Polystrate Fossils

[juvenissun]

Well I don't feel sorry for poorly educated scientists who do know God.



But they still have to pay tuition, right?

Total estimate cost for the entire two year "Biblical Apologetics Program: $14,800. (SOURCE)

Single module of the Creationist Worldview Program: $150.00
5 Modules total: $750 (SOURCE)



For more money, though, right? And from an accredited university, right?



Considering that in geology the Masters is often considered the "working degree" I should think rather a lot.



There's a difference between making their education relevant to the real world and completely re-educating them because they learned about paleontology this way:

Evil.

For practical purpose, I think a master student from ICR and from other "accredited schools" would have equal capability to deal with any practical problem. They both need to be re-trained (more than just orientation). And after the training, the difference would only be the personality, but not on the background education.

After that, I do think the one from ICR would have a stronger potential.

If ICR could offer Ph.D. degree (all it would take is $$$. Accreditation could take a hike.), I think their students would be even better off.

 

[juvenissun]

To give you an example, I don't think a student who learned the content suggested by the image would be inferior than one who learned the same subject in a "creditable' way when deal with a real world problem. I could not come up with a situation which would show the difference.

Take the polystrate fossil as another example. An ICR student would interpret it as an evidence of the Global Flood. So what? What would be a practical problem for that?

 

[juvenissun]

All you need to do is look at what they say about specific geologic processes and events and read what the scientific literature says, and honestly compare the two, you will find deliberate misrepresentations. Things like scientists say the layers polystrate trees are found multiple layers that are millions of years old. What the science actually says is, the strata the trees in which they are contained are of "X" age. They do not say each layer represents millions of years as the ICR literature implies.

If this statement is used in classroom (it may not be), it should be clarified.

However, if you read literature about microstratigraphy, there are examples of neighboring rock layers which take millions of years to deposit. Noticed that 0.1 million years can also be described as millions of years. Even what you said is true, it should not be taken as deliberate misrepresentations.

 

[thaumaturgy]

For practical purpose, I think a master student from ICR and from other "accredited schools" would have equal capability to deal with any practical problem.

How do you arrive at that. There's 5 "modules" in the Creationist Worldview and a 2-year program in the Biblical studies department.

How on earth could a person who went through that be even marginally as well acquainted with geology as someone who spent up to 6 years or more getting a BS and MS in geology relying on countless credit hours of classwork and actual research?

They both need to be re-trained (more than just orientation).

No, the ICR grad will have to actually get an education in geology first. The MS from an actual university will be far, far, far ahead of the ICR grad.

*(Either that or the school you've seen were horrible, horrible schools and taught very badly. I really don't see how the ICR class offerings can even come close to an MS program in a regular university. I just don't see it. Maybe ICR relies on "miracles" to get their kids through).

And after the training, the difference would only be the personality, but not on the background education.

Ummm, yeah. No.

After that, I do think the one from ICR would have a stronger potential.

Based on what I've read of your postings on here in regards geology I'd say you would say that. Of course I think that might say more about you than it does ICR grads.

If ICR could offer Ph.D. degree (all it would take is $$$. Accreditation could take a hike.), I think their students would be even better off.

Money makes miracles happen. Maybe with more $$$ ICR could actually afford real geology teachers and with enough $$$$$$ despite their inability to produce actual research that is accepted by anyone outside of their denomination of christianity, they might one day actually have a geology department.

Again, money can make miracles. But even miracles have their limitations.

Can you give me the percentage of science placements in oil companies and mining companies that come out of ICR programs?

 

[thaumaturgy]

To give you an example, I don't think a student who learned the content suggested by the image would be inferior than one who learned the same subject in a "creditable' way when deal with a real world problem. I could not come up with a situation which would show the difference.

Well, considering Jesus could have come to earth at any time, even during the Mesozoic, and being 100% god as well as 100% man I have no doubt that Jesus using miracle power could mount a rather smallish looking brachiosaur or micro-diploticus or whatever that thing is and pet and hold a baby ceratopsian, I guess you're right.

