Fossil Record Observation

[VirOptimus]

You really should stop giving non-answers.
And how is 'my' problem not 'the' problem?

I bet he will answer magic or something equivalent.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

If you read the bible you'll see that the land and cities were flooded, to the mountain tippy tops, however the oceans were unaffected. So its not unlikely that all the flooded land would drain into the oceans, because that's the only places not affected by the flood.

Any excess rainwater froze, which became the polar ice caps.

But basic logic says that if the WHOLE WORLD was flooded, that would also imply that the levels of the ocean would rise too.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

I bet he will answer magic or something equivalent.

Probably.

 

[juvenissun]

Still waiting on the number of of fountains of the great deep and your source, or are you backing pedaling on that claim as well?

Sorry, I do not know the number. I guess nobody knows. Do you want me to guess?

 

[Queller]

Sorry, I do not know the number. I guess nobody knows.

Then how do you know they were numbered?

Do you want me to guess?

Sure. Go for it. Then give the reasoning that brought you to that number.

 

[Queller]

I feel we've made some headway here. This is what can happen when people come together with their theories and work together for a better explanation for things. Collaborative scientific process.

If you read the bible you'll see that the land and cities were flooded, to the mountain tippy tops, however the oceans were unaffected. So its not unlikely that all the flooded land would drain into the oceans, because that's the only places not affected by the flood.

Sounds good. Every other physical property of the earth was different at the time so why not gravity as well?

 

[Queller]

But basic logic says that if the WHOLE WORLD was flooded, that would also imply that the levels of the ocean would rise too.

No, no, no. The part in bold is where your thought process has broken down.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

No, no, no. The part in bold is where your thought process has broken down.

... I was going to say something daft until I realised what you meant.

 

[46AND2]

Are you God? No? Then that time scale is irrelevant to you.

I'm sorry. I thought we were trying to have a serious discussion.

Noah as a time traveler. Let me guess, the Ark looked like a giant 20th century London Police Box?

Would explain fitting all those animals on board...."it's bigger on the inside."

 

[Queller]

Would explain fitting all those animals on board...."it's bigger on the inside."

 

[juvenissun]

Then how do you know they were numbered?

Sure. Go for it. Then give the reasoning that brought you to that number.

One tectonic rift zone is one source of the water.

 

[Paul of Eugene OR]

Name one.

You never heard of sandstone?

 

[Queller]

You never heard of sandstone?

Of course. Can you explain why sandstone will help form incised or entrenched meanders during a global flood event?

Because that is what juvenissun is claiming.

 

[Queller]

One tectonic rift zone is one source of the water.

Got a real life example of a tectonic rift zone where movement unleashes hundreds of trillions of gallons of water?

 

[Paul of Eugene OR]

Of course. Can you explain why sandstone will help form incised or entrenched meanders during a global flood event?

Because that is what juvenissun is claiming.

Well, of course, it would not. In fact, fast moving waters of the sort that carve out instant canyons never meander.

 

[Queller]

Well, of course, it would not. In fact, fast moving waters of the sort that carve out instant canyons never meander.

I agree but juve seems to think otherwise.

 

[juvenissun]

Got a real life example of a tectonic rift zone where movement unleashes hundreds of trillions of gallons of water?

No. It only happened ONCE.

 

[juvenissun]

I agree but juve seems to think otherwise.

My mind is very busy. After a few days, I no longer recall what was the argument. I don't remember I said anything about sandstone.

 

[Queller]

No. It only happened ONCE.

Got any evidence?

I didn't think so.

 

[Queller]

My mind is very busy. After a few days, I no longer recall what was the argument. I don't remember I said anything about sandstone.

Gee, it's only a couple of pages back. It isn't too hard to go back and read the discussion.

I asked you "What sediment properties are required for a fast flow to form meanders?"

You replied "Sediments with a high shear strength"

I then asked for an example "Such as?"

You replied "un-indurated sedimentary rocks."

I then asked you to "Give an example of such un-indurated sedimentary rocks, that is; rock that has not been hardened by heat or baking or sediments that have not been hardened through cementation or compaction, or both, without the introduction of heat."

You replied "There are many quite weak sedimentary rocks"

I then asked you to "name one"

You never bothered to respond.

Paul of Eugene, OR suggested sandstone.

If you don't accept sandstone, can you give another specific example of an un-indurated sedimentary rock with a high shear strength, that is also quite weak that would allow incised or entrenched meanders to form under catastrophic flood conditions?