite.
None of these things should be there, Faith. They should be planed off by a shear zone that has no regard for irregularities for the primary features of a sedimentary setting. And yet there they are. You have not explained this.
And I haven't even gotten into what a detachment fault looks like...
Sure there is. Huge quartzite boulder buried in the Tapeats sandstone well above the contact line.
Yes, and I would expect that. Fragments of the lower (older) zone in the (younger) upper one are common above unconformities. We often find this, though the opposite would be much harder to explain. If your scenario were correct, I'd expect a lot more ambiguity in this relationship.
Your boulder only indicates an age relationship with a boulder rolling off of a quartzite highland.
ABE: Could you please explain how this boulder supports your position? What are the features that make you think it is of a tectonic origin?
Edited by edge, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 590 by Faith, posted 08-03-2014 10:03 AM Faith has not replied

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


Message 594 of 740 (734902)
08-03-2014 10:22 AM
Reply to: Message 592 by Faith
08-03-2014 10:06 AM


Re: other evidence the strata were all in place before the faulting
I don't ignore anything, I've talked about it and if you can't see what I mean by parallel you have no ability to see or think at all and why should I talk to someone who makes such a mess of a simple communication. End of contact with you.
I can understand why communicating with me makes you uncomfortable. No one likes to have there cherished notions questioned. However, there are ramifications to your deformational scenario. Would you like to know more of them?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 592 by Faith, posted 08-03-2014 10:06 AM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 597 by Faith, posted 08-03-2014 12:24 PM edge has not replied

  
Coragyps
Member (Idle past 734 days)
Posts: 5553
From: Snyder, Texas, USA
Joined: 11-12-2002


(1)
Message 595 of 740 (734905)
08-03-2014 10:51 AM
Reply to: Message 585 by Faith
08-03-2014 9:28 AM


Re: New depositions strangely different from old strata
Another point about that same Gulf Coast stack of rocks, Faith. Look at the very odd shapes in pink. That is salt. It is in those odd shapes for a reason, and my opinion is that the reason has nothing to to with Satan trying to deceive seismologists and drillers. I think, and can find a lot of opinion to back me up, that it takes those odd shapes because it is less dense than the rock that surrounds it.
Google up "the prize beneath the salt" by John Dribus (I can't figure out how to link it on this phone.) Lots of seismology/geology shop talk is there, but I will try to clarify somewhat. The pink on Percy's diagram is the Louann (not Lohan) Salt. It started out pretty horizontal, there at the bottom, in the Triassic. It was buried by silts and sands starting in the Jurassic. Since salt is less dense than shale or sandstone, it is unstable there below those rocks. All the pink tentacles in that pic are places where the deep salt has floated, and still today is floating, up through weaker spots in the rock. You can go to Beaumont, Texas, and see odd hills in the otherwise flat as a pool table terrain that are there because the tips of those pink tentacles are rising below them.
You can also go a hundred miles offshore to any of several highly productive oil wells that were drilled through that pink tongue of salt over to the right of Percy's diagram. Those reservoirs are younger rock than the Triassic salt that is above (and below) them - salt has floated up through that rock and then spread sideways. It made an ideal trap for oil being generated in the rocks below - salt doesn't have pores like sandstone does. So the oil is trapped beneath the salt today, just waiting to fuel our SUVs.
One other item that ties this to ages: we know how fast salt can flow. It can be measured in the lab or in a salt mine. It can be measured in the Zagros Mountains in Iran, where there are salt glaciers on the surface with precisely the same sort of subsurface activity feeding them. The salt in Iran has nothing but air to block its flow, and only moves about a meter per year. The Louann has a mile or two of rock holding it back, so I'm guessing it moves a bit slower. Too slowly by far to have been emplaced and buried by your Flood and then crept all that way in 4300 years.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 585 by Faith, posted 08-03-2014 9:28 AM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 596 by Faith, posted 08-03-2014 12:22 PM Coragyps has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 596 of 740 (734906)
08-03-2014 12:22 PM
Reply to: Message 595 by Coragyps
08-03-2014 10:51 AM


Re: New depositions strangely different from old strata
You obviously haven't read a thing I've ever written about the salt or anything else. Why do you have to make up a straw man?
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 595 by Coragyps, posted 08-03-2014 10:51 AM Coragyps has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 600 by Coragyps, posted 08-03-2014 1:11 PM Faith has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 597 of 740 (734907)
08-03-2014 12:24 PM
Reply to: Message 594 by edge
08-03-2014 10:22 AM


Re: other evidence the strata were all in place before the faulting
deleted
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 594 by edge, posted 08-03-2014 10:22 AM edge has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 598 by Coyote, posted 08-03-2014 12:28 PM Faith has replied

  
Coyote
Member (Idle past 2106 days)
Posts: 6117
Joined: 01-12-2008


(1)
Message 598 of 740 (734908)
08-03-2014 12:28 PM
Reply to: Message 597 by Faith
08-03-2014 12:24 PM


Re: other evidence the strata were all in place before the faulting
Communicating with you is just talking to an idiot who can't read.
It is not that we can't read, it is that we read--and understand--all too well.
You are just upset because we won't accept your unevidenced beliefs, and we keep posting evidence to show that your beliefs are wrong.

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.
Belief gets in the way of learning--Robert A. Heinlein
How can I possibly put a new idea into your heads, if I do not first remove your delusions?--Robert A. Heinlein
It's not what we don't know that hurts, it's what we know that ain't so--Will Rogers
If I am entitled to something, someone else is obliged to pay--Jerry Pournelle
If a religion's teachings are true, then it should have nothing to fear from science...--dwise1
"Multiculturalism" does not include the American culture. That is what it is against.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 597 by Faith, posted 08-03-2014 12:24 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 603 by Faith, posted 08-03-2014 3:54 PM Coyote has not replied
 Message 605 by RAZD, posted 08-03-2014 4:08 PM Coyote has seen this message but not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22392
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.3


(1)
Message 599 of 740 (734909)
08-03-2014 12:45 PM
Reply to: Message 446 by Faith
07-30-2014 3:39 PM


Re: Cardenas
Hi Faith,
Now you're not making any sense. First in Message 270 you say you're looking for evidence that there was onlh one intrusive/extrusive event:
Faith in Message 270 writes:
I'm not so much assuming it as looking for evidence for it.
And now you say you have tons of evidence for it:
I HAVE tons of evidence for this order of things.
Aside from this one among many contradictions, the conclusion that you have no evidence supporting your ideas is inescapable.
One doesn't abandon a hypothesis the first time a knee-jerk objection comes from the opposition with a vested interest in "proving" me wrong.
Hypotheses are constructed from evidence. Your ideas are constructed around Biblical myths.
I haven't yet given the Cardenas a careful think-through; that whole bunch of rocks beneath the GC is a very complicated situation and it's going to take time to sort it all out, WHEN I'm finally able to get to it.
That you're going to give something some thought in the future is one of your most common devices of dismissal for things you have no answer for.
And I don't ASSUME there is only one such supposed extrusive event, so far the evidence is that there is only one.
If you still truly think the geologic column across the globe records only a single extrusive event, then that is evidence only of your ignorance of geology.
The objections I've been getting to my view of the geo column, for just the most recent example, tell me nobody cares to understand anything from my point of view, I HAVE TO accept theirs, the sooner the better, as soon as they've posted them for the very first time, or I'm being "evasive" or "lying" or "denying" or whatever.
We understand your point of view, and we've been presenting the evidence that shows how and why it is wrong. That you are unable to see evidence that proves you wrong is a problem with you, not with the evidence, and certainly not with the people taking the time and effort to gather and present the evidence to you.
And that's all you're doing here, putting anything I think in a bad light which is all from your own assumptions.
When you draw irrational and contradictory conclusions from evidence, the only one putting you in a bad light is you. You can't blame the people calling attention to the irrationality and contradictions.
So, you think I should just fold up because the Cardenas is supposedly a killer objection.
If after all the evidence that has been presented you truly believe the Cardenas is the only extrusive event in the geologic record then it just adds to the long list of evidence you're already ignoring.
Sorry, not when I know I'm on the right track on this issue from other angles. The Cardenas will have to wait, and I expect it will eventually fall into place.
Yes, the Cardenas and all the other evidence of extrusive events in the geological record will have to wait. Forever. Just like all the other evidence you ignore.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 446 by Faith, posted 07-30-2014 3:39 PM Faith has not replied

  
Coragyps
Member (Idle past 734 days)
Posts: 5553
From: Snyder, Texas, USA
Joined: 11-12-2002


(1)
Message 600 of 740 (734911)
08-03-2014 1:11 PM
Reply to: Message 596 by Faith
08-03-2014 12:22 PM


Re: New depositions strangely different from old strata
Point me to where you have said anything at all about the Louann, or any other salt, that contains facts.

"The Christian church, in its attitude toward science, shows the mind of a more or less enlightened man of the Thirteenth Century. It no longer believes that the earth is flat, but it is still convinced that prayer can cure after medicine fails." H L Mencken

This message is a reply to:
 Message 596 by Faith, posted 08-03-2014 12:22 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 602 by Faith, posted 08-03-2014 3:51 PM Coragyps 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