Interpreting Genesis

[Molal]

jim, seems you are saying that the old age model doesn't help the oil industry in any way. Glenn Morton's story says the opposite.

Thanks! I was hoping they had read the website, but it seems my links were in vain.

 

[Jimlarmore]

jim, seems you are saying that the old age model doesn't help the oil industry in any way. Glenn Morton's story says the opposite.

Here's my basic contention. Since I am in the oil business and use geologist, have geologist friends and have studied geology I know a little bit about what I am saying. Oil and gas is where you find it. Now we know that oil is found in certain formations and structures that appear a certain way on either a seismograph or after an annulus is drilled a gamma ray log. When we see these structures we can conclude that the likely hood of finding oil and gas is increased. For instance in some areas salt domes are a good area to explore because in a high percentage of cases oil if found near salt domes.

None of these things have anything to do with a time element for the deposition of those structures. As a matter of fact a geologist could teach someone who never heard of evolution or the uniformatarian theory at all the tools of his trade. Show him what he looks for and that person could be just as successful without any philosophy at all on evolution or whether or not those formations were put there billions of years ago or last week.

God Bless
Jim Larmore

 

[philadiddle]

None of these things have anything to do with a time element for the deposition of those structures. As a matter of fact a geologist could teach someone who never heard of evolution or the uniformatarian theory at all the tools of his trade. Show him what he looks for and that person could be just as successful without any philosophy at all on evolution or whether or not those formations were put there billions of years ago or last week.

But how those things could have been formed is the issue. I don't know enough about geology to get highly technical with you, but it seems some structures could only be made over long periods of time. It's true, you may not have to know how they formed to find them, but that doesn't mean any explanation for age would fit. Some things HAVE TO be old. I used to be a creationist, then I believed the earth was old because there were some things that I just couldn't explain without invoking old age, and there was nothing I could explain using only a young age.

 

[Molal]

But how those things could have been formed is the issue. I don't know enough about geology to get highly technical with you, but it seems some structures could only be made over long periods of time. It's true, you may not have to know how they formed to find them, but that doesn't mean any explanation for age would fit. Some things HAVE TO be old. I used to be a creationist, then I believed the earth was old because there were some things that I just couldn't explain without invoking old age, and there was nothing I could explain using only a young age.

It is true, synclines, anticlines require time to form. The faster the rate of stress, the more brittle the material acts.

Obviously with depth there is greater and P and T allowing the the material to act more ductile.

For instances, we observe some folds where the rock has flowed into it's nose - this ductile flow indicates a low rate of stress over time - such as orogenies.