Jump to content


Photo

Layers Of Rock


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
50 replies to this topic

#1 JoshuaJacob

JoshuaJacob

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 441 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Ponchatoula, Louisiana
  • Age: 34
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Ponchatoula, Louisiana

Posted 01 February 2011 - 01:59 PM

I hear a lot that layers of rock proves long ages but is this true? When Mt St Helen erupted in 1980 it was discovered that it had laid down layers of rock in just one day, the same layers that some scientists says only happens with long periods of time. So is this just a one time thing with volcanoes or does it really prove that the layers We see do not need long periods of time?

Since the Flood of Noah was a catastrophic event with probably thousands of volcanoes erupting with massive tsunamis being caused by earthquakes in the ocean, wouldn't these cause massive amounts of layers to be formed in a short period of time?

#2 MamaElephant

MamaElephant

    former JW

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1564 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Interests:Bible, Home-schooling, Education, Fitness, Young Earth Science, Evolution, Natural Medicine, Board Games, Video Games, Study of cult mind control and Counseling for those coming out of cult mind control.
  • Age: 35
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • I am His! 1/29/12

Posted 01 February 2011 - 02:53 PM

I hear a lot that layers of rock proves long ages but is this true? When Mt St Helen erupted in 1980 it was discovered that it had laid down layers of rock in just one day, the same layers that some scientists says only happens with long periods of time. So is this just a one time thing with volcanoes or does it really prove that the layers We see do not need long periods of time?

Since the Flood of Noah was a catastrophic event with probably thousands of volcanoes erupting with massive tsunamis being caused by earthquakes in the ocean, wouldn't these cause massive amounts of layers to be formed in a short period of time?

View Post

You can't prove that Noah's flood caused the layering... so we will ignore it as a good explanation.

The Bible doesn't say anything specifically about volcanoes or tsunamis... you are merely making that bit up so things will fit better.


:rolleyes:

who is giving you a hard time so that an evolutionist doesn't have to.

#3 JoshuaJacob

JoshuaJacob

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 441 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Ponchatoula, Louisiana
  • Age: 34
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Ponchatoula, Louisiana

Posted 01 February 2011 - 03:58 PM

The Bible doesn't say anything specifically about volcanoes or tsunamis... you are merely making that bit up so things will fit better.


No but We see what happens when these things do occur in the present. You also cant prove that the flood didn't cause the layering :rolleyes:

#4 Scanman

Scanman

    Member

  • Banned
  • PipPipPip
  • 641 posts
  • Age: 49
  • Christian
  • Theistic Evolutionist
  • West Virginia

Posted 01 February 2011 - 05:56 PM

I hear a lot that layers of rock proves long ages but is this true? When Mt St Helen erupted in 1980 it was discovered that it had laid down layers of rock in just one day, the same layers that some scientists says only happens with long periods of time.


More like layers of ash and mud.

Maybe you are talking about volcanic basalt or other igneous rocks that result from magma/lava flows?

The ash from the Vesuvius eruption that buried Pompei nearly 2000 years ago, is still ash today...not rock.

Lava flows are a whole other thing, and are easily identifieable when encountered in strata.

#5 Geode

Geode

    Member

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

Posted 01 February 2011 - 06:12 PM

More like layers of ash and mud.

Maybe you are talking about volcanic basalt or other igneous rocks that result from magma/lava flows?

The ash from the Vesuvius eruption that buried Pompei nearly 2000 years ago, is still ash today...not rock.

Lava flows are a whole other thing, and are easily identifieable when encountered in strata.

View Post


Excellent points. The example of the sediment deposited following the eruption of Mt. St Helen's is not a good one to apply to a discussion that attempts to dispute what mainstream geologists know about rates of sedimentation. What was found there fits perfectly within mainstream thought.

#6 ikester7579

ikester7579

    Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 12500 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Florida
  • Interests:God, creation, etc...
  • Age: 48
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • I'm non-denominational

Posted 01 February 2011 - 09:53 PM

I hear a lot that layers of rock proves long ages but is this true? When Mt St Helen erupted in 1980 it was discovered that it had laid down layers of rock in just one day, the same layers that some scientists says only happens with long periods of time. So is this just a one time thing with volcanoes or does it really prove that the layers We see do not need long periods of time?

Since the Flood of Noah was a catastrophic event with probably thousands of volcanoes erupting with massive tsunamis being caused by earthquakes in the ocean, wouldn't these cause massive amounts of layers to be formed in a short period of time?

View Post


Now you notice they don't go and do dating tests on those layers. Because it would prove that layers that are already "aged" through the creation by God, can be separated by this process. Which would also prove that the flood laid it just as you see it.

