Evolution? How?

Either the sea would have to be 9000 feet deep, in which case we are talking about a sea that would cover much of the continent;

Wilso wrote:

real life wrote:

farmerman wrote:

Having evidence of a sea at one time in geologic history doesnt imply that such inundation occured at the SAME TIME.

And it doesn't mean it wasn't. It means that at one time or other that many parts of the earth that are now hundreds or even thousands of miles from ocean were once under it. That's all I said.

Since all of these various areas have been under the sea, it makes far more likely (not less) the concept of a worldwide flood.

You can postulate, if you like, that these all occurred at different times. And I can propose that they may have occurred at the same time.

What you cannot say is that it could not have happened at any time.

But how did a group of "illiterate" Hebrews correctly guess that scientific evidence would show thousands of years later that these areas had all been under the sea? If we had no areas of land that showed this evidence, then clearly things would be looking a lot less favorable for Genesis at this time. But the opposite is the case. Were they just lucky?

I don't know what you're on, but I'd love some of it myself.

Too bad you couldn't take a shot at trying to answer the question.

"real life said

Quote:

Either the sea would have to be 9000 feet deep, in which case we are talking about a sea that would cover much of the continent;

Or neither. The Fountain Formation is one of the best studied examples of "alluvial fans" in the world. The flatirons , by showing these mega ripples , exhibit evidence of a tremendous force of "running water"that was busy eroding and depositing into the basin. Marginal basins are quite common in geologic history since they often form traps foroil migration. The Newark/Gettysburg basin of the Eastern US is an even thicker unit that occured while the Gondwanaland began to break up .
Your inability to understand the available evidence is not my problem. If you start thinking about all the evidence about sedimentological basins and deep time long enough, maybe youll com e to the conclusion that a lot of time was involved and , within all that time ,there were a series of complex tectonic forces like extension, compression, shear, and gravity gliding that enhanced the formation of local basins.

The evidence for your "surprising discovery " about the flatirons of the eastern Rockies, is really there. All you have to do is read past the "wow" part. The only thing thats needed to form deep basins is a rate of upthrust exceeding the rate of cutting by the eroding streams. We have many examples of modern mountain areas in which this is occuring. The Himalayas and the Sierras come to mind.

Science has, in all fairness, attempted to define and study a phenomenon until a valid series of conclusions can be developed. It hasnt started with one world view. In the past, most geological discoveries were made in a spirit that was an attempt to"understand" what the Creator had in mind (Lyell,Hutton, Steno, Darwin). When they often realized that their findings were diverging from dogma, most of them tried to soften the impacts or, in Darwins case, just chickened out and let others do it for him.
Yet, the "true believers" quoting an ancient text, ascribe to it a level of sophistication that didnt arrive until almost 2 thousand years later.However, when one probes the science sophistication of many of the "true believers" one finds minds that are pretty much closed to understanding of definable phenom and observable facts.
I have second year geo students who can make the flatiron story without resorting to a "global flood"

so, as far as being intimidated by your personal discovery and your own preposterous explanation,
I didnt back away, I attempted to present you some facts that I can further back up with lots of literature citations. SOmehow, however, finding out about simple science truths, was probably not what you had in mind. Neh?

..

real life wrote:

Wilso wrote:

real life wrote:

farmerman wrote:

Having evidence of a sea at one time in geologic history doesnt imply that such inundation occured at the SAME TIME.

And it doesn't mean it wasn't. It means that at one time or other that many parts of the earth that are now hundreds or even thousands of miles from ocean were once under it. That's all I said.

Since all of these various areas have been under the sea, it makes far more likely (not less) the concept of a worldwide flood.

You can postulate, if you like, that these all occurred at different times. And I can propose that they may have occurred at the same time.

What you cannot say is that it could not have happened at any time.

But how did a group of "illiterate" Hebrews correctly guess that scientific evidence would show thousands of years later that these areas had all been under the sea? If we had no areas of land that showed this evidence, then clearly things would be looking a lot less favorable for Genesis at this time. But the opposite is the case. Were they just lucky?

I don't know what you're on, but I'd love some of it myself.

Too bad you couldn't take a shot at trying to answer the question.

What question would that be? How in the modern world, with all we've learnt and discovered that people can still believe in some wild tale about an omnipotent fairy creating all things by the simple wave of his magic hand?

Let's just keep it focused. Are there any sedimentary deposits of this size (9000 feet in depth) that are currently being formed?

Let's just keep it focused. Are there any sedimentary deposits of this size (9000 feet in depth) that are currently being formed?

Let's just keep it focused. Are there any sedimentary deposits of this size (9000 feet in depth) that are currently being formed?

Many geologists do not believe that the mountains as we see them today have always been the same height.

real life said

Quote:

Let's just keep it focused. Are there any sedimentary deposits of this size (9000 feet in depth) that are currently being formed?

My entire answer was , unlike your speculation, all fact and evidence derived. Are you mormally this denese or just trying to get my goat?
There are plenty of basins 9000 feet and thicker, that are not "ocean bottoms" This could be evidenced quite easily in any number of Sedimentology or stratigraphy textsw. Of course, youd have to (gasp) READ. If you wish to be spoon fed, kiss off and go spout your'biblical revelations ' elsewhere. They are worth precisely nothing in a world that is trying to squeeze out the last few drops of oil.
The flatirons that you claim I "speculated" about ARE (whether you care to listen or not) derived from a deltaic deposit of intermontane sediments from theE Colorado basin, a prominent basin feature that was created from sediments that washed from the Colorado Range and the Uncomphagre/San Luis/Las Animas ezxtensions of the proto Rockies. All this was from the Pennsylvanian and Permian times. The fossils contained therein were a combination of fresh water amphibians and some land reptiles.
My "speculation" is based upon about 10 years of research in theSan Luis/ Pedernale and Arbuckles, searching for metals. Any geologist who would be thus wandering around with a bible for geologic reference will quickly attain a status of "No Bread".
I love it when you say Im speculating when its obvious that you have no clue that you have no clue (sorry husker, I robbed your line).

Real

Quote:

Many geologists do not believe that the mountains as we see them today have always been the same height.

Of course not. If you had taken a basic geology course you would know that erosion continually wears down mountains and various other events builds them. The earth is in constant change.

xingu wrote:

One thing we know for certain, there is not enough water on this planet to cover the earth the way the Bible describes.

Are you certain the mountains were always as high as they are now?

Why would they not be?

Perhaps you misread my post. My actual question had to do with sedimentary formations of this size (9000 feet) in the process of being formed today, not ones known to be in existence from days gone by.

Real

You say 9,000 feet of sediment was deposited during the Flood in the Boulder CO area.

Think about it. It rained for 40 days; 960 hours. After that the earth was covered with water; a vast ocean. All the erosion that occurred would have happened in those 40 days of rain.

So lets see; 9,000 feet divided by 40 days is 225 feet of erosion per day, or 9.4 feet of erosion per hour.

Can you tell me of a storm we have had in which we get 9.4 feet of erosion, on average, per hour for every hour of rain?

Since the water covered the entire earth it had to be at least 29,000 feet deep (Creationist say sedimentry rock found atop Mt. Everest is proof that the Flood covered the mountain). Therefore 785 feet of water accumulated per day for 40 days; that's 30.2 feet of rain per hour. That's .5 inches per minute for 960 hours.

By the way, where did all the water go?