U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 03-27-2012, 12:25 PM
 
17,968 posts, read 12,427,722 times
Reputation: 989

Advertisements

I wonder what you naysayers have to say about this information in favor of a world-wide flood:

Scientific Evidence for a Worldwide Flood
Scientific Evidence for a Worldwide Flood

It talks about polystrate evidence all over the world, salinity etc.



Polystrate trees going through layers of sediment laid down during the global flood.

Last edited by Eusebius; 03-27-2012 at 12:59 PM..

 
Old 03-27-2012, 12:51 PM
 
Location: Dallas, TX
31,777 posts, read 24,004,420 times
Reputation: 12105
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eusebius View Post
Well, as you know, the ice age came after the world-wide flood of Noah. But, no, he didn't need a snow mobile to get through it. But it is rather clever you think Noah was smart enough to build one.
Not even God is presented in these stories as a smart person, much less this character Noah. The thought process of God, as presented in these scriptures you blindly follow, has tribal knowhow written all over it. Heck, with flying vehicles, Hindus were far more advanced in their thoughts.
 
Old 03-27-2012, 12:53 PM
 
17,968 posts, read 12,427,722 times
Reputation: 989
EinsteinsGhost, what did you think of the link I just posted about the evidence for a world-wide flood? Did you read all of it?
 
Old 03-27-2012, 01:00 PM
 
Location: Dallas, TX
31,777 posts, read 24,004,420 times
Reputation: 12105
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eusebius View Post
EinsteinsGhost, what did you think of the link I just posted about the evidence for a world-wide flood? Did you read all of it?
Don't give me crap for links. I'm picky about clicking on links, as I always check beforehand where the link takes me to. So, let us stick with something that you find disturbing: facts.

What was the calendar year when the flood happened?
 
Old 03-27-2012, 01:06 PM
 
17,968 posts, read 12,427,722 times
Reputation: 989
Quote:
Originally Posted by EinsteinsGhost View Post
Don't give me crap for links. I'm picky about clicking on links, as I always check beforehand where the link takes me to. So, let us stick with something that you find disturbing: facts.

What was the calendar year when the flood happened?
Nope, just tell me what you think of the scientific evidence I provided. I don't get you guys. You thump your chests and say I never have provided any evidence for a world-wide flood and when I do you ignore it!

This is from the link provided above:

Turbidity Currents:
A turbidity current is an underwater mud flow, the discovery of which caused somewhat of a revolution in geology.
As a result, many sedimentary strata layers throughout the world have been reevaluated and found to be turbidites. 34,35,36,37,38,39,40
For example, regarding turbidites and the impact they are having on modern Geology, Kurt Howard, 41 said the following in his paper on this topic:
My physical geology professor said, "Regarding uniformitarianism, you can take it with a grain of salt." After reviewing geology texts on the subject of turbidites, I am following the courageous professor's advice. To paraphrase his words, I am taking uniformitarianism with a grain of sand, for the philosophy of uniformitarianism states that sedimentary layers form over many millions of years, while ... recent research has shown that turbidites form within a few hours. {1} Emphasis Added

In 1972 Burgert identified several lower basal Tapeats units as turbidites in Grand Canyon's Cheops Bay. Dr. Ariel Roth a geologist at Loma Linda University's Geoscience Institute, suggested that 30% of all sedimentary rocks in Grand Canyon are turbidites. Some geologists suggest that 50% of the world's sedimentary rocks might be turbidites. Emphasis Added


Modern geologists discarded the terms flysch sediments and geosyncline because rapidly formed megathick flysch is incompatible with uniformitarianism and long ages. However, in the last few years, the number of geologists abandoning the classical uniformitarian discipline and adopting the new catastrophism is almost a shock to ... creationists. Geologists are finally beginning to grudgingly agree with ... creationists about the nature of the stratigraphic record, which is a record of major catastrophic events and not the slow year-by-year buildup suggested by uniformitarianism. Flysch deposits might be the sedimentary results of a global flood. The idea of geosynclines is unpopular because most geologists believe in plate tectonics. Emphasis Added http://www.earthage.org/EarthOldorYo...wide_flood.htm

Last edited by Eusebius; 03-27-2012 at 01:36 PM..
 
Old 03-27-2012, 01:42 PM
 
Location: Victoria, BC.
30,038 posts, read 30,671,240 times
Reputation: 12213
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eusebius View Post
Nope, just tell me what you think of the scientific evidence I provided. I don't get you guys. You thump your chests and say I never have provided any evidence for a world-wide flood and when I do you ignore it!

This is from the link provided above:

Turbidity Currents:
A turbidity current is an underwater mud flow, the discovery of which caused somewhat of a revolution in geology.
As a result, many sedimentary strata layers throughout the world have been reevaluated and found to be turbidites. 34,35,36,37,38,39,40
For example, regarding turbidites and the impact they are having on modern Geology, Kurt Howard, 41 said the following in his paper on this topic:
My physical geology professor said, "Regarding uniformitarianism, you can take it with a grain of salt." After reviewing geology texts on the subject of turbidites, I am following the courageous professor's advice. To paraphrase his words, I am taking uniformitarianism with a grain of sand, for the philosophy of uniformitarianism states that sedimentary layers form over many millions of years, while ... recent research has shown that turbidites form within a few hours. {1} Emphasis Added

In 1972 Burgert identified several lower basal Tapeats units as turbidites in Grand Canyon's Cheops Bay. Dr. Ariel Roth a geologist at Loma Linda University's Geoscience Institute, suggested that 30% of all sedimentary rocks in Grand Canyon are turbidites. Some geologists suggest that 50% of the world's sedimentary rocks might be turbidites. Emphasis Added