Posted Image

MSH81_dredging_toutle_river_02-05-81.jpg
In order to remove the May 18, 1980 sediment deposits, and to keep up with new sedimentation, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers began a dredging program on the Toutle (shown here), the Cowlitz, and the Columbia Rivers. By 1987, nearly 140 million cubic yards (110 million meters) of material had been removed from the channels. This is enough material to build twelve lanes of highway, one-foot thick, from New York to San Francisco.
USGS Photograph taken on February 5, 1981, by Lyn Topinka.
http://vulcan.wr.usg...t_slideset.html

Posted Image

This is a picture of the volcanic ash after the Mt. St. Helen eruption. Can you spot the man standing next to the helicopter? This should give you an idea of how much ash is actually expelled during an eruption.

#7 JoshuaJacob

JoshuaJacob

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 441 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Ponchatoula, Louisiana
  • Age: 34
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Ponchatoula, Louisiana

Posted 01 February 2011 - 10:17 PM

More like layers of ash and mud.

Maybe you are talking about volcanic basalt or other igneous rocks that result from magma/lava flows?

The ash from the Vesuvius eruption that buried Pompei nearly 2000 years ago, is still ash today...not rock.

Lava flows are a whole other thing, and are easily identifieable when encountered in strata.

View Post

Ash and mud from just a volcano but what about material from the oceans? doesn't limestone come from the ocean and do We find it laid down on dry land?

#8 JoshuaJacob

JoshuaJacob

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 441 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Ponchatoula, Louisiana
  • Age: 34
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Ponchatoula, Louisiana

Posted 01 February 2011 - 10:28 PM

Some limestone is formed in lakes too but the point is limestone is on dry land but comes from water.

#9 Scanman

Scanman

    Member

  • Banned
  • PipPipPip
  • 641 posts
  • Age: 49
  • Christian
  • Theistic Evolutionist
  • West Virginia

Posted 01 February 2011 - 11:25 PM

Some limestone is formed in lakes too but the point is limestone is on dry land but comes from water.


Because at different times throughout the history of the earth, nearly all land, at one time or another, was under water.

Each layer of limestone or chalk or sandstone, etc...has a story to tell.

#10 Geode

Geode

    Member

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

Posted 01 February 2011 - 11:37 PM

Because at different times throughout the history of the earth, nearly all land, at one time or another, was under water.

Each layer of limestone or chalk or sandstone, etc...has a story to tell.

View Post


And let us not forget what geologists consider "terrestrial" sedimentation which includes those deposits which are transported not only by wind, but by rivers. There are thick sequences of sandstones and shales that have been deposited in the channel belt systems of rivers.

#11 Scanman

Scanman

    Member

  • Banned
  • PipPipPip
  • 641 posts
  • Age: 49
  • Christian
  • Theistic Evolutionist
  • West Virginia

Posted 01 February 2011 - 11:41 PM

Ash and mud from just a volcano but what about material from the oceans? doesn't limestone come from the ocean and do We find it laid down on dry land?


Yes...from periods of time when the land was once an ocean, or a river delta, or the shallow layers of a lagoon, etc...

There are some limestone deposits over a kilometer thick...at an average deposition rate of 1mm/year, it would take a million years to accumulate that much limestone....and that is just one particular deposit. There are many different limestone layers separated by vast quantities of time and sediment.

There are marine layers on top of aeolian deposits on top of evaporite layers ontop of coal layers and then even more marine layers....it would be impossible for these combinations of strata to have been laid down by one single event. All of these strata represent different epochs.

The world has undergone dramatic changes over 4.5 billion years...the continental land masses have divided, subsided, collided and uplifted, etc...

#12 JoshuaJacob

JoshuaJacob

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 441 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Ponchatoula, Louisiana
  • Age: 34
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Ponchatoula, Louisiana

Posted 01 February 2011 - 11:59 PM

Because at different times throughout the history of the earth, nearly all land, at one time or another, was under water.

View Post

And yet You will say there is no evidence that the flood of the bible was a global flood? Just that at certain times the earth was nearly under water. Hmmm

#13 JoshuaJacob

JoshuaJacob

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 441 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Ponchatoula, Louisiana
  • Age: 34
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Ponchatoula, Louisiana

Posted 02 February 2011 - 12:04 AM

Another question would be if God used 4.6 billion years, why wouldn't God say so? Instead God choose the wrong words to describe how he created everything. Why is that? trying to fit mainstream science into the bible does not work and makes what is written not make any sense whatsoever. because You would have to say there was billions or millions of years of death before the fall of man.

#14 JoshuaJacob

JoshuaJacob

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 441 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Ponchatoula, Louisiana
  • Age: 34
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Ponchatoula, Louisiana

Posted 02 February 2011 - 12:12 AM

...the continental land masses have divided


The continental land masses are still connected, they are just separated by water.

