Fossilized Termite Nests and the Flood

[shinbits]

when have YOU backed up anything with any sort of proof?

Read pages 30 to 50 of this thread.

 

[Asimov]

All the "evidence" you describe have been shown to either help the flood belief or was shown to be insufficient. Read pages 30 to 50 of this thread to see why.

No, it really hasn't shinbits. Ad hoc rationalizations do nothing but show your ignorance of science.

 

[shinbits]

No, it really hasn't shinbits. Ad hoc rationalizations do nothing but show your ignorance of science.

The links posted has helped me learn more, and helped me make better arguments. Read pages 30 to 50 to see how.

 

[Baggins]

The links posted has helped me learn more, and helped me make better arguments. Read pages 30 to 50 to see how.

Instead of asking people to read 20 pages of you showing your ignorance of even basic geological concepts, why don't you read Turner and Peterson 1998 USGS and admit that you have been spouting a load of whooey for over 80 pages now?

I'll post the link again to make it easy for you.

http://www2.nature.nps.gov/geology/publications/hot_topic/ht_morrison.htm

 

[shinbits]

Instead of asking people to read 20 pages of you showing your ignorance of even basic geological concepts, why don't you read Turner and Peterson 1998 USGS and admit that you have been spouting a load of whooey for over 80 pages now?

The first twenty or so pages included some hypotheticals, which were corrected by people's posts. For shinbits' more informed posts as a result of people's link that nicely supports a Flood, read pages 30 to 50 on this thread.

I'll post the link again to make it easy for you.

http://www2.nature.nps.gov/geology/publications/hot_topic/ht_morrison.htm

Thank you.

It'll take me some time to read though it carefully, tho.

 

[dlamberth]

[/color]
Read pages 30 to 50 of this thread.

Ok, I was wrong...well...sort of wrong..well, not really. I went through all of the post from page 30 to 50 and found only one post, #365 on page 37 where you do actually presented proof of something. But it is NOT proof of what you were trying to prove. Some how in your mind, at least in how I read it, it's seeming like your taking something that was quickly covered with sediment and equating that with quick fossilization. That comes to light when you say in that same post: In order for things to fossilize, it has to be buried quickly anyway. The term "rapid fossilzation" for the most part, is redundant.

The funny part is that link you posted as your proof spoke of the normal slow fossilization process. It did not prove your point about rapid fossilization caused by a flood.

So in the end, my statement still stands: Thus far I have not seen you back up a single thing you say with any proof. Everything you have said is ad hoc.

.

 

[Split Rock]

If you present what this "falsification" of the flood was, I'm pretty sure that as we examine it, it will be found that this is not really the case, in the same way we are examine these nests and showing reasons for a flood.

Christian geologists abandoned the Flood model after they could not find evidence of a world-wide flood in the geological record. Even today, so-called Creation Scientists cannot agree on which layers were pre-Flood and which were post-Flood. Why? Because none of them are.

I didn't say can't be falsified; I said isn't false. There's a big difference.

You said that you didn't think there was a type of rock formation that the Flood could not create and bury objects in. This amounts to admitting the Flood cannot be falsified.

You claimed that geologists have falsified the flood. Whatever info you've read on that subject shows how it's falsifiable;

As I said, the Flood model put forth by geologists was falsified along time ago. This says nothing about the one you are putting forth.

Again, if we could examine it here, I'm sure it will be shown that though it's falsifiable, it isn't actaully false.

Again I will ask. Please provide us with at least one example of a potential geological finding that would falsify your version of The Flood. If it cannot be falsified, it is mere assertion on your part that it is not false.

 

[notto]

All the "evidence" you describe have been shown to either help the flood belief or was shown to be insufficient. Read pages 30 to 50 of this thread to see why.

So, termtite nests that show up inbetween different layers of sediment and different levels of the geologic column in the same general area with no signs of them being transported or moved is evidence for a raging worldwide flood? Once your adhoc explanations have been shown to be poor, I certainly would like to know specifically how this is so.

Describe for us once and for all in a way that actually addresses and matches the evidence we find that the fossil termite nests, limestone beds, chalk beds, and even devil tower can be explained with a single flood event of approximately 1 year. Don't just say it is - show it is.

Pick a piece of evidence and lay out a non contradictory model to explain it with a flood, and include actual descriptions, evidence, and measurements that allow you to build your model. You can't (and I'm guessing you won't).

The evidence shown in this thread shows directly that this evidence is contradictory to the mechanisms and results of a worldwide flood.

You are saying that black is white and ignoring just about every point that has been discussed in this thread.

You are a great creationists.

 

[TasManOfGod]

For the benefit of those making insulting remarks I was trying to point out that codependency is indicative of special creation rather than evolution

 

[TasManOfGod]

So, termtite nests that show up inbetween different layers of sediment and different levels of the geologic column in the same general area with no signs of them being transported or moved is evidence for a raging worldwide flood? Once your adhoc explanations have been shown to be poor, I certainly would like to know specifically how this is so.

Can you provide some source data so we can legitimize what you are asking
Thanks

 

[shinbits]

Once your adhoc explanations have been shown to be poor

Good luck showing logical explinations to be poor.

