Most of the mountains are not from Earth in origin (faith, Christians)

[eanassir]

[quote=PanTerra;11969496]You did see that "most likely" in there didn't you? You evidently are not aware that we have seen stars being born, and stars dying. Until one comes along that explains ALL the evidence, using only the evidence, even better, I suppose we'll stick with that one.

Plainly, I say to you that such theories are in fact "most unlikely".

Originally Posted by PanTerra

Well, knock me over with a feather. hehe

Geologists ARE scientists.

At the start I thought you seek after evidence and in scientific way; but now I see you only try to overcome in words.

Your following words are in disorder; mostly they circle around:

Originally Posted by PanTerra

Which mountains were formed on the earth and which were not? List them.
Can you name the ranges?
Which are older?
Can you direct me to one of these ranges? I don't think you can.
You claimed that both are here, now. How do you tell the difference? No answer, eh?

There are general features; I said in a previous reply that I cannot say this or that mountain is for certain has been cast by God in the Earth.

The general features of the newly-formed mountains are as follows:
>> The mountains due to volcanoes are obviously clear.
>> The mountains that form the longitudinal mountain ranges are almost due to the depression of one part of the land and the elevation of the neighboring part.
>> The newly formed mountains by the rain and torrents drafting substances to another place and by time another mounatain is formed.

These are written in 4 numbers at the start of our link, which I don't think you have read it carefully:
http://www.quran-ayat.com/u/new_page_2.htm#Mountains (broken link)


The mountains due to the falling of planetary portions on the Earth:
>> Almost they are the high mountains.
>> They are mountains nieghboring each other to form some chains.
>> Some solitary mountains that cannot be explained by any geological factor menitoned above.

In a previous reply, I gave some images of mountains that IMO are due to falling of meteoritic portions of the destroyed planets on the Earth; but I cannot say that for certain; I don't know exactly which moutain belongs to this or that group.

Originally Posted by PanTerra

Which are older?Older than the Himilayas? You already wrote they were formed tectonically.

I did not say about Himalayas for certain; but I said the tectonical factor does work in addition to the other geological factors; this concerning the newly formed mountains.

Another method to differentiate is that the older mountains are almost those that fell from the space. Particularly, if you see the mountain is older than the surrounding areas.

Originally Posted by PanTerra

Having mapped a few ranges, I have not found any that would indicate that they were formed elswhere.

How did you know that they were not formed elsewhere? did you find a letter specially written for you and telling you that?

Originally Posted by PanTerra

If they were former meteors, they would have huge amorphous iron cores.

Not all meteorites have iron; yes indeed some of meteorites include iron in its free form, but not all of the meteorites are like that. And since the mountains were portions of the past planets; they are like the earth in its general constituents.

BTW, the iron in its free form is found only in the recently fallen meteorites; as in the Quran 57: 25 God - be glorified - said the iron came down from the sky:
وَأَنزَلْنَا الْحَدِيدَ فِيهِ بَأْسٌ شَدِيدٌ وَمَنَافِعُ لِلنَّاسِ...الخ

The explanation:
(And We sent down the iron [included in the meteorites falling down from the space], in which are both keen violence and [many] advantages to people, …etc.)

It means: He sent down iron, included in the meteorites. Because the extraction of the pure iron was not known by tha ancient people; so they used to exploit the free iron present in the meteorites for many advantages.

The Universe and the Quran 2 (http://www.quran-ayat.com/u/new_page_2.htm#Mountains - broken link)

[Fred314X]

So you're saying that the geological evidence there in front of your face--by which I mean the strata visible in all mountains--counts for nothing...and you're going to continue trying to tell us that mountains are not of terrestrial origin?

You certainly aren't making a case either for yourself or for the Qu'ran.

[PanTerra]

Originally Posted by eanassir

Plainly, I say to you that such theories are in fact "most unlikely".

Yet you provide really nothing. Just plainly arm-waving.

At the start I thought you seek after evidence and in scientific way; but now I see you only try to overcome in words.

Your following words are in disorder; mostly they circle around:

And you haven't shown me geologic evidence.