Modern geologists discarded the terms flysch sediments and geosyncline because rapidly formed megathick flysch is incompatible with uniformitarianism and long ages. However, in the last few years, the number of geologists abandoning the classical uniformitarian discipline and adopting the new catastrophism is almost a shock to ... creationists. Geologists are finally beginning to grudgingly agree with ... creationists about the nature of the stratigraphic record, which is a record of major catastrophic events and not the slow year-by-year buildup suggested by uniformitarianism. Flysch deposits might be the sedimentary results of a global flood. The idea of geosynclines is unpopular because most geologists believe in plate tectonics. Emphasis Added Scientific Evidence for a Worldwide Flood
Your links are to creationist young earth sites and are not credible...Try linking to an authentic scientific site that supports your views...What, you can't find one? I wonder why...
 
Old 03-27-2012, 02:02 PM
 
Location: Dallas, TX
31,777 posts, read 24,004,420 times
Reputation: 12105
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eusebius View Post
Nope, just tell me what you think of the scientific evidence I provided. I don't get you guys. You thump your chests and say I never have provided any evidence for a world-wide flood and when I do you ignore it!
The problem is that these sources are your idea of "science". Save the trouble for another time, and just give me the calendar year when Noah's flood happened. You at least know that, right?
 
Old 03-27-2012, 02:53 PM
 
Location: the Beaver State
6,468 posts, read 11,153,819 times
Reputation: 3513
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eusebius View Post
I wonder what you naysayers have to say about this information in favor of a world-wide flood:

Scientific Evidence for a Worldwide Flood
Scientific Evidence for a Worldwide Flood
Wow... talk about terrible science. Using a string of unrelated events and then trying to relate them all together to prove another fact would get an "F" grade in most science classes, and even many Philosophy classes.
 
Old 03-27-2012, 03:02 PM
 
34,450 posts, read 8,876,928 times
Reputation: 4784
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eusebius View Post
EinsteinsGhost, what did you think of the link I just posted about the evidence for a world-wide flood? Did you read all of it?
I believe that we have mentioned some of these. The whale is a notorious piece of ignorance - the strata itself has turned on end: firm evidence of folding of geology over millions of years. That's why the whale is upright. I already mentioned the shells on the mountains are part of a fossil sea - bed as they are in situ and not scattered as though in a storm and there are fossil worm - burrows.

Basically, the response to the Q:

"Was virtually all of the sedimentary strata laid down by a single Worldwide Deluge in a short amount of time, or is the evolutionary scenario of slow change, acting over eons of T-I-M-E, and the associated Geological Time Chart (with its millions and millions of years) a more accurate account of Earth history?"

is, yes, all that is more credibly the result of eons of erosion rather than a year - long flood.

The suggestion about layered precipitation sounds unfeasible. How can one suggest that coal underlies rocks or silt settled quicker than stone?

I recall that the Mt St Helens claim has been refuted but do we need to? That site already looks compromised.

Last edited by TRANSPONDER; 03-27-2012 at 03:14 PM..
 
Old 03-27-2012, 03:04 PM
 
34,450 posts, read 8,876,928 times
Reputation: 4784
duplicate post..maybe I'll post something else...


Mt. St. Helens:
Three separate eruptions produced sedimentary-type layers hundreds of feet thick. One of these was a hurricane velocity deposit that produced thousands of thin laminations up to 25 feet thick 10,11,12 The third eruption was a lava flow, which turned into a hot mud-flow as it crossed the Toutle River. This hot mud flow not only diverted the river, but carved a 17 mile long series of canyons (up to 140 feet deep) in a matter of hours. They call it the Little Grand Canyon of the Toutle River." 20,21,22 And to this very day, the neither the mass media, nor any popular "science" publications have told the public what happened. 23 For more on this see Mt. St. Helens: Evidence in Support of Biblical Catastrophe.

Claim CH581.1:
Rapid erosion of sediments along the north fork of Toutle River, flowing out of Spirit Lake on Mount St. Helens, carved a canyon like a miniature Grand Canyon, showing that the Grand Canyon could form suddenly.
Source:
Austin, Steven A. 1986. Mt. St. Helens and catastrophism. Impact 157 (July). http://www.icr.org/pubs/imp/imp-157.htm http://www.icr.org/index.php?module=...on=view&ID=261
Response:

The sediments on Mount St. Helens were unconsolidated volcanic ash, which is easily eroded. The Grand Canyon was carved into harder materials, including well-consolidated sandstone and limestone, hard metamorphosed sediments (the Vishnu schist), plus a touch of relatively recent basalt.

The walls of the Mount St. Helens canyon slope 45 degrees. The walls of the Grand Canyon are vertical in places.

The canyon was not entirely formed suddenly. The canyon along Toutle River has a river continuously contributing to its formation. Another canyon also cited as evidence of catastrophic erosion is Engineer's Canyon, which was formed via water pumped out of Spirit Lake over several days by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.

The streams flowing down Mount St. Helens flow at a steeper grade than the Colorado River does, allowing greater erosion.

The Grand Canyon (and canyons further up and down the Colorado River) is more than 100,000 times larger than the canyon on Mount St. Helens. The two are not really comparable. (Talk Origins)

Last edited by TRANSPONDER; 03-27-2012 at 03:19 PM.. Reason: duplicate post, sorry.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Closed Thread

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top