rosborne979 wrote:RexRed wrote:Isn't the big bang just clinical words for poofism?
No.
Yes
xingu wrote:I suppose Real will tell us this all came about because of The Flood.
I suppose you suppose wrong.
I have never said that all geological features are due to the Flood. But some of them may be.
However, what interests me about some formations (which are similar to what you have posted) is that some have large trees which extend through many 'layers' .
These layers would otherwise be assumed to have formed over very long periods of time, but those pesky trees would have had to avoid decomposition for an extraordinary period if that were the case.
Upright Trees in Coal
The autochthonous (or swamp-growth) theory of coal formation is central to the Age of the Earth debate because it was used by German, English, Canadian, and American lawyers and geologists during the early to middle 19th Century to convince the scientific communities of the world that the Earth had to be much older than the 6,000--10,000 year Chronology portrayed in the Old Testament: where Dragons (now incorrectly referred to as "Dinosaurs") are described as real creatures that were living at the same time as Man (i.e. Job 40:15-24 and 41).
The reason they believed this was because there are places in Germany, Canada and the United States where multiple seams of coal occur, one on top of the other, separated by shales, sandstones, clays and limestones, usually in some type of sequential order (called a cyclothem). In fact, some locations have over 80 seams of coal of various thicknesses. And even though many of these are less than and inch or two thick, some of them are several feet thick.
Therefore, according to the Peat Bog Theory, the time required for such "forests" to grow upon the spot of their burial, in multiple swampy peat bogs, and then to be covered up -- over and over and over again -- by the same types of sediments (surely) must have taken many hundreds of thousands (to millions and millions) of years.
This view also, at first glance, appears to lend some support to the theory of evolution; however, time is simply not enough, as is discussed in other portions of this site.
On the other hand, if the coals were the result of rafted in vegetation (via a major flood or floods) -- which was buried, again and again during recurring phases of one major event, then the coals need not have taken long to form, as they could do so via a single worldwide event that uprooted virtually all vegetation on the Earth's surface and buried it under sediments at various different times, perhaps only days, hours, or minutes apart.
One of these views is (somewhat) compatible with the theory of evolution and one is not. So if one is inclined to believe in evolution, or even to disbelieve in a Creator/God, then he or she would naturally lean toward believing in the peat bog theory of coal formation. However, for various reasons, this theory is losing ground today in favor of the allochthonous, drift, or alluvial theory (i.e. a Major Flood or floods), which states that the coals are merely laminated sedimentary deposits of mixed up and partially decomposed plant material. This rapid formation view also better explains why such organic deposits are almost always laminated, and in many cases very finely laminated.
For example, the Peat Bog Theory asserts that one foot of coal represents 10 feet of compressed peat. However, when considering the upper drawing below, one will note that the seam in which the trees rest is about 2 feet thick. This would (in theory) represent about 20 feet of peat growth. And since peat grows at about 1 foot every 300-600 years, then 20 feet of peat would represent about 6,000 -- 12,000 years of time.
If such trees grew upon the spot where they were entombed, this would mean that they somehow persisted for 6,000 -- 12,000 years without decaying or falling over, since the lower ones appear to be "rooted" below the coal. However, this poses a problem for the peat growth theory because trees are not known to live for 6,000 years. Also, by the size of their trunks, the trees only appear to be about 100--200 years old. Therefore something really does appear to be wrong with this picture? Or just maybe, something is wrong with the peat-bog theory of coal formation.
Various other instances of trees in coal have also been documented and observed by other writers; a few are mentioned in the author's paper on "Fossil Forests" Parts 1 and 2 (see examples below). One was reported to be 40 feet long and completely enclosed in a very thick coal seam. The author has also found various other instances of upright trees in coal that are from one to three feet thick. And according to Kingsley such occurrences are not uncommon. Below are a few links concerning Fossil Trees (and other artifacts) found in coal.
Querschnitt durch
Gesteinschichten
der Steinkohlenzeit
mit aufrecht
versteinerten
Baumstämmen.
Which means:
Cross-section
through rock
strata of the coal
period with
upright fossilized
tree stumps.
After Bölsche, Wilhelm, Im Steinkohlenwald; 1906-- (Various Eds.), p. 35
After Williamson, William C., A Monograph on the Morphology and Histology of Stigmaria Ficoides, 1887, p. 13.
Click Here for Full Size Image.
Note that in the drawing above there are no visible traces of roots even though the tree is sitting atop a laminated Fireclay and clays are supposed to be very good at preserving all sorts of (once living) things: Like (purportedly) 17 "million-year-old" green and fresh-looking magnolia leaves.
The Polystrate Trees and Coal Seams of Joggins Fossil Cliffs
by John Morris, Ph.D.
Certain geologic sites have been especially crucial in shaping current thought. Thus it is with the amazing sequence of beds and fossils exposed along the Bay of Fundy, Nova Scotia, Canada, near the town of Joggins.
Sir Charles Lyell, friend and colleague of Charles Darwin, and principal architect of the principle of geologic uniformity, published his classic book, Principles of Geology, in 1830. In it he proposed that slow and gradual processes, operating on a local scale much as are seen today, had sculptured the earth's surface over vast eons of time. He denied the role of major geologic events, most especially the global Flood of Noah's day, insisting that "the present is the key to the past."
