Proof of Creation?

[Paul of Eugene OR]

I've discussed that in another forum at length. Not going to go over it
again.

You laugh at everything that does not line up to your naturalistic views.

Sediments that would require millions of years to form indicate millions of years have passed. Why would God lie by putting those sediments in place? He would not.

Is it possible for an error to be present when the hand of man was involved? Is it possible for an error to be present when the hand of man was never involved?

I know which way is the logical way to lean on those options.

 

[Kylie]

So how do the fossils on mountain still remain. If erosion is so strong and it can wear something down that far then how come mountains dont get completely eroded away. They are suppose to have happened millions of years ago with enough time to just about erode the entire mountain away. Yet they still have sea life fossils on them and even water ripple marks like they have hardly been eroded.

Mountains are also being pushed up.

Do you know anything about plate tectonics?

 

[Smidlee]

Mountains are also being pushed up.

Do you know anything about plate tectonics?

This doesn't explain how those fossil remain buried on top of the mountains as they should have eroded away a long time ago even with the up-lift. Fossils are exposed all the time due to erosion.

 

[Kylie]

This doesn't explain how those fossil remain buried on top of the mountains as they should have eroded away a long time ago even with the up-lift. Fossils are exposed all the time due to erosion.

I take that as a "no, you don't know anything about plate tectonics."

Why should they have eroded away?

 

[Smidlee]

I take that as a "no, you don't know anything about plate tectonics."

Why should they have eroded away?

Because the top layers are those that are eroded first as the mountain continues to up lift.

Guess what, no one knows "millions of years" but they doesn't stop them from speculating.

 

[Paul of Eugene OR]

Because the top layers are those that are eroded first as the mountain continues to up lift.

Guess what, no one knows "millions of years" but they doesn't stop them from speculating.

Guess what, geologists confirm "millions of years" and its based on evidence, not speculation.

You are the one speculating . . . before our eyes, you speculated that the top layers have had enough time to be all eroded away and therefore shouldn't be there.

You should do a little research. You should find out what age the layers are said to actually be on top, and you should explain why those layers can't be merely the layers left over after whatever erosion there was took place.

So far, you haven't done that, so . . . you actually speculated.

 

[Smidlee]

Guess what, geologists confirm "millions of years" and its based on evidence, not speculation.

You are the one speculating . . . before our eyes, you speculated that the top layers have had enough time to be all eroded away and therefore shouldn't be there.

You should do a little research. You should find out what age the layers are said to actually be on top, and you should explain why those layers can't be merely the layers left over after whatever erosion there was took place.

So far, you haven't done that, so . . . you actually speculated.

Actually I have read a little about the subject as it's been known for decades the erosion rates are extreme high on mountain tops that those layers should be erode away a long time ago.

 

[Paul of Eugene OR]

Actually I have read a little about the subject as it's been known for decades the erosion rates are extreme high on mountain tops that those layers should be erode away a long time ago.

Stop speculating and come up with something along the line of evidence. Exactly what geological era of layers are you talking about, anyway?

 

[Loudmouth]

Actually I have read a little about the subject as it's been known for decades the erosion rates are extreme high on mountain tops that those layers should be erode away a long time ago.

Now would be the time to reference that information.

 

[Smidlee]

Stop speculating and come up with something along the line of evidence.

I'm not the one speculating that they had to be mile high layer of missing rock in order for those fossil to be burden on top of those mountains for them explain away millions years of erosion.

 

[Strathos]

"God cleans up in mysterious ways." - unknown

I miss AV, I wonder where he went?

 

[Loudmouth]

I'm not the one speculating that they had to be mile high layer of missing rock in order for those fossil to be burden on top of those mountains for them explain away millions years of erosion.

Missing rock where? Which mountains?

How does this apply to every mountain range and basin?

 

[Smidlee]

Rocky Mountains uplifts and erodes between 1 -10 meters per 1,000 years. If the Rockys form 70 million years ago and using "The present as the key to the past" assumptions that would add up to 70-700 km of vertical erosion and up lift. That's a lot of dirt. It's nothing short of a miracle those fossils remain buried through all that erosion.

 

[Loudmouth]

Rocky Mountains uplifts and erodes between 1 -10 meters per 1,000 years. If the Rockys form 70 million years ago and using "The present as the key to the past" assumptions that would add up to 70-700 km of vertical erosion and up lift. That's a lot of dirt. It's nothing short of a miracle those fossils remain buried through all that erosion.

Where is your reference for the erosion rate of the Rocky's?

 

[Smidlee]

Where is your reference for the erosion rate of the Rocky's?

That's from memory. IIRC there are other mountains with even higher erosion rates.

 

[Loudmouth]

That's from memory. IIRC there are other mountains with even higher erosion rates.

We will need more than memory.

 

[Loudmouth]

Found this paper:

"Drainage basins erode more quickly (mean = 218 m Myr−1; median = 54 m Myr−1) than outcrops (mean = 12 m Myr−1; median = 5.4 m Myr−1), likely reflecting the acceleration of rock weathering rates under soil. Drainage basin and outcrop erosion rates both vary by climate zone, rock type, and tectonic setting."
GSA Today - Understanding Earth’s eroding surface with 10Be

Seems that Smidlee was off by a factor of 1,000. For outcrops, it is 12 m per million years, not 1,000 years. That means for a 70 million year old outcrop, that would be 840 m. I really don't see how this is a problem.

 

[Paul of Eugene OR]

Found this paper:

"Drainage basins erode more quickly (mean = 218 m Myr−1; median = 54 m Myr−1) than outcrops (mean = 12 m Myr−1; median = 5.4 m Myr−1), likely reflecting the acceleration of rock weathering rates under soil. Drainage basin and outcrop erosion rates both vary by climate zone, rock type, and tectonic setting."
GSA Today - Understanding Earth’s eroding surface with 10Be

Seems that Smidlee was off by a factor of 1,000. For outcrops, it is 12 m per million years, not 1,000 years. That means for a 70 million year old outcrop, that would be 840 m. I really don't see how this is a problem.

People like Smidlee who complain that scientists are merely speculating should stop doing so much speculating.

 

[lasthero]

I've discussed that in another forum at length. Not going to go over it
again.

You laugh at everything that does not line up to your naturalistic views.

I laugh at people who talk a lot of junk and refuse to back it up when the time comes. As if you're really the sort of person who shies away from repeating himself.

I'm curious, ED - what forum was this? Give me a name. I'll look it up, myself.

 

[bhsmte]

I miss AV, I wonder where he went?

As with some, I think he may have just run out of gas.