Moderators: MichelleH, Minimalist, JPeters
Names, affiliations, credentials, please. Post a link to one of their articles or something. Otherwise arch won't consider you a good ally.Genesis Veracity wrote:Those geologists who are willing to think for themselves, who are willing to look at the big picture, and use logic, and there are plenty of those, Frank.
OK. So we have thousands of feet of old sea bed in the Himalayas. And where is this seabed elsewhere?Genesis Veracity wrote:Oh so explain to me how flat-lying sedimentary layers, containing billions of mostly small marine creatures, ended up composing mountain ranges of these, now folded, sedimentary layers, with no radial tension cracks in the folds, indicating the layers were still soft when the folding occurred, let's see that knowledge of geology which you imply you have.
Mainstream science does not consider the young earth biblical interpretation of a global flood and associated deluge mythology to be a valid scientific theory. Although flood geology was widely supported by early practitioners of geology and geosciences, it was contradicted by many scientific discoveries of the first half of the 19th century and it was abandoned as a serious scientific hypothesis by the middle of the century. It was revived in the early 20th century as part of the growth of the Christian fundamentalist movement in the United States.
Many scientific objections have been raised concerning the proposed mechanics of flood geology, which often require the suspension of basic laws of physics - something which mainstream science sees as being extremely improbable. A massive flood of the size suggested by creation geologists is extremely difficult to reconcile with basic physical laws. In particular, the amount of water required to cover the Earth's entire surface is enormous and no naturalistic mechanism exists that can explain where it came from or where it went. The mechanisms proposed by creationists to account for the fossil record, lithospheric layering, and tectonic formations are rejected by the vast majority of geological scientists. In short, mainstream geologists consider it to be pseudoscience, and old-earth creationists agree.
Flood geology should not be confused with episodic catastrophism as observed by geologists and earth scientists at many locations throughout the Earth's ~4.55 billion year natural history. Such confusion surrounded the observations of the geologist J Harlen Bretz who discovered the Missoula Floods in the Pacific Northwest of the United States. His observations and theories were rejected out of hand for many years by mainstream geologists and scientists on the basis that catastrophism was not science, but rather religion. The Earth's physical history is replete with catastrophic events that can be misconstrued this way.
Your dismissal of the implications Genesis "Veracity" is, however.Genesis Veracity wrote:By the way "Doctor X," mountain ranges of thousands of feet IS this issue, so it can't be "irrelevant blather, . . .
Argumentum ad veritatem obfusandam: you have yet to explain the volume of water and the implications of it.. . . your saying that is like saying horses have nothing to do with equestrian events, snap out of it.
Were is this layer?Genesis Veracity wrote:The sedimentary layers are all over the continents, from the global ocean which was such for about a year, to deposit those thousands of feet of sedimentary layers, with billions of marine creatures entombed therein, 99% of which are small marine creatures.
The mountain ranges were folded and uplifted during the rapid plate-tectonic movments of the Deluge year.
How was the energy released during the flood manifested?Genesis Veracity wrote:Classic Wikipedia, they say the (Global Flood) Model forces a suspension of the laws of physics, bad try, but millions will believe Wikepedia on this, so I challenge all, how does the Global Flood Model supposedly require a suspension of the laws of physics, good luck.