#15 Scanman

Scanman

    Member

  • Banned
  • PipPipPip
  • 641 posts
  • Age: 49
  • Christian
  • Theistic Evolutionist
  • West Virginia

Posted 02 February 2011 - 06:32 AM

And yet You will say there is no evidence that the flood of the bible was a global flood? Just that at certain times the earth was nearly under water. Hmmm

View Post


There is no point in recent human history (i.e. the last 100,000 years) where the geological evidence supports a worldwide flood.

It is just not there.
  • Calum likes this

#16 Scanman

Scanman

    Member

  • Banned
  • PipPipPip
  • 641 posts
  • Age: 49
  • Christian
  • Theistic Evolutionist
  • West Virginia

Posted 02 February 2011 - 06:44 AM

Another question would be if God used 4.6 billion years, why wouldn't God say so? Instead God choose the wrong words to describe how he created everything. Why is that? trying to fit mainstream science into the bible does not work and makes what is written not make any sense whatsoever. because You would have to say there was billions or millions of years of death before the fall of man.

View Post


Because Gen 1 is not meant to be used as a scientific textbook.

From another interpretation of Gen 1, Moses was having a panoramic vision of God's creation, compressed in the real 6-day tinmeframe of Moses's experience while he was on Mt Sinai.

Or,

Gen 1 is an figurative retelling of God's creative power and sovereignty, as told orally by the descendants of Adam to a nomadic. primitive people, in a way that they could comprehend.

But... it seems you are diverting the conversation from the geological, physical evidence and trying to defend YEC with your particular interpretation of scripture, rather then the evidence.

#17 JoshuaJacob

JoshuaJacob

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 441 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Ponchatoula, Louisiana
  • Age: 34
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Ponchatoula, Louisiana

Posted 02 February 2011 - 07:07 AM

Its all how you look at the evidence.

Because Gen 1 is not meant to be used as a scientific textbook.


Your right, its meant to be taken literally but to fit what Science says it must be figuratively.

Gen 1 is an figurative retelling of God's creative power and sovereignty, as told orally by the descendants of Adam to a nomadic. primitive people, in a way that they could comprehend.


Why wouldn't they be able to comprehend billions of years?

#18 Scanman

Scanman

    Member

  • Banned
  • PipPipPip
  • 641 posts
  • Age: 49
  • Christian
  • Theistic Evolutionist
  • West Virginia

Posted 02 February 2011 - 07:22 AM

Why wouldn't they be able to comprehend billions of years?


10 fingers ...10 toes...the number of bushels of grain from a field...the number of sheep in a flock...

These are the kind of numbers most low-tech cultures had to deal with.

The Egyptians, (hi-tech for their time) had a numbering system that actually went as high as 1 million ( a heiroglyph of a surprised man with outstretched hands)...but it was something most likley only used by scribes and record-keepers.
  • Calum likes this

#19 jason777

jason777

    Moderator

  • Moderator Team
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2670 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Machining, Engine Building, Geology, Paleontology, Fishing
  • Age: 40
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Springdale,AR.

Posted 29 April 2011 - 01:05 PM

Ash and mud from just a volcano but what about material from the oceans? doesn't limestone come from the ocean and do We find it laid down on dry land?

View Post


Millions of gallons of water from the melting glacier on top of Mt. St. Helens flowed down the Tuttle river before the ash cloud begin spewing high into the atmosphere. The mud flow laid down hundreds of feet of sediment and then the ash settled on top of it.

So, it was not what geologists are used to seeing. They assume that sediment below ash and lava was formed by slow gradual sedimentation, but the eruption at Mt. St. Helens proved them wrong.

Posted Image

In the picture you can clearly see three different layers. The middle layer is sediment - not ash or lava - that was deposited before the ash settled. The bottom layer is ash from a previous eruption.


Enjoy.

#20 Geode

Geode

    Member

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

Posted 30 April 2011 - 02:09 AM

Millions of gallons of water from the melting glacier on top of Mt. St. Helens flowed down the Tuttle river before the ash cloud begin spewing high into the atmosphere. The mud flow laid down hundreds of feet of sediment and then the ash settled on top of it.

So, it was not what geologists are used to seeing. They assume that sediment below ash and lava was formed by slow gradual sedimentation, but the eruption at Mt. St. Helens proved them wrong.

Posted Image

In the picture you can clearly see three different layers. The middle layer is sediment - not ash or lava - that was deposited before the ash settled. The bottom layer is ash from a previous eruption.
Enjoy.

View Post


I can't speak for other geologists, but I would expect rapid sedimentation to be the result of outwash from melting glacial ice at the top of a volcanoi that was caused by the events surrounding a volcanic eruption. Why would any of us assume that slow and gradual sedimentation would result from what is basically a catastrophic event that occurs within a short period of time compared to other geologic events resulting in sedimentation?

I can't see how the eruption proved geologists wrong. Can you provide a citation that states what geologists expected and how this is in variance with what was observed?




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users