But these would require a few more "miracles" than the average paleontologist would need to resort to.

Take the polystrate fossil as another example. An ICR student would interpret it as an evidence of the Global Flood. So what? What would be a practical problem for that?

The ICR grad would extrapolate it to be a "global flood". All the evidence of a "polystrate fossil" would be would be for a localized flood. The evidence for a "GLOBAL flood" would, of course contain:

1. Globally correlatable evidence of contemporary submersion at one specific point in time

2. Absolutely no evidence of any "subaerial exposure" at that same time horizon anywhere on earth (easy way to "falsify the hypothesis")

3. That the event be within the geologic record from the time since humans existed and started forming civilizations.

So for the Joggins formation to be "evidence" of a global flood you'd have to ensure that humans existed over 300 million years ago orexplain how all of geology could be so incorrect in pinpointing the time of the Pennsylvanian Era (so in order to make one "hypothesis" work you pretty much have dismantle all the rest of geology, but hey, ICR grads have plenty of time), then you'd have to make sure that no one ever accidentally found a contemporaneous formation anywhere on earth that showed "subaerial exposure", be it a preserved aeolian deposit, like a sand dune, or any sort of preserved raindrop impressions in mud, etc. etc.

Now, as a comparison the KT boundary has an Ir anomaly which appears to be correlatable in many places around the globe. So we know what a "globally impacting event" might look like in geology.

Only problem with Noachian Flood geology is no such data actually exists. If it exists in the form of the Joggins formation it is in the wrong time zone, if it exists in some other age of formation you can't use the Joggins as evidence, etc.

Do you see how the system works yet?

 

[Split Rock]

To give you an example, I don't think a student who learned the content suggested by the image would be inferior than one who learned the same subject in a "creditable' way when deal with a real world problem. I could not come up with a situation which would show the difference.

Take the polystrate fossil as another example. An ICR student would interpret it as an evidence of the Global Flood. So what? What would be a practical problem for that?

So tell us how Flood Geology helps in a practical way. For example, how would Flood Geology help a Petroleum company find new oil reserves?

 

[Orogeny]

For practical purpose, I think a master student from ICR and from other "accredited schools" would have equal capability to deal with any practical problem.

Challenge accepted. I will be finishing my MS in geology within the month. Find me an ICR 'master student' in geology, select a field area, and we'll both head out there and spend a week mapping it. I'd love to see what the ICR goof came up with. Alternatively, provide me and the same student with a subsurface data set and we'll spend a couple days doing some reservoir characterization, really put the industry applicability of that ICR degree to the test. Or provide a geochemical dataset for interpretation. Or provide a suite of thin sections and measured stratigraphic sections and we'll do a depositional environment analysis. I'm up for pretty much anything.

This is not a joke. I have a few weeks off between my defense and the beginning of my job. I challenge ANY ICR geology graduate student to put their money where their mouth is and compare their real world ability to mine. Gauntlet's been thrown. Or since you're the expert, Juve, you could accept the challenge. Please, oh please, say yes!

 

[RocksInMyHead]

Challenge accepted. I will be finishing my MS in geology within the month. Find me an ICR 'master student' in geology, select a field area, and we'll both head out there and spend a week mapping it. I'd love to see what the ICR goof came up with. Alternatively, provide me and the same student with a subsurface data set and we'll spend a couple days doing some reservoir characterization, really put the industry applicability of that ICR degree to the test. Or provide a geochemical dataset for interpretation. Or provide a suite of thin sections and measured stratigraphic sections and we'll do a depositional environment analysis. I'm up for pretty much anything.

This is not a joke. I have a few weeks off between my defense and the beginning of my job. I challenge ANY ICR geology graduate student to put their money where their mouth is and compare their real world ability to mine. Gauntlet's been thrown. Or since you're the expert, Juve, you could accept the challenge. Please, oh please, say yes!

Can I volunteer as the referee?

 

[Orogeny]

Certainly. Obviously there would need to be a panel of impartial observers, but if you can fill that roll, you would be more than welcome to join in.