Describe for us once and for all in a way that actually addresses and matches the evidence we find that the fossil termite nests, limestone beds, chalk beds, and even devil tower can be explained with a single flood event of approximately 1 year. Don't just say it is - show it is.

read pages 30 thru 50.

 

[dlamberth]

Can you provide some source data so we can legitimize what you are asking
Thanks

Can you please re-ask this. I can't figure out what your wanting. There were several ideas presented in his statement. Which one are you wanting data on and what is it that you have problems with?

.

 

[timlamb]

Wrong, those who wish to believe the bible go one way, those who wish to believe physical evidence go another



Wrong, many different animals and plants have developed co-dependancies over the hundreds of millions of years of life on earth, the pathways are well known, you should do a bit of reading before coming up with statements about which you obviously know nothing.



That all depends on submurtion and what it is


The deposits we are talking about are late Jurassic and end 148 million years ago, do you think that is long enough to fossilise what is already to all intents and purposes a lump of mudstone.




Translation: I have asked a load of questions but I won't listen to any answers because my mind is closed.




Why bother if it isn't in the bible you won't accept th eevidence anyway.

Mr. Baggins, aren't you the rude one.

So I don't know how to spell Submersion, I was in a hurry.

You have alot of excuses for not answering legitimate questions.

You don't even know me and you call me closed minded because I choose to believe God's word. the inside of your mind hasn't seen much light lately, in more ways than one. I am sure you are open to all the evidence, so long as it contradicts the bible.

Tell me oh brainy one, what evidence do you have of codependant creatures evolving. God says they were created, you say they evolved, lets see, who to believe?
If you had any evidence you would gladly share it.

 

[TasManOfGod]

Can you please re-ask this. I can't figure out what your wanting. There were several ideas presented in his statement. Which one are you wanting data on and what is it that you have problems with?

.

It is amazing that you find post # 850 so hard to understand. It asks for more detail so that the question could be addressed regarding the multiple termite nests. Surely when you ask to comment on something the least you could do is give us an image , diagram or something just so we know that what you are asking about actually exists. That is not too hard is it?

 

[Gracchus]

It is amazing that you find post # 850 so hard to understand. It asks for more detail so that the question could be addressed regarding the multiple termite nests. Surely when you ask to comment on something the least you could do is give us an image , diagram or something just so we know that what you are asking about actually exists. That is not too hard is it?

It has been shown what was meant. Once more, so a kindergartner could understand:

______ One stratum of aeolian (wind deposited) sandstone

m One mound

-------m---------m--------------m----m----------m------m----------m-----
-----m----m----------m------m----------m-----m----------m-------m-----m
----m----------m--------m--------m--------m-----m------m---------m----
etc.

The question is: How could the mounds have been built in successive strata while being buried during a flood?

 

[notto]

Can you provide some source data so we can legitimize what you are asking
Thanks

It's the topic of this entire thread. All you have to do is actually read it with the intent of learning something and actually take the time to review the references provided.

What I am asking has be legitimized. It is the answers provided by creationists that don't match the data.

 

[Baggins]

Can you provide some source data so we can legitimize what you are asking
Thanks

http://www2.nature.nps.gov/geology/publications/hot_topic/ht_morrison.htm


It has been posted a number of times

 

[Baggins]

Good luck showing logical explinations to be poor.

Ah, but yours aren't logical, they are ad hoc and completely without scientific evidence, therefore they are very easy to prove wrong, this whole thread is one long rebuttal to your ad hoc ideas and flummery.

read pages 30 thru 50.

Why don't you read
http://www2.nature.nps.gov/geology/publications/hot_topic/ht_morrison.htm

 

[Baggins]

You don't even know me and you call me closed minded because I choose to believe God's word.

Well yes I do, if you believe the bible over the evidence of your own eyes I would say that you are close minded.

the inside of your mind hasn't seen much light lately, in more ways than one. I am sure you are open to all the evidence, so long as it contradicts the bible.

I am open to scientific evidence that proves biblical myths as well, I just haven't been presented with any yet.

Tell me oh brainy one, what evidence do you have of codependant creatures evolving. God says they were created, you say they evolved, lets see, who to believe?

Why don't you go away and read up on it, you creationists are so lazy you always expect us to go away and spend hours collating data for you, and then you either don't understand it, don't read it, or reject it for no good reason

Tell you what, you go away and search peer reviewed or text book scientific data on symbiosis and you get back and give us your considered opinion on it. So far all we have is your disbelief which, last time I checked, isn't a good argument.

here's a helpful hint

Google: Symbiosis, lichen, human stomach bacteria, clown fish, evolution, insect pollination.

Lets see a creationist sweat in the data mines for a change

 

[Baggins]

It is amazing that you find post # 850 so hard to understand. It asks for more detail so that the question could be addressed regarding the multiple termite nests. Surely when you ask to comment on something the least you could do is give us an image , diagram or something just so we know that what you are asking about actually exists. That is not too hard is it?

Have trouble with text with no pictures do we?

better not read

http://www2.nature.nps.gov/geology/publications/hot_topic/ht_morrison.htm

then as there are no pictures in it