#80569 - 05/03/06 11:56 PM
Re: Strict Biblical Literalism on Scientific Matters: Is It Tenable?
[Re: ]
|
Registered: 09/04/02
Posts: 4699
Loc: New England
|
Quote:
They were not stated to be sedimentary rocks. More typically, would be igneous, such as granite.
You wrote...
Quote:
Suddenly, one night, unexpectedly, a massive mudslide engulfs the village, and it is buried beneath thousands of tons of mud and rock. Four thousand years later, due to local shifting of the land, the village is exposed, and archaeologists investigate. They attempt to determine the age of the village. They use radiometric dating of the rocks surrounding the village, and come up with a figure in the billions of years. They conclude that the village MUST be the same age, BECAUSE it was encased in the rock and earth. Were they correct?
If you weren't asking about the dating of sedimentary rocks, why do you think the geologists would conclude that the obviously moved rocks surrounding the village dated the village?
/Bevin
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#80570 - 05/04/06 12:37 AM
Re: Strict Biblical Literalism on Scientific Matters: Is It Tenable?
[Re: Mandy]
|
Craftsman
Registered: 03/13/06
Posts: 3513
Loc: N38d14.516m, W122d37.982m
|
Quote:
bevin said: If you weren't asking about the dating of sedimentary rocks, why do you think the geologists would conclude that the obviously moved rocks surrounding the village dated the village?
/Bevin
Please refer to post #216103. BTW where do you find any statement that the rocks were sedimentary? Please quote it.
Edited by David Koot (05/04/06 12:43 AM)
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#80571 - 05/04/06 12:59 AM
Re: Strict Biblical Literalism on Scientific Matters: Is It Tenable?
[Re: Mandy]
|
Craftsman
Registered: 03/13/06
Posts: 3513
Loc: N38d14.516m, W122d37.982m
|
Quote:
bevin said: You look for evidence of this happening - and WHAT DO YOU KNOW - you almost always find it, and you never find anything that invalidates this prediction.
Plate tectonics is one self-evident mechanism for such an occurrence, although not the only mechanism.
Quote:
A shining example of success for the long-age evolutionary model and a stunning set back for the short-age creationists who have no explanation for either phenomona - old-over-fossil-over-young or young-over-fossil-over-old.
Actually, no. The very phenomenon you are referring to, has been used to refute long-age evolution. I have seen that done in a live presentation by a geologist, including pictures of the very type of thing you are referring to. Will see if I can get in contact with that geologist. I do notice that your response is presented in terms of generalities and rhetoric.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#80572 - 05/04/06 04:14 AM
Re: Strict Biblical Literalism on Scientific Matters: Is It Tenable?
[Re: ]
|
Registered: 09/04/02
Posts: 4699
Loc: New England
|
Quote:
Plate tectonics is one self-evident mechanism for such an occurrence, although not the only mechanism
Plate tectonics is NOT self-evident. It took a lot of research and exacting studies to verify it.
Give ONE OTHER plausible explanation backed by an equivalent level of study.
Quote:
I do notice that your response is presented in terms of generalities and rhetoric.
ROFLOL - I am giving specific situations. You are not giving a single one. Instead you are saying that you are waiting for the cavalry to arrive and giving hypothetical pieces of nonsense about geologists confusing the dating of mud slides with dating the thing they engulf.
I see you say you are an evangelist. I hope you aren't standing up in public and talking such ignorant nonsense.
/Bevin
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#80573 - 05/04/06 04:31 AM
Re: Strict Biblical Literalism on Scientific Matters: Is It Tenable?
[Re: Mandy]
|
Registered: 09/04/02
Posts: 4699
Loc: New England
|
Maybe you want specific instances of inversions... http://www.virtualexplorer.com.au/journal/2000/01/betts/background.htmlhttp://www.palmod.uni-bremen.de/FB5/geochron/basin_fill.htmhttp://www.nps.gov/whsa/Geology%20of%20White%20Sands/Chap01/Chap01%20Main.htmlLook for the reference to meteors in http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/1998/nsf98155/chp5.htm Quote:
Antarctic search for meteorites. Ralph Harvey, Case Western Reserve University. Since 1976, ANSMET (the Antarctic Search for Meteorites program) has recovered more than 9,000 meteorite specimens from locations along the Transantarctic Mountains. Antarctica is the world's premier meteorite hunting ground for two reasons.
