Creation & EvolutionForum for the discussion of this important topic. This forum is open to non-believers. There is a Christians-only forum in the Christians-only section too.
Gee i guess you are going to have to explain the whale fossil buruied in Lompoc Ca in diatomite using your uniformatiarian geology
gee, looks like it has already been answered. I guess you will have to counter why their argument is not valid.
since you want to play the link war, the answer has been here all along. http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/polystrate/whale.html
Check this site to all of the claims you might post. They answer most of them. Sorry....
__________________ Jesus said, "If a blind person leads a blind person, both of them will fall into a hole." Thomas 34
"On blind faith they place reliance, what they need more of is science"- MC Hawking
Last edited by pureone; 2nd December 2003 at 04:11 PM.
But you don't even understand the argument to see if it is valid. But you post it as tho it is. Why? Because it says what you want it to?
but i have seen the catastrophic remnants incurred in Mt St Helens...in a span of weeks the geologic columns that are found in the Grand Canyon was etched out...Please get a book by Steve Austin or his video on Mt St helens..unless he is blatantly lying
And what does this have to do with the DT of this thread? NOTHING!
Was there a volcano here? Mudflows? Pyroclastic ash? NO! So what happened at Mt. St Helens has nothing to do with anything here.
Ah, so you haven't seen it yourself. Have you looked closely at the Austin video. Have you noticed that the different types of rocks and sediment in the Grand Canyon are not there? Were the bandings of the Grand Canyon there? Were the sediments rocks? That is, were they lithified or were they, to use the geological term, unconsolidated?
Now, Austin took the pictures how long after Mt. St. Helens. He claims banding (laminae). Are those laminae going to stand up to time and compression? Or will they merge to one layer over time? Didn't mention that, did he?
one can only be convinced about the sudden columnar creations that was created by the Mt st helens eruption
Again, when was the video shot? Is it still the same today?
your quetions are due to the assumption of uniformitarian ideas that layers and rock formation is created by eons of time.
Look again. I wasn't assuming eons of time. In fact, I was assuming the time frames set up by creationists, wasn't I? I was getting sedimentary rock in 1,000 years instead of millions. I was using the cooling rates given in the ICR paper you referenced. And with all the creationist time frames, I still couldn't get the Devil's Tower formed on a young earth.
That's your problem. You can't answer my post; it refutes young earth using young earth assumptions, so you try this distraction of telling me I am using uniformitarian ideas when I wasn't.
__________________ "If sound science appears to contradict the Bible, we may be sure that it is our interpretation of the Bible that is at fault." Christian Observer, 1832, pg. 437
"Christians should look on evolution simply as the method by which God works." Rev. James McCosh, theologian and President of Princeton, 1890
"How much of the debris or sediment from Mount St. Helens has turned to ROCK. Until it does (several thousand years from now), it is hardly an analogy to other sedimentary ROCK formations"...
Gee i guess you are going to have to explain the whale fossil buruied in Lompoc Ca in diatomite using your uniformatiarian geology:
Not only has this creationist falsehood been answered but what does it have to do with the topic? it only demonstates yet again your complete lack of any explanation for any aspect of geology, so you have to resorting to posting refuted nonsense, truly, truly pathetic.
"How much of the debris or sediment from Mount St. Helens has turned to ROCK. Until it does (several thousand years from now), it is hardly an analogy to other sedimentary ROCK formations"...
Gee i guess you are going to have to explain the whale fossil buruied in Lompoc Ca in diatomite using your uniformatiarian geology:
And yet another distraction! Yes, boys and girls, napajohn continues to duck and weave! Look at him dodge! What footwork under pressure!
Unable to answer the Devil's Tower, he posts an irrelevant link! Then when creationist geology shows that the DT can't form under creationist geology, napajohn makes a lightning move to Mt. St. Helens! Whoa! Creationist Mt. St. Helens gets falsified too! But Napajohn makes an incredible swing to polystrate whale fossils! But wait! Pureone destroys that one too!
Where, good ladies and gentlemen, will napajohn distract with now? What other irrelevancies has he got up his sleeve to throw? Radiometric dating? Tree rings? I have it. That oil and coal can be formed very fast! Anything to keep a moving target and hope the audience realizes he never has answered the DT!
__________________ "If sound science appears to contradict the Bible, we may be sure that it is our interpretation of the Bible that is at fault." Christian Observer, 1832, pg. 437
"Christians should look on evolution simply as the method by which God works." Rev. James McCosh, theologian and President of Princeton, 1890
"Was there a volcano here? Mudflows? Pyroclastic ash? NO! So what happened at Mt. St Helens has nothing to do with anything here."...no but the elements of a flood environment and cataclysmic events that occired at the time may give some evidence to explain Devils Towers...Let me ask you this lucaspa?have you been to Mt Helens and verified what you are trying to claim..I gave you a site and resources to view...take it up with steve austin at icr.org..there are numbers of ways to contact him..for you to insinuate that he is misleading the public speaks volumes about your intent to dis credit him without giving him a chance to answer your questions..I'll tell you what, I'll post your specific questions and when I get an answer I'll get back to you...why you couldn't get it to work I can't answer but Ill again try to get someone from icr to get an answer...that is if you want to hear our side of the story...
Napa- ask him to expain how D.T. could be formed through flood geology. We would all love to hear the answer....
why don't you get Steve to come here and debate? He could really tell everyone here your side of the story....
__________________ Jesus said, "If a blind person leads a blind person, both of them will fall into a hole." Thomas 34
"On blind faith they place reliance, what they need more of is science"- MC Hawking
--I suggest substantiating your criticism by doing a thorough analysis of the math involved in the compaction of sediments as a most relevant factor in the ultimate lithification of unconsolidated sediments. This will also substantiate any criticisms against the potential slumping of grand canyon walls subsequent to its erosion (as a criticism against a scenario of rapid deposition of the sediments exposed in the canyon).
"Napa- ask him to expain how D.T. could be formed through flood geology. We would all love to hear the answer....
why don't you get Steve to come here and debate? He could really tell everyone here your side of the story"
actually Steve is a busy man..I'm one of thousands who send icr questions..for me to think that he will go to this site and debvate would be foolish..i will forward him your question and will probably meet Frank Sherwin this spring..so i will mention this website
"And yet another distraction! Yes, boys and girls, napajohn continues to duck and weave! Look at him dodge! What footwork under pressure"...
good ole lucaspa..attacking as usual..read the link that i attached ..am i dodging the question?.i'm responding aren't i?..heres one for you lucas, how did sexual reproduction occur and what were the mechanisms and examples that have been found in nature?...find a case where species thru mutations were created?...no distraction here...its all about evolution right? of course i know what your answer will be but somehow you'll make this an attack.
am i dodging the question?.i'm responding aren't i
Not ansering the question is dodging the question, if you are incapable of making a relavent response why bother making a pointless response at all?
You obviously have no idea how to repond to this falsification of this falsification of your mythology and so can only repond with pointless posts containing only evasion becuase your useless unchristian doctrine has failed you again.
Look again. I wasn't assuming eons of time. In fact, I was assuming the time frames set up by creationists, wasn't I? I was getting sedimentary rock in 1,000 years instead of millions. I was using the cooling rates given in the ICR paper you referenced. And with all the creationist time frames, I still couldn't get the Devil's Tower formed on a young earth.
Linear Mode
