Jump to content


Why Does The Fossil Record Look The Way It Does?

  • Please log in to reply
102 replies to this topic

#101 Javabean



  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 950 posts
  • Location:Harrisburg Pa
  • Age: 33
  • no affiliation
  • Atheist
  • Harrisburg

Posted 14 August 2009 - 10:10 AM

I wonder if anyone can define "supernatural".

The word means "above natural", so we obviously have to know the definition of "natural". I've never seen a good one -- which is why I think the argument about whether the supernatural should be allowed into/kept out of science is silly.


View Post

Supernatural means to me that an entity outside of normal perceived reality effecting reality in obvious manners, such as the flood, time dilation before the fall of man. The act of creating. etc.

Of course it could be in less obvious manners for theistic evolutionists also. The guiding hand of God evolving his creations into their present day forms. I say this is less obvious because of the evidence backing evolution, or the evidence that Evolutionists say back evolution.

But then again I'm certainly no YEC.

Adam any thoughts on what you would consider 'supernatural', or a definiton of 'supernatural'?

#102 Guest_Taikoo_*

  • Guests

Posted 24 October 2009 - 08:13 AM

Your comet idea for water does not work. Comets are like bombs. Remember what happened to Jupiter a few years ago? One hole blown into Jupiter from a comet "fragment" was big enough to fit the earth inside it.

Posted Image

Besides, like creation you cannot provide any observation which makes it all speculation.

On the atmosphere. Which weighs more?

1) Dry air?
2) Moist air?

In water, according to scuba books. Every 33 feet you descend equal 1 atmosphere. Now, if the air in the atmosphere weighed that much we would all be crushed. So if water weighs more, then so does moist air.

Rain falls out of the air because of what? It weighs more. So when it condensates it falls.

Does air have weight? At sea level the weight of the atmosphere causes a little over 14 psi. You also get around 14 psi in 33 feet of water.

Subduction on the scale that is needed for things to work the way old earthers and evolutionists need it to. Would also mean that the whole earth's crust recycles itself every so many years. Basically, subduction on this level is a work around for evolution and old earth problems.

One more thing. What happens to oil and gas deposits that go through subduction on the level evolutionists and old earthers claim that it does? There are oil and gas deposits under the oceans, right? So what happens to them when they get sucked into the "HOT" upper mantle? Hear any underground bombs go off lately? One spark and:
Posted Image
So what do you think will happen when gas and oil gets heated way beyond explosion temps during subduction? Also, because of subduction there should be no oil or gas deposits left because they all got sucked into the upper mantle. But that is not what we find now do we?
Side note: I notice you are trying to make this personal with comments such as these:

After dismissing plate tectonics as lacking a mechanism Ikester posts:-
Then Ikester pastes a passage from:-
Then he goes on:-

If your intent is to entertain the lurkers, or try to get on my nerves by making the debate more personal. I will consider you a time waster. Debate the subject without the personal comments.

I can also say: Keith C thinks that air has more weight than water and responds...

Now what would be my intent with a post like that? Did I prove something scientifically, or am I taking it personally and getting back at you? Or better yet. Maybe I cannot debunk what's being said so a comment like this is needed? Maybe that's why you do it?

View Post

Couple of problems with what you wrote here...

1. yes, the comet made quite a hole in jupiter, but then, jupiter isnt solid like the earth. so it rally cant be compared directly. We have been hit by some very big asteroids, and the earth stays intact. comets vary tremendously in size anyway.

2. if greater air pressure would crush us, why doesnt 14 psi? You know its coz we have the same pressure inside as out!
Same reason deep sea fish are not crushed.

In the old pressure suits, divers would go down a hundred feet or more, breathing many times normal air pressure, but the air dissolved in their blood equalized it. And of course, caused a lot of trouble if they came up too fast!
14 psi is equal to what, 896 lbs per square foot. 33 cu ft of water is over wights 2.047 lbs so maybe you are remembering your scuba book wrong.

3. i am curious why you think that subduction isnt real. have you examined the evidence? One can even find sea floor volcanoes leaning at an angle on the slope down into a subduction zone.

4. The seabed oil/ gas deposits you speak of are not under the sea bed itself.
The earth's crust is very different between sea bed and continent. The oil' / gas deposits are in continental rock, some of which is flooded with sea water.

5. No, plate tectonics does not mean that the entire crust is reworked ever so many years.

The problems you are finding here are just based on misconceptions.

#103 Geode



  • Banned
  • PipPipPip
  • 612 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 60
  • Mormon
  • Theistic Evolutionist
  • Bangkok, Thailand

Posted 13 October 2010 - 07:18 AM

Re my post saying that scientists had been studying sedimentation in rivers and deltas since at least 1914 - well before the creationist experiments shown in the video.

Steno is considered the father of modern geology because he got many things right.
His principles relate to deposition from still or slowly-moving water in oceans and lakes.

The video is concerned with deposition of a mixture of two different size materials from water flowing relatively rapidly in one direction - not the system Steno was interested in.  That is why the video results are different from Steno's.

View Post

Although Steno's contributions to geology were very significant, geologists themselves attribute James Hutton as being the father of modern geology.

I agree with you that the experiment in the video is not an analogous test of the depositional systems studied by Steno. The limitation of grain sizes and current flow used are atypical. The results do not falsify the Law of Superposition, which actually is shown to be upheld by the results in the experiment if applied correctly, and not according to the re-definition of the principle as set forth in the videos, which is not the way it was used by Steno or geologists since his time. Theclaim made here has been soundly refuted in other threads.

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users