A4C said:
Yet A4C has in the past concluded that the sediment that forms coal seams that has dinosaur footprints in it was formed pre-flood. I guess there are other ways fo hundreds of feet of sediment to be laid down.
Upvote
0
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
A4C said:There is only one way that sediment can be laid down to thicknesses of hundreds of feet and then that same sediment gets eroded by the same water that layed it as it receeds - and that is by a global flood
Think about it
Well first of all it is the only occasion where the flood level would be above the highest layer of the sediment.rmwilliamsll said:why is it "the same water"?
A4C said:Well first of all it is the only occasion where the flood level would be above the highest layer of the sediment.
Secondly it would be still wet then and easily eroded by the "one shot" receeding water
What makes you so sure that the sedimentary layers of the Colarado Plateau weren't deposited by a global flood?Frumious Bandersnatch said:What you are saying is that if they were deposited by the flood they must have been eroded by the same water. Since the sedimentary layers of the Colorado Plateau weren't deposited by a global flood they weren't eroded by the "same water" so your entire circular argument is refuted. In fact your argument refutes itself since layers that were still wet" would not support 5000 foot shear cliffs.
FB
A4C said:Well first of all it is the only occasion where the flood level would be above the highest layer of the sediment.
Secondly it would be still wet then and easily eroded by the "one shot" receeding water
notto said:Since A4C has me on ignore somebody should ask him to explain why we have conglomerate rocks in the runnoff of the erosion of the grand canyon if it was eroded when it was 'wet'. A mechansim for how the exposed cliff walls turned to rock was also not forthcoming.
He ignored this little bit last time he brought up the grand canyon (and the time before that).
A4C said:What makes you so sure that the sedimentary layers of the Colarado Plateau weren't deposited by a global flood?
5000 foot shear cliffs were indeed formed by the fact that the wet sediment "collapsed" thus forming the sheer cliffs.
Actually there is no circular reasoning at all -absolutely linear
The site gives dates based on a non-catastrophic dating system.notto said:The site you gave us verifies this. It shows that the age of the rocks is from before and after the irridium layer. Guess where that means they were found.
Your own reference site conflicts with your conclusions.
If you do that, aren't you ignoring things like erosion and uplift?duordi said:The site gives dates based on a non-catastrophic dating system.
To test a catastrophic condition you must use a different approach.
It is actually easier. All that needs to be done is compare the elevation of the iridium layer to the elevation of the creator.
Also remember that not all of the creators were from one event and will be random in time and placement on the planet.
I am assuming that you are truly interested in understanding catastrophic Earth history.
Duane
Actually I am a YBC ( Young Bilogical Earth Theory ).Frumious Bandersnatch said:This is total gibberish as far as I can see, not even a good try. As with so many YECs, what you think is evidence for the global flood actually shows that it didn't occur.
FB
TheBear said:If this was the result of a global flood, the Grand Canyon should be rich with fossils of animals and plants not indigenous to North America. I haven't found any yet. Have you?
duordi said:An interesting thought.
What chain of events would bring this about?
Duane
TheBear said:A global flood?
Why would I expect a global flood to take animals from Africa and form fossils in North America.TheBear said:A global flood?
Sorry for the delay.TheBear said:Still waiting for a reply to this 'interesting thought'.
Because YECs claim there was only one continent before the flood and all the animals lived on it. In any case if massive flood waters swept over the area depositing all these sediments we would expect to see some body fossils of land animals and some of more modern marine animals distributed throughout the canyon layers. Instead the fossils in the various layers are exactly what one would expect if they were laid down during the various geological eras in which mainstream geology says they were laid down.duordi said:Why would I expect a global flood to take animals from Africa and form fossils in North America.
Fossils only form when something is quick buried.
Things that float around for awhile would not make fossils but be digested by bacteria and erosion.
Duane
duordi said:The site gives dates based on a non-catastrophic dating system.
To test a catastrophic condition you must use a different approach.
It is actually easier. All that needs to be done is compare the elevation of the iridium layer to the elevation of the creator.
Also remember that not all of the creators were from one event and will be random in time and placement on the planet.
I am assuming that you are truly interested in understanding catastrophic Earth history.
Duane
duordi said:1: Why would I expect a global flood to take animals from Africa and form fossils in North America.
2: Fossils only form when something is quick buried.
3: Things that float around for awhile would not make fossils but be digested by bacteria and erosion.
Duane
Frumious Bandersnatch said:You are confusing YEC pseudo-geology with real geology. There were large flows down the Colorado after the breaching of lava dams several times in the last few hundred thousand years but there is no evidence of a giant lake anywhere. That is a figment of Steve Austin's imagination.
Frumious Bandersnatch said:Geologist understand that catastrophic processes occasionally occur. When they do they leave evidence. There is no evidence of a global flood.
It is a myth that trilobites were especially heavy. Their fossils are heavy because they are made of solid rocks but many trilobites were free swimming organisms and they lived in every marine ecological niche.
Frumious Bandersnatch said:Somehow none of the flying repitles made these flight I guess those intellegent, flying mangrove trees and fast running grasses were able to outrace the velocirators to high ground as well
Frumious Bandersnatch said:What? Ocean levels were lower during the ice ages and are rising now. What does this have to do with a worldwide flood?
where do you get this nonsense?
The centennial drift idea would place winter climate fossils at the equator along with tropical fossils at the poles.Frumious Bandersnatch said:The Noth Pole is in the Artic Ocean. Maybe you mean the South Pole. Did you ever hear of continental drift?
Frumious Bandersnatch said:Who said they did? There have been many ice ages and many warmer periods in earth's long history.
Actually there is evidence of many catastrophic events in earth's history but no evidence of a global flood.
Frumious Bandersnatch said:I have previously pointed out that there are too many meteor strikes and massive volcanic eruptions known to fit in the Young Earth/Global flood scenario. Thanks for bring this falsfication of YEC mythology up again.
Frumious Bandersnatch said:Actually there have been many ice ages during the last billion years of earth's history providing yet another falsification of your young earth mythology.
Frumious Bandersnatch said:You could say that modern geologists are actualists rather than strict uniformitarians if you actually knew what you were talking about.
They are not too complicated if you are willing to study a little actual geology and not simplistic YEC pseudo geology.
Indeed they are not.
As soon as one looks at the base assumptions and realizes that the base assumptions can not be true it is understandable why the accepted dates are questioned by well informed intelligent people.
It is not my intent to say the much of what is given is not good information, however we must be careful not to forget how we have arrived to a specific conclusion and not deem the theory as some kind of inspired unchangeable truth.
To do so would define one as a religious fanatic which unfortunately neither side of the argument is immune to.
I must complement you on your reasoning.
It both challenging and enjoyable.
Duane
duordi said:For the few who follow this endeavor.
Insults do not impress or convince, and take little intelligence or effort.
With so many interesting and unexplored topics in this subject why waste time using them as it shows an illogical emotional thought process which is of course would also be unreliable.
I am going camping for a few days to explore an interesting world.
Have fun while Im gone.
Duane
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?