The Biblical Flood and its Nature

Your words, Fman... Doesn't specify North, South, or anything like that, most readers would assume you meant ALL continental shelves and slopes.

Basic reality is they're now finding antediluvian cities out there on them pretty regularly; that's almost certainly because they represent antediluvian shorelines. We're living in areas which would have been viewed as plateaus prior to the flood, and which would have been sparsely inhabited if they were inhabited at all.

ALL I CAN SAY TO YOUR BREATHLESS INANITY IS

BULLSHIT , YOU HAVE NO IDEA IN HELL WHAT YOURE TALKING ABOUT

Although Geology is not strictly my field I feel comppeled to agree with Farmerman:

BULLSHIT: YOU HAVE ABSOLUTLEY NO IDEA WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT

Gunga Dim so frequently uses the expression: "basic reality is . . .", as though he were familiar with reality. I've seen no evidence over the years that this is so.

I reject the use of the word "Antediluvian" as if it is an accepted term.
its a word that comes from "scientists" who believe in ALley OOp, and THE GREAT FLOOD. These are people who keep a bible in their libraries of technical volumes. AS I stated,There are no real scientists who pose a great flood as a time line in their Quaternary research(Even Ryans work on the CAspian resulted in a plausible source for a local component of a more regional flood myth). The only thing that a great flood is used for is to show how actual history of a subject can be suborned by idocy for rather long periods of time. We generally look at the work of George McReady Price as the "Golden Age" of Flood "Geology"(the 1920's through the 1960's). MAny pieces of initial evidence in the mid 1800's were originally collected when field workers attempted to provide "proof" of Biblical inerrancy and found, to the contrary, that these earlier accepted snippets fom the bible (like the Great Flood) were actually bullshit and made up trales by the patriarchs. Real archeology began when data was evaluated objectively rather than with a biblical leaning.

Wow, you'd think that after providing only piss-poor evidence for a global flood, pretending the Bible is a history textbook (and being called on it), being exposed as the laziest of quoteminers, and showing everyone precisely how little he knows about punk-eek (and the bullshit he will believe if it confirms his fantasies), gunga would take pause and say, 'hey, maybe I should be more careful. Maybe, sometimes, the random guy on Free Republic is wrong.'

Nope, just ploughing on ahead, all past failures on full ignore (along with Setanta and parados, apparently).

So, gungasnake, are you ever going to get around to telling me why the sequence of fossils in the fossil record match the phylogenies following from molecular data? I'll note that stupid quotemines and changing the subject would not be answers.

It takes quite a bit of chutzpah to pretend that there are "antediluvian" cities while simultaneously ignoring sea level changes. Edit: I mean *natural* sea level changes, obviously. You know, the ones that naturally follow from the exisence of ICE ages.

Does it hurt gunga, relying on the quote(mine)s of scientists when it suits you and then ignoring everything they tell you about geology? Such cognitive dissonance must make you question your beliefs on some level, no one is truly impervious to contradiction.

Hes off busily trying to scare up some more tripe about Floods and Electric Universes.

No doubt. I always wonder if people like gunga realize that whenever they ignore science and scientists for their craziness, they're rejecting their expertise, but whenever they quotemine in support of their nonsense they are accepting it. Are they that short-sighted or do they recognize and ignore (in public) the hypocrisy?

Im gonna take door number 2 on that. Gunga knows damn well that he ignores major discoveries and implications in physics, chemistry, biology, geology, and engineering. He cherry picks his science so that his head doesnt blow up like those little dudes in "Mars Attacks"

Gunga, I would never be so crass as to state "BULLSHIT: YOU HAVE ABSOLUTLEY NO IDEA WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT!!!"

But that does send the message quite effectively. I hope you're not teaching this bullshit to children.

Crass, my ass.

Immanuel Velikovsky once wrote an entire book about geological evidence for global CATASTROPHE (flood and otherwise) called 'Earth in Upheaval'. One of his followers, Charles Ginenthal, claims that evidence for global floods (plural) is the easy part, and the only difficult thing in the picture is trying to figure out which piece of evidence pertains to which global flood:

http://saturniancosmology.org/files/flood/mfloods.txt

Huge treatise, interesting comments on whales, amongst multitudinous other things...



