Ice Age?

[leccy]

Hahahahahaha

The signs at that site are priceless.

They are also completely irrelevant to the questions that you have been asked.

You postulated that the limestones in the Grand Canyon were formed in caves and washed out. Jet Black asked if you have any evidence for that.

Karl asked you how limestones are formed.

I asked you how marine limestones (like the ones in the Grand Canyon) were formed in caves.

Are you going to answer any of those questions or are you just going to post irrelevant links to comical sites?

 

[Jet Black]

Here is a good start for you
http://www.icr.org/pubs/imp/imp-079.htm

that'S how the caves form, not how limestone forms. can you answer the question?

 

[Karl - Liberal Backslider]

A4C - you don't know how limestone is formed, do you?

That's why you don't understand why the limestone layers in the GC could not have been deposited in a flood.

 

[A4C]

got any evidence for that?

Well I was not around 4500 years ago to check whether limestone cavs in the area of the GC were cleaned out but it sure seems like a scnario that is feasible Perhasps you would like to share your version of the formation of the limestone layer of the Grand Canyon

 

[Jet Black]

Well I was not around 4500 years ago to check whether limestone cavs in the area of the GC were cleaned out but it sure seems like a scnario that is feasible

that's a no then I guess. so on what do you base your hypothesis and how is it testable?

 

[A4C]

A4C - you don't know how limestone is formed, do you?

That's why you don't understand why the limestone layers in the GC could not have been deposited in a flood.

I have posted how limestone is formed Please stop being so accusatory or you will be reported

 

[A4C]

that'S how the caves form, not how limestone forms. can you answer the question?

Here we go again then

Solution cave chemistry can be simply stated: limestone and dolostone, the host rocks for most caves, are dissolved by natural acids (carbonic, sulfuric, and various organic acids) which occur in groundwater. Calcite (CaCO3), the principal mineral comprising limestone, is dissolved in the presence of add to produce calcium ion (Ca ++) and bicarbonate ion (HCO3 _). Dolomite [CaMg(CO3)2], the most important mineral in dolostone, is dissolved by acid to produce calcium ion (Ca ++), magnesium ion (Mg ++), and bicarbonate ions (HCO3_ ). If the acid is able to flow through the rock, ions will be removed and a cavity or solution conduit will form.

 

[leccy]

I have posted how limestone is formed Please stop being so accusatory or you will be reported

No you haven't.

The link that you posted described the process by which solution cavities = caves are formed in limestone that already exists.

 

[Jet Black]

Here we go again then

here I go again:

that's how the caves form, not how limestone forms. can you answer the question and tell us how limestone forms?

 

[Jet Black]

I have posted how limestone is formed Please stop being so accusatory or you will be reported

It might be well worth noting that this is not what the report function is for. If you feel Karl has broken the rules in some way, then report him - you are not supposed to threaten people with reports, that is against the rules.

 

[notto]

Good luck guys. I'm still waiting for him to explain how semi-soft sediment can erode in large amounts of rushing water into pebbles. I'm guessing that his lack of understanding of chemical rocks will prevent an adequate answer to this question as well.

 

[Jet Black]

Good luck guys. I'm still waiting for him to explain how semi-soft sediment can erode in large amounts of rushing water into pebbles.

we are waiting for alot of things. I am waiting for how fossilised raindrops form underwater, how spiders leave footprints underwater, and how terrestrial therapsids leave footprints underwater, all while having millions of tonnes of sediment rained down on them at the same time.

 

[A4C]

Messrs black notto and co Hey I am under no obligation to satisfy your lusts for knowledge about How God has done things. Perhaps you might like to visit www.answersingenesis.org or www.icr.org where I am sure you will feel confortable in getting the answers you so desperately crave for.

 

[Karl - Liberal Backslider]

In other words, A4C, you don't know.

What I'm wondering is whether your scientific comprehension is actually so poor that you don't realise that the links you've provided are about cave formation, not limestone formation, or whether you're simply smokescreening.