 

[RocksInMyHead]

Certainly. Obviously there would need to be a panel of impartial observers, but if you can fill that roll, you would be more than welcome to join in.

Actually, considering that mapping doesn't necessarily require you to agree with the ages of units, this would be an interesting way to test the extent of a Creationist geology education. It would be a test of interpretive skills and geology fundamentals (map reading, superposition, folding characteristics, etc), which should be the same between a typical accredited university and the ICR geology program.

To make it fair, both maps shouldn't have names attached to them and should be submitted to 3-5 geologists who have previously mapped the area. It would be even better to use an area with a previously published map, so long as neither of the participants has seen it.

 

[juvenissun]

How do you arrive at that. There's 5 "modules" in the Creationist Worldview and a 2-year program in the Biblical studies department.

How on earth could a person who went through that be even marginally as well acquainted with geology as someone who spent up to 6 years or more getting a BS and MS in geology relying on countless credit hours of classwork and actual research?



No, the ICR grad will have to actually get an education in geology first. The MS from an actual university will be far, far, far ahead of the ICR grad.

*(Either that or the school you've seen were horrible, horrible schools and taught very badly. I really don't see how the ICR class offerings can even come close to an MS program in a regular university. I just don't see it. Maybe ICR relies on "miracles" to get their kids through).



Ummm, yeah. No.



Based on what I've read of your postings on here in regards geology I'd say you would say that. Of course I think that might say more about you than it does ICR grads.



Money makes miracles happen. Maybe with more $$$ ICR could actually afford real geology teachers and with enough $$$$$$ despite their inability to produce actual research that is accepted by anyone outside of their denomination of christianity, they might one day actually have a geology department.

Again, money can make miracles. But even miracles have their limitations.

Can you give me the percentage of science placements in oil companies and mining companies that come out of ICR programs?

I haven't paid much attention to the ICR graduate education. But the "5 modules" course may not even be for any science major.

 

[juvenissun]

Well, considering Jesus could have come to earth at any time, even during the Mesozoic, and being 100% god as well as 100% man I have no doubt that Jesus using miracle power could mount a rather smallish looking brachiosaur or micro-diploticus or whatever that thing is and pet and hold a baby ceratopsian, I guess you're right.

But these would require a few more "miracles" than the average paleontologist would need to resort to.



The ICR grad would extrapolate it to be a "global flood". All the evidence of a "polystrate fossil" would be would be for a localized flood. The evidence for a "GLOBAL flood" would, of course contain:

1. Globally correlatable evidence of contemporary submersion at one specific point in time

2. Absolutely no evidence of any "subaerial exposure" at that same time horizon anywhere on earth (easy way to "falsify the hypothesis")

3. That the event be within the geologic record from the time since humans existed and started forming civilizations.

So for the Joggins formation to be "evidence" of a global flood you'd have to ensure that humans existed over 300 million years ago orexplain how all of geology could be so incorrect in pinpointing the time of the Pennsylvanian Era (so in order to make one "hypothesis" work you pretty much have dismantle all the rest of geology, but hey, ICR grads have plenty of time), then you'd have to make sure that no one ever accidentally found a contemporaneous formation anywhere on earth that showed "subaerial exposure", be it a preserved aeolian deposit, like a sand dune, or any sort of preserved raindrop impressions in mud, etc. etc.

Now, as a comparison the KT boundary has an Ir anomaly which appears to be correlatable in many places around the globe. So we know what a "globally impacting event" might look like in geology.

Only problem with Noachian Flood geology is no such data actually exists. If it exists in the form of the Joggins formation it is in the wrong time zone, if it exists in some other age of formation you can't use the Joggins as evidence, etc.

Do you see how the system works yet?

You wrote a lot. But I don't see any practical problem a newly graduate from ICR can work on.

 

[juvenissun]

So tell us how Flood Geology helps in a practical way. For example, how would Flood Geology help a Petroleum company find new oil reserves?

Not much. That is why I said an ICR graduate would be as good as one from any accredited school. They both need to count rock layers one by one.