Although meteorites fall in a random fashion all over the globe, the likelihood of finding a meteorite is enhanced if the background material is plain and the accumulation rate of terrestrial sediment is low, making the east antarctic ice sheet the perfect medium. Along the margins of this ice sheet, ice flow is sometimes blocked by mountains, nunataks, and other obstructions, exposing slow-moving or stagnant ice to the fierce katabatic winds. These winds, in turn, ablate away the ice, leaving behind a lag deposit of meteorites representing those that were sprinkled throughout the volume of ice lost to the wind. When such a process continues for a long enough time (10s or 100s of thousands of years), the concentration of meteorites can be spectacular.
/Bevin
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#80574 - 05/04/06 07:04 AM
Re: Strict Biblical Literalism on Scientific Matters: Is It Tenable?
[Re: Mandy]
|
Craftsman
Registered: 03/13/06
Posts: 3513
Loc: N38d14.516m, W122d37.982m
|
Quote:
bevin said: I see you say you are an evangelist. I hope you aren't standing up in public and talking such ignorant nonsense.
/Bevin
I recall reading the ground rules for participation on this Origins forum. I also recall Bravus commenting that he felt positive about the tone of the discussions, and so was opening up this forum more. However, your comments above, are ridicule and are demeaning, and should be unacceptable on a forum like this. If you are unwilling to be civil, perhaps you should take a break from this discussion. Or, if you will not, then I would ask Bravus as moderator to keep this discussion on a positive note.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#80575 - 05/04/06 07:05 AM
Re: Strict Biblical Literalism on Scientific Matters: Is It Tenable?
[Re: Mandy]
|
Craftsman
Registered: 03/13/06
Posts: 3513
Loc: N38d14.516m, W122d37.982m
|
Quote:
bevin said: Maybe you want specific instances of inversions
It is good to provide cites. As for meteorites, that has not been an issue in this discussion so far, other than your reference to Hornbacher.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#80576 - 05/04/06 12:31 PM
Re: Strict Biblical Literalism on Scientific Matters: Is It Tenable?
[Re: ]
|
Registered: 09/04/02
Posts: 4699
Loc: New England
|
It was you who started down the road with Quote:
I do notice that your response is presented in terms of generalities and rhetoric.
If you don't like the retort, stick to the topic.
So far the following issues are lacking a short-age explanation
A short-age explanation for
- meteor distribution in Antarctica
- Hawaii
- The distribution of fossils between South America and South Africa
- The distribution of fossils into distinct groupings that the evolutionists explain by their living millions of years apart
- Inversions
- The White Cliffs of Dover
- The magnetic fields imbedded in the rocks
- and more
/Bevin
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#80577 - 05/04/06 04:27 PM
Re: Strict Biblical Literalism on Scientific Matters: Is It Tenable?
[Re: ]
|
Registered: 09/04/02
Posts: 4699
Loc: New England
|
Quote:
I would ask Bravus as moderator to keep this discussion on a positive note.
Bravus has already done so in private mail to me
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#80578 - 05/04/06 05:28 PM
Re: Strict Biblical Literalism on Scientific Matters: Is It Tenable?
[Re: Mandy]
|
Craftsman
Registered: 03/13/06
Posts: 3513
Loc: N38d14.516m, W122d37.982m
|
In regard to your post # 216092, you seem to assert that fossilization has in fact been observed to be CURRENTLY in process. Was that your intention? If so, please provide cites of observations supporting same. Bravus' cites pertained to fossilization believed to have occurred within the past few thousand years, but not actually occurring at present.
Secondly, you assert that there are "other ways" than C-14 of dating ORGANIC remains or fossils. We are not talking about rocks here. In regard to fossilized organic remains, please state the 'other ways' you are referring to. That is, dating the remains themselves, not the surrounding rocks or based on any other external items or factors, but the actual remains themselves.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|

SEARCH OUR SITE
|
|
This full membership income helps pay for hosting, advertising, domain names, software support etc etc
|
|
|
61 registered (aldona, Beryl, Bravus, Bruno, c freeland, carolaa, CoAspen, Coulsty, Curly, darlene, dgrimm60, Dottie, fca, fccool, forgie, Gerry Cabalo, Gladussee, Jerry D Thomas, John317, Kevin H, Kountzer, lazarus, LifeHiscost, Lineman, Liz, Loren Fenton, LynnDel, max, Maxi, melvin mccarty, mikeyswen79, Nan, Neil D, Nightingale, Norman, olger, pkrause, Planey, Redwood, Robert, Sapphire, SMAN, Taylor, vern, 17 invisible),
420
Guests and
233
Spiders online. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
Registered: 05/19/07
Posts: 130
|
|
|