Then again to my own thinking, and I've mentioned this and farman has not replied, the single clearest evidence of recent planetary catastrophe is the question of mammoth remains in the arctic circle.

How do you extrapolate present conditions back a few thousand or a few tens of thousands of years even, and get the arctic region habitable to vast herds of large herbivores without some interveningplanetary scale catastrophe??

The basic answer is, you can't. Nonetheless that sort of thinking is fatal to evoloserism and evolution is about lifestyles and not science and, in that scheme of things, lifestyles trump science, logic, and every sort of thing like that. That's the basic problem.

The basic answer is that the periglacial conditions did not allow for wide-spread forestation, which meant the the dominant plant forms were grasses. These in turn attracted large herds of herbivores.

It seems that Gunga Dim's basic thesis is that if ain't thought of it, or if he can't understand it, then it can't be true.

Again, evolution is about lifestyles, and not science.

and his "geological evidence" was easily debunked. Ive often used Worlds in Collision to make points about how evidence is evaluated (multiple hypotheses that lead to more evidence: trying to knock evidence down by logical extension and falsification). Velikovsky has never fared well in the arena of science.

PS, gunga, I loved the "fudge packer" clip. Im gonna send that one around.

I had to go find an example of the hoodoo columns that are a mainstay of wadi el hitan. (I once did some mapping on a people to people grant in Wadi el hitan). The name HOODOO, is an African word that was selected because the various rock columns looked like animals. In the case of the wadi, the Basiloceotus fossils were fundon the ground and the hoodoos are quite common and display the several formations OVERTOP the Eocene sediments that contain the "zeuglodons" (thats an out of fashion word like brontosaurus).
The zeugs are found in the mid Eocene (top of the Lutetian stage in the Wadi-el-hitan formation to be exact). Overlying these rocks are mudstones , shales, ASH FLOWS and marls of later formations. The wadi el Hitan depositional sequence is only a few hundred square miles and is abruptly terminated by uncomformable deposits of earlier distributary sands of the Cretaceaous.
What all that means is that

1the "whale deposists are beneath later sedimenst of everything from river sands to volcanic deposits (kind of shoots the worldwide flood thing from a vertical standpoint)

2 Surrounding the Wadi basin are abrupt terminal older formations of the K that made a downwarped depo basin where the shallow marine (Did I say MArine? you know that marine means oceanic deposits, not flood) deposits show that a shallow sea slowly moved inland and deposited its sediment in a 10 to 20 million yeart sequence and then retreated. BUT, all the rocks around were already there and no shallow sea overlies the K of upper Egypt and the rest of the TRANS AFRICAN LINEAR ZONE (this is where all the volcanics came from)

What Vellikovsky wasnt trained to understand was that, during the entire Cenozoic(PAleocene and up) about 85% of the AFrican continent, was NOT covered with water . It was an erosion surface, no floods were happening in most of Africa.(Rogers and Santosh, 2004 p146)

Gunga, youve gotta view the planet like you see it today. there are areas inundated and there are dry lands. ANytime you see evidence of water inundation on a continental mass, you should immediately ask yourself"Where does this all terminate"? How far does this go?. Thats easily determined by skilled geological mapping and thats why we dont go hunting for oil in the Canadian shield but we do hunt for oil in the sands that are adjacent to the CAnadian SHield.


OOPS . heres a photo clip of the wadi and the hoodoos can easily be seen to contain rocks of differing formations that erode at differential rateshttp://www.eiecop.org/pdf/F_Sponsorship-Eng.pdf

This is a grant solicitation and sponsorhip site by the World Heritage Guys. Its a commercial but the photos of the hoodoos is what I want you to see. They are the real deal , right from the Wadi. SO dont be telling me about this world flood nonsense

Are you trying to get gunga to admit that rivers actually exist? He won't do it, I tell you. He just won't.

He stays his point and is on message without blinking. Hes a good Conservative . The fact that hes incorrect in his thin king is more a fact rom his inability to think in 4 dimensions.

Velikovsky has never fared well in the arena of science.

Velikovsky is not science ---- that's why.
In fact searching for oil debunks the whole creationist shabbang: the science is that oil is derived from dead creatures. Over millions of years these become oil.
If you can read the geology you can tell where these creatures lived.

Surely if it was all put there randomly by God, we could hunt for oil by say,tossing dice.