 

[juvenissun]

Can I volunteer as the referee?

No. You can play coach to see how fast the ICR student can learn.

 

[RocksInMyHead]

No. You can play coach to see how fast the ICR student can learn.

But that would defeat the point. You claim that an ICR grad would have the same capabilities as a grad from an accredited institution. This would be an experiment of sorts to test that hypothesis. That means no coaching, for either student.

Edit: to clarify, this is a graduate of the ICR Geology program that we're talking about.

 

[juvenissun]

Actually, considering that mapping doesn't necessarily require you to agree with the ages of units, this would be an interesting way to test the extent of a Creationist geology education. It would be a test of interpretive skills and geology fundamentals (map reading, superposition, folding characteristics, etc), which should be the same between a typical accredited university and the ICR geology program.

To make it fair, both maps shouldn't have names attached to them and should be submitted to 3-5 geologists who have previously mapped the area. It would be even better to use an area with a previously published map, so long as neither of the participants has seen it.

Don't get me wrong. I would agree that an ICR geology graduate could be under-educated in geology practice. But my point is, given a short period of in-job training, he could be as good as anyone.

For example, in field mapping, as long as one can identify rock, see structure, and can read topomap, then one can do mapping. So, in ICR, I would expect a geology student learn rock ID, structure ID and map reading as well as one in any other school. These topics do not involve any creation/evolution argument. So, if an ICR student learned well in school, I don't see why should he feel difficult in field mapping. The only difference, might just be the experience. And I know, in many so-called accredited schools, students DO NOT do field mapping even up to the Ph.D. level. On the other hand, one of my dumbest student (undergraduate, learning disable, will get lost in the field) is now the chief field geologist in an EPA unit in Oregon.

 

[Orogeny]

Not much. That is why I said an ICR graduate would be as good as one from any accredited school. They both need to count rock layers one by one.

This is nonsense. Are you accepting my challenge or what?

 

[juvenissun]

But that would defeat the point. You claim that an ICR grad would have the same capabilities as a grad from an accredited institution. This would be an experiment of sorts to test that hypothesis. That means no coaching, for either student.

Edit: to clarify, this is a graduate of the ICR Geology program that we're talking about.

...

 

[Orogeny]

On the other hand, one of my dumbest student (undergraduate, learning disable, will get lost in the field) is now the chief field geologist in an EPA unit in Oregon.

Outstanding! You claim to be a faculty geologist. Then you should be more than willing to partake in a mapping challenge! Whata ya say, chap?

 

[RickG]

If this statement is used in classroom (it may not be), it should be clarified.

However, if you read literature about microstratigraphy, there are examples of neighboring rock layers which take millions of years to deposit. Noticed that 0.1 million years can also be described as millions of years. Even what you said is true, it should not be taken as deliberate misrepresentations.

Here's an example direct form one of the ICR articles on polystrate fossils.

A Classic Polystrate Fossil

"The tree was a mature tree, yet could not have grown in the location where the surrounding shale was deposited, since trees don't live long under the sea. Furthermore, the time required for shaley sediments to accumulate must be added to the tree's lifespan, as must the time to deeply bury the coal precursor and create the pressure to generate enough heat to alter the peat into coal. No scenario possible today could account for this sequence of events if evolution’s interpretation of earth history is true."


Now, let's examine this.

1. They are stating that all shale is deposited in marine environments and not on land. Most shale's are result of river deposits. Burial of a tree can take anywhere from a few minutes (catastrophic flood conditions) to several years (repeated seasonal flooding and subsidence). Why do they ignore that.

2. Why the description about coal? The picture they show is clearly not showing coal deposits.

3. Why the evolution comment? It has nothing to do with the geologic processes being discussed.

Further down in the article they attempt to describe trees being buried by the Mt. St. Helen's volcano like it would in a global flood. They weren't buried by a flood, they were buried by a mud flow of volcanic ash. They also ignore the fact that none of the "polystrate" fossils were formed anywhere near the time of said Noah's flood.

Juve, that is not geology, that's pure unadulterated garbage, absolute rubbish.