 

[notto]

Messrs black notto and co Hey I am under no obligation to satisfy your lusts for knowledge about How God has done things. Perhaps you might like to visit www.answersingenesis.org or www.icr.org where I am sure you will feel confortable in getting the answers you so desperately crave for.

You seem to be admitting that you really don't know that much about the geology or more specifically, the grand canyon yet you continue to claim that it shows evidence of being created by the flood. All you've done is continue to post ad-hoc explanations made up on the spot that over time contradict one another to leave a description of the flood and what it did that is physically impossible with mechanisms that directly contradict ones you've described in the past. Instead of doing this, why don't you take the time and this opportunity to learn about what the real evidence at the Grand Canyon looks like and understand the geology we find there.

 

[Jet Black]

Messrs black notto and co Hey I am under no obligation to satisfy your lusts for knowledge about How God has done things. Perhaps you might like to visit www.answersingenesis.org or www.icr.org where I am sure you will feel confortable in getting the answers you so desperately crave for.

you mean you don't know

ok, different question. you were asked several times how limestone forms, and every time you supplied information on how limesone caves form. Why did you give that information as if it was an answer to the question being posed to you?

 

[A4C]

you mean you don't know

I see an attempt here is to say Ah ha You dont know something - therefore you must know nothing.
You want to give the impression that because I think that the Flood formed the Grand Canyon and because there might be something I don't know well obviously the flood didn't form the Grand Canyon
Well I dont think anybody is going to fall for that sort of nonsense

 

[Karl - Liberal Backslider]

I see an attempt here is to say Ah ha You dont know something - therefore you must know nothing.
You want to give the impression that because I think that the Flood formed the Grand Canyon and because there might be something I don't know well obviously the flood didn't form the Grand Canyon
Well I dont think anybody is going to fall for that sort of nonsense

It's quite specific. You don't know how limestone is formed. So why on earth would anyone with two brain cells rub together take your word over how the limestone strata at the GC site came to be there over that of geologists'?

It's your hubris we're extracting the Michael from here, not your ignorance.

 

[notto]

I see an attempt here is to say Ah ha You dont know something - therefore you must know nothing.
You want to give the impression that because I think that the Flood formed the Grand Canyon and because there might be something I don't know well obviously the flood didn't form the Grand Canyon
Well I dont think anybody is going to fall for that sort of nonsense

I think what is being said is that you don't know enough about the specific geology involved in the things you are discussing to make a claim that the flood formed the Grand Canyon. You haven't addressed the evidence that shows that it could not have. You simply make up ad-hoc explanations (or simply imposiible ones) as you go, often contradicting others you have already given to try to fit (or ignore) the evidence to make it fit your preconceived belief. In doing so, you have demonstrated that you are not really interested in understanding what we really find at the Grand Canyon or addressing the information that has been presented to you.

 

[leccy]

I see an attempt here is to say Ah ha You dont know something - therefore you must know nothing.
You want to give the impression that because I think that the Flood formed the Grand Canyon and because there might be something I don't know well obviously the flood didn't form the Grand Canyon
Well I dont think anybody is going to fall for that sort of nonsense

That isn't the case at all.

You made a postulation that limestones were formed in caves and washed down to be redeposited in the Grand Canyon. You were asked to provide some evidence of that and the links which you posted described how caves form, not how limestone forms.

Given that the presence of limestones within the Grand Canyon, and in many other locations, provides important evidence refuting a global flood, then your understanding of the mode of formation of limestone is quite important in terms of your frequent assertions that the geological record provides evidence FOR a global flood. If you don't know how limestones form, which would appear to be the case, then you cannot evaluate the evidence which they provide refuting a global flood in the manner which you propose.

That's the problem with making confident assertions about things which you know nothing about- it isn't that knowing nothing about them that is the problem (that can easily be resolved with some reading and learning). It is the making of unfounded, ill considered and incorrect assertions about them and using those in support of a model which they actually disprove.