The scientific community of the day opposed him, recognizing that most geologic deposits were best interpreted in terms of catastrophic events, operating at rates, scales, and intensities far beyond those observed today.
In an attempt to convince them, Lyell traveled far and wide, searching for evidence to support his model. One such site was at Joggins, where, he claimed, upright fossil trees rose from several successive layers of coal. It could hardly be imagined, he argued, that tree trunks could maintain their upright posture during transportation in a watery catastrophe.1 Thus Joggins became a major argument against the Flood and against the doctrine of recent creation. As a result, the influence of the Bible on science and society waned, paving the way for Darwin's view of biological uniformitarianism. But was Lyell's presentation of the evidence accurate? Let's return to the site for a fresh look.
The Geologic Setting
Alternating beds of sandstone, siltstone, and shale are exposed along the banks of the Bay of Fundy, known for its extreme tidal range. Here the difference between the water's elevation of high tide and low tide is over 50 feet!2 This leads to continual erosion of the cliff and continual exposure of new fossils. The strata sequence, dipping to the south at about 25 degrees, is approximately 14,000 feet thick, measured perpendicularly to the originally horizontal bedding. The individual beds are interspersed with scores of layers of coal. Lyell's partner, Sir William Dawson, recorded some 85 coal horizons, ranging in thickness from just a few inches to thick enough to be mined by underground mining methods. As one walks northerly along the banks of the Bay, one encounters beds deposited ever earlier in time, since the lower beds must have been deposited first. In standard thinking, this thick sequence of beds was laid down over a 10-million-year period of time, from 310 to 300 million years ago.
Two schools of thought exist within uniformitarian geologists, who variously interpret these beds as: (1) a flood plain in which a river occasionally overflowed its banks, burying the surrounding marsh in mud; and as (2) a coastal plain occasionally inundated by rising oceans. In both cases, sediments are assumed to have been building up as the underlying basin subsided, with deposition keeping up with sinking.3 The coal beds are thought to record a recurring swampy bog, where organic materials collected for hundreds of years, only to be buried either by river flooding or sea level rises. Over time thick layers of mud and sand would collect, later to be uplifted and returned to a swamp condition. However, the exacting conditions necessary for peat bog formation strain the credibility of 85 swamps forming in exactly the same location over 10 million years, with long hiatuses in between. Local channel infillings can be seen, as can fossil trackways, ripple marks, raindrop pits, and cross bedding. The ever-present nature of these features hardened in the rocks, argues against a normal swamp, for the extensive bioturbation in a swamp would annihilate them in just a few years. Rapid burial and preservation seems to be required.
Fossils
A variety of fossils can be found here, from fish to clams to snails to ferns. They are considered to be primarily freshwater and terrestrial, but the tubeworm, Spirorbis, almost certainly marine or brackish, points to a mixing of environments.4
The most impressive fossils are the upright lycopod trees. They bear little resemblance to their modern vine-like counterparts, for the stems of these fossil "vines" are thick tree trunks, up to one meter in diameter. The two most common types found are Lepidodendron and Sigilaria, which grew to over 30 feet in height. These trees had overlapping scalelike bark with a pithy inner pulp. The fossils themselves have lost their pulp and all that remains is a cylinder of coalified bark filled with sediments often different from the surrounding material. The fossils remain only as upright stumps usually from 2-10 feet tall?-sometimes much taller.
Inside the once hollow, now sediment-filled stumps are sometimes found the bodies of lizard-like amphibians and reptiles. Horizontal logs are rare, but are usually flattened, crushed by overlying sediment. The roots or rootlets of the trees, called Stigmaria, are often seen separated from the main trunks.
Uniformitarian geology, the mainstream view ever since Lyell, holds that these trees grew in the place where they are now found. It is supposed that surrounding the base of the trees, a layer of forest litter collected, which if thick enough, could become peat. The trees eventually died when sediments buried their roots and lower sections. Finally, the tops broke off, and the insides were hollowed. Animals living in the swamp were trapped inside the hollow trees and were entombed. Temporary flooding buried the sequence under several feet of mud. In time, the peat turned to coal while the surface mud supported another forest and the cycle repeated. Some of the partially buried dead stumps remained intact and penetrated through the overlying shale, sandstone, and accumulating layers of forest litter, existing today as polystrate (i.e., "many strata") fossils. Surely there is a more satisfying explanation.
Arguments for Rapid Sedimentation
Dr. Harold Coffin has listed several reasons (summarized and extended below) to consider that the trees have been moved to this location, washed in during a time of extensive and massive sedimentation.5
A distinctive soil level is missing. Only a few of the trees arise from the organic coal layers. Often the trees rest on top of a coal seam, but roots seldom penetrate into it as they would if the tree grew in a peat bog. Those stumps arising from non-organic layers have no possible soil present.
The vertical stumps often penetrate two or more strata, including thin seams of coal. Often they overlap other trees, arising from overlying layers. A dead, hollow, and submerged stump could not persist for the long period of time necessitated for a second forest to grow and collect as peat.
Segments of roots are often found inside the once-hollow trunks, while other fossil roots are normally detached and buried in the surrounding soil. This seems to be a very unlikely scenario for any growth in situ hypothesis.
Leaves seldom remain on a forest or swamp floor for long periods without decay, yet well preserved fossil leaves are abundant, thus indