Summations Only

And Slatibardfast made the crinkly bits around Norway. Special rocks huh? Made out of special stuff not found anywhere else. Exceot everywhere we look. And flat - yikes we never see that either. Except where we see it of course.

It's called The Rock Cycle Faith.

quote:

---

A river carries, or transports, pieces of broken rock as it flows along. When the river reaches a lake or the sea, its load of transported rocks settles to the bottom. We say that the rocks are deposited. The deposited rocks build up in layers, called sediments. This process is called sedimentation.

​

The weight of the sediments on top squashes the sediments at the bottom. This is called compaction. The water is squeezed out from between the pieces of rock and crystals of different salts form.

​

The crystals form a sort of glue that sticks or cements the pieces of rock together. This process is called cementation.

​

These processes eventually make a type of rock called sedimentary rock. It may take millions of years for sedimentary rocks to form.

---

Page not found - BBC BitesizeIt takes a while....And we can tell you how long....Edited by Tangle, : No reason given.

It's like you're just being introduced to the stuff you've been arguing about for almost a decade. You're surprised that, geology shows order, that fossils show order and that turning sediments into rock takes a while. The 'conventional' paradigm is the one with a couple of hundred years of multidisciplinary evidence that all hangs together.So far you haven't even begun to understand what's involved in a 'paradigm'. It requires stacks of evidence and process and every bit of evidence needs to fit every other bit of evidence. It also has to include all the evidence. Inconvenient bits - like radiometric dating - can't be just ignored.It's normal to want to preach from the pulpit in the celebrant's echo chamber. But all you'll get there is more delusion.

Why are you here?

Palaeontology has it all wrong about fossils
Biology has it all wrong about evolution
Molecular biology has it all wrong about evolution
Physics has it all wrong about radiometric dating
Dendrochronology has it all wrong about tree rings
Archaeology has it all wrong about civilisations
Cosmology has it all wrong about, well, everythingYet you have no education or training in any of these disciplines. You've never touched a fossil or looked at a rock. You've never written a research paper or have any understanding of the scientific process. You sit at you computer making shit up and claiming 'paradigms'.After 10 years you've learned nothing except how to ignore and pollute hard won knowledge inorder to preserve a primitive believe system. I've no idea why you're here and neither have you. Edited by Tangle, : No reason given.

A while back you were telling us of your prowess in critical thinking. Your methodology - such that it is - is the exact opposite of objective analysis. You ignore facts that contradict you and invent facts that you prefer. You don't read source material or study the subject matter in any depth and you don't understand the things you pontificate on.If all you're doing is trying - and really horribly failing - to 'hone the YEC arguments' you're home is EFT not here. Here you'll be continually show to be a religiously motivated ignoramous that's avoiding observed fact for deluded reasons.But then you admit to that so there's nothing new to say.

Well the thing is Faith, the 'facts' are actually known so what you believe is totally irrelevant. Like you, I know nothing about geology, but unlike you I can use Google.Amazingly, there are one or two things we KNOW about what's on and what's under the ocean floor 'cos, you know, we drill through it looking for oil.This is a thirty second google - no doubt far better information is available but frankly as you won't read it anyway it's not worth my time. But I'm sure you'll find ocean floor core samples if you care to look. Which you won't will you?

quote:

---

The Petrological Database of the Ocean Floor is a relational database and repository for global geochemical data on igneous and metamorphic rocks generated at mid-ocean ridges including back-arc basins, young seamounts, and old oceanic crust, as well as ophiolites and terrestrial xenoliths from the mantle and lower crust and diamond geochemistry. These data are obtained by analyses of whole rock powders, volcanic glasses, and minerals by a wide range of techniques including mass spectrometry, atomic emission spectrometry, x-ray fluorescence spectrometry, and wet chemical analyses. Data are compiled from the scientific literature by PetDB data managers, as well as being provided by members of the scientific community. PetDB is administered by the EarthChem[2] group under the IEDA[3] facility at LDEO headed by K. Lehnert.PetDB is supported by the U.S. National Science Foundation.

