
26th May 2005, 04:59 PM
|
 | Undefeated

| | Join Date: 17th January 2005
Posts: 15,199
Blessings: 18,652 My Mood
Reps: 164,588,693,507,141 (power: 164,588,693,527) | |
Originally Posted by gluadys What we lack here is any sort of coherence. Your various scenarios contradict each other. You can’t have all that contradiction within a year and still get the record of deposits in the Jurassic (or any other period) that you do. You cannot have it dry enough for salt deposits to form and and the same time have a flood. [ Assuming the salt was flood caused, what about the mist, daily wind, etc from pre flood? Now in the flood, you didn't address, even, why some wind dried, receeded, calm area at times, could not have been dry? Not when it was covered, but in a rising, or receeding stage?] You cannot have burrowers calmly digging burrows (on land or under water) and still have rapid sedimentation.[ In the little what if scenario I gave of the Jurassic, the burrowers down under were already buried, dead and gone before the water started to fall, what about it?] You cannot have water “whooshing around” with a daily wind “blowing like crazy” [ Hold on here, now you are talking about the pre flood world where I mentioned the daily wind. It was the great wind that blew in the flood year] and violent plate tectonic movements as well, [ Violent plate movement may have lasted hours or days, Why would our big world of rising and receeding waters nowhere have some calmer areas, and some stormier ones? ] and also have the tranquil waters needed for shale to form. [ Here again, you already admitted that especially in mountainous areas, disturbances were common, so what if some shale from pre flood was disturbed into the mix?-uplift, etc.]
Also a complete ignorance of normal geological processes. Do you know what it means for a mineral like calcium carbonate to precipitate out of water? Your questions around this are meaningless.
"
[ Limestone. A typical cementing agent in sedimentary rock is calcium carbonate (CaCO3)—commonly called limestone. Any geologist or mineralogist who stops to think about it should realize the earth has too much limestone, at least based on present processes. Sediments and sedimentary rock on the continents average about a mile in thickness. Between 10 and 15% of this is limestone.20 How did so much limestone form—much of it quite pure? Limestone, without the impurities that normally drift in, suggests rapid burial. Most limestone is in vast layers, tens of thousands of square miles in area and hundreds of feet thick. Today, limestone forms either by precipitating out of seawater or by sea creatures manufacturing limestone shells and corals. In either case, oceans supply limestone sediments, but oceans already contain about as much dissolved limestone as they can possibly hold. So where did all the limestone come from, especially its calcium and carbon, which are relatively rare outside of limestone? " http://www.creationscience.com/onlin...html#wp1218044
-- So, by the way, would this cause earth frying heat or not?]
Finally, if “science is our friend” in this period, you have to stop calling on stuff from “outside the box” to explain natural phenomena. So no “pre-split” scenarios.
[ If something falls in a pre split time, how could we ignore it? I'm beginning to think no one has any substancial objections to the split taking clear into flood time to complete? Because, if not, that leaves a hec of a lot to work with, that before this, people tried to say too much heat, etc would occur!!!!] [/quote]. |