There are general features; I said in a previous reply that I cannot say this or that mountain is for certain has been cast by God in the Earth.

The general features of the newly-formed mountains are as follows:
The mountains due to volcanoes are obviously clear.
The mountains that form the longitudinal mountain ranges are almost due to the depression of one part of the land and the elevation of the neighboring part.
The newly formed mountains by the rain and torrents drafting substances to another place and by time another mounatain is formed.


The mountains due to the falling of planetary portions on the Earth:
Almost they are the high mountains.
They are mountains nieghboring each other to form some chains.
Some solitary mountains that cannot be explained by any geological factor menitoned above.

Present the cross-sections. What solitary mountains are you writing about. I don't know of any that can't be explained by conventional Geologic process. They are all accounted for.

In a previous reply, I gave some images of mountains that IMO are due to falling of meteoritic portions of the destroyed planets on the Earth; but I cannot say that for certain; I don't know exactly which moutain belongs to this or that group.

As I suspected. You are making this up as you go along. If there is no way to test it, then it is not scientific.

I did not say about Himalayas for certain; but I said the tectonical factor does work in addition to the other geological factors; this concerning the newly formed mountains.

Can you point to where this delineation occurs? At what point did your broken peices of another planet contribut to the making of the himilays as the plates pushed together?

Another method to differentiate is that the older mountains are almost those that fell from the space. Particularly, if you see the mountain is older than the surrounding areas.

Like alluvial fans? That is an erosional feature. Or are you talking about faulting, a tectonic activity. Still nothing?

How did you know that they were not formed elsewhere? did you find a letter from your agent telling you that?

By how they conformed. And any unconformity is resolved through a reconstruction prior to any type of disturbance, confirming deposition and or formation in purley conventional earth-bound mechanisms

Not all meteorites have iron; yes indeed some of meteorites include iron in its free form, but not all of the meteorites are like that. And since the mountains were portions of the past planets; they are like the earth in its general constituents.

There is a logical fallacy in there. Can you spot it? Bueller, Bueller? I would think that if the mountains were first formed on other planets they would be markedly different, not conveniently the same.

BTW, the iron in its free form is found only in the recently fallen meteorites; as in the Quran 57: 25 God - be glorified - said the iron came down from the sky[/quote]

Yet they are older than the mountains. Why is that?

The explanation:
(And We sent down the iron [included in the meteorites falling down from the space], in which are both keen violence and [many] advantages to people, …etc.)

It means: He sent down iron, included in the meteorites. Because the extraction of the pure iron was not known by tha ancient people; so they used to exploit the free iron present in the meteorites for many advantages.

The Universe and the Quran 2 (http://www.quran-ayat.com/u/new_page_2.htm#Mountains - broken link)

mmm kay.

[Jazzymom]

Originally Posted by PanTerra

Yet you provide really nothing. Just plainly arm-waving.




And you haven't shown me geologic evidence.





Present the cross-sections. What solitary mountains are you writing about. I don't know of any that can't be explained by conventional Geologic process. They are all accounted for.



As I suspected. You are making this up as you go along. If there is no way to test it, then it is not scientific.



Can you point to where this delineation occurs? At what point did your broken peices of another planet contribut to the making of the himilays as the plates pushed together?



Like alluvial fans? That is an erosional feature. Or are you talking about faulting, a tectonic activity. Still nothing?



By how they conformed. And any unconformity is resolved through a reconstruction prior to any type of disturbance, confirming deposition and or formation in purley conventional earth-bound mechanisms




There is a logical fallacy in there. Can you spot it? Bueller, Bueller? I would think that if the mountains were first formed on other planets they would be markedly different, not conveniently the same.

BTW, the iron in its free form is found only in the recently fallen meteorites; as in the Quran 57: 25 God - be glorified - said the iron came down from the sky

Yet they are older than the mountains. Why is that?



mmm kay.[/quote]


He can't because to accept anything you have said would bring into question the quran he is taking his information from...

[Cunucu Beach]

I wasn't too many years ago that the Quran was pretty much the sole textbook in schools in the Middle East. That should tell you something.