---

Petrological Database of the Ocean Floor - Wikipedia

No surprise there.What do you imagine is under the ocean floor?

So we have ocean, then magma? Nothing else? You claim that there is no geological column under the ocean floor. Ignoring the geological fact that the geological column is an idealised construct anyway, that seems a wild and ludicrous claim.Now you tell us that there's molten rock there. Well there's molten rock everywhere under the earth's surface and sometimes on top of it. So something is seperating the ocean from the magma, what is it? I suggest that it rock and rock is part of the geological column. How about that?

The 'so what' bit is that you had previously said this... ... you can't even keep track of the stuff you've made up a few posts before. You do this all the time.The thing about lying is that you have to remember the lies otherwise people notice - it's the same with inventing excuses for silly myths; you have to remember what crap you made up a minute ago to get yourself out of a previous difficulty. We notice.

Well we live on a planet that's over 4 billion years old with rocks stopping the molten inside becoming the outside.You live on one that was built a few years ago by a bad tempered superguy who got it wrong on his first attempt so ripped it up, killed everything and started over. Oh, and made it look like it's old, just so he could have a laugh at us.I prefer my planet.

Couple of points1. I don't believe anything about geology - or any science - I accept it's conclusions.2. Your 'someday' has been and gone. You had your day for as long as you could make shit up. When science came along we demanded evidence. Evidence showed that the shit you'd made up was very smelly indeed. The people that believed the same shit that you do now, 200 years ago went out to find the evidence that they knew would support their beliefs. They knew that they could prove it because they knew their beliefs were right. After all, their god had told them.But what actually happened was the opposite. They proved that their beliefs about stuff like the age of the earth was wrong and everything that has been discovered since has confirmed it. Everything you misunderstand and misrepresent is evidence produced by science. Nothing - repeat nothing - new has been found by creationists. All they and you do is lie about it what science has discovered. You will never convince anybody but yourself by lying, misrepresenting and being utterly ignorant of the knowledge created by science.Your day has been and gone Faith. You got it wrong and only nut jobs cling onto the falsehoods.

We share the facts because the facts have only one source - science. But you deny those facts.Radiometric dating - and all other dating methods - prove that the earth is old. You simply deny those facts but can not explain why they are wrong. By doing that you lose outright. Yes we know they got it wrong, they were convinced that the earth was young, just like you. They were convinced because they had a firm but unfounded belief. But unlike you, they also had intellectual integrity so that when it was demonstrated beyond doubt that they had got it wrong, they changed their mind.And since then there's been mountains of confirmatory evidence supporting their initial conclusions. All of which you just deny. It's very painful to watch; you're the living proof of delusion and confirmation bias. The phrase 'motivated thinking' was invented to explain your methodology.

quote:

---

Cognitive strategy. The processes of motivated reasoning are a type of inferred justification strategy which is used to mitigate cognitive dissonance. When people form and cling to false beliefs despite overwhelming evidence, the phenomenon is labeled "motivated reasoning"

---

The early geologists believed what you believed. The bit you call unbiblical is concluding from the evidence that the earth was old - which apparently disagrees with the bible. Although the bible does not say how old the earth is. And you deny those scientific facts. Radiometric dating shows the earth to be old. Scientific fact. You deny it. What's 'specific scientific principle' have you used to deny those facts?

Had you been alive 250 years ago you would have believed all the same fanciful shit along with all sorts of other fanciful shit about cures for warts, weather predictions and omens. All people had prior to the scientific method was fanciful shit invented by sooth sayers, priests and witches.Science has now exploded all the nonsense but we're left with the old ways of thinking in a few crackpots that can't accept facts for what they are. You're left defending the only thing you have left - the age of the earth. And you confine yourself to doing that by imagining fanciful alternative scenarios around rock formations instead of confronting the direct evidence of dating.You know you can't contradict dating because it's direct and factual. So you try to ignore it. But you can't because we're going to push it under your nose every time you claim a young earth. It's the proof that hurts.Edited by Tangle, : No reason given.