[eanassir]

Originally Posted by Fred314X

So you're saying that the geological evidence there in front of your face--by which I mean the strata visible in all mountains--counts for nothing...and you're going to continue trying to tell us that mountains are not of terrestrial origin?

You certainly aren't making a case either for yourself or for the Qu'ran.

Many of the mountains were formed on the Earth because of different geological factors.

While most of the mountains came as portions of some plenets where the strata were availble there also, so when such portions came they retained such strata; moreover the strata go inside the earth for considerable depth and indicate such mountain rested heavily on the ground and dipped to some distance like the pegs of the tent.

Moreover, some strata are not horizontal, sometimes vertical or oblique, and this indicates certainly they fell on the ground, rested heavily and dipped to considerable depth under the ground. This is like the peg of the tent which you hammer in the ground in order to fix the tent in position.

This is in the Quran 78: 7
وَالْجِبَالَ أَوْتَادًا
The explanation:
(And [haven't We made] the mountains [as] pegs?)

Islam Guide: The Quran on Mountains

[Asheville Native]

Originally Posted by jackmccullough

This whole thread is a joke, right?

If it isn't are you now scared when you realize that people who believe this type of nonsense are out there with the rest of us. Scares me, even the thought of them driving on the same roads I might be on, and I really really hope these are not the people designing bridges I drive across or airplanes I may fly in.

[eanassir]

Originally Posted by Bag-Of-Hammers

Moderator cut: Orphaned post

Throw your enthusiasm away and also your associating Jesus with God Almighty or else you will lose in your afterlife and Jesus himself will quit himself from every enthusiastic and say to them as in the Gospel: "I tell you the truth; I don't know you; away from me, evildoers." (in spite they are related to him by name)

[Bag-Of-Hammers]

God will be fighting to say who has the word on weather Jesus was a man of his word. He is going to fight with passion. You would too if it was your beloved, torchered to death son.

[eanassir]

Originally Posted by PanTerra

Yet you provide really nothing. Just plainly arm-waving.

I said such theory that the Earth was formed from the accretion of dirts and some other substances is the most ridiculous one; how could you convince yourselves with it ?

Originally Posted by PanTerra

What solitary mountains are you writing about. I don't know of any that can't be explained by conventional Geologic process. They are all accounted for.

Geologists made classification and try to explain but they had no such idea of the origin of mountains from the space as falling portions of some destroyed planets in the past; so geologists had no such idea when they made their classifications and explanations.

Originally Posted by PanTerra

Can you point to where this delineation occurs? At what point did your broken peices of another planet contribut to the making of the himilays as the plates pushed together?

You have misunderstood my words about the Himalaya because some members said: what about Himalaya and the Alp; and I answered him: I don't know for certain; the geological factors do work, but most of mountains fell from the space; while about Himalaya or others I don't know; although I think they fell also from the space; because such huge areas I don't think they are due to tectonics and their position also is in the middle of the continent not in the periphery or borders between continents; and God is All-Knowing.

Originally Posted by PanTerra

There is a logical fallacy in there. Can you spot it? Bueller, Bueller? I would think that if the mountains were first formed on other planets they would be markedly different, not conveniently the same.

This is another smack for you
The constiuents of the past planets are like the new planets. And the portions falling from the space can be more logical to explain the story; but they had not such idea.

Originally Posted by PanTerra

[quote eanassir] BTW, the iron in its free form is found only in the recently fallen meteorites; as in the Quran 57: 25 God - be glorified - said the iron came down from the sky

Originally Posted by PanTerra

Yet they are older than the mountains. Why is that?

These meteorites containing iron are older than the newly formed mountains and older than some of the old mountains: depending on what group of planets were destroyed and on what Doomsday they issued from; because there had been seven Doomsdays (when seven successive solar systems had been destroyed successively with a very long time intervals between one solar system and the other) and the next Doomsday will be the eighth; so the meteorites may be very old; if they belong to some remote Doomsday.

See this here:

The Universe and the Quran 4 (http://www.quran-ayat.com/u/new_page_4.htm#Formation_of_the_New_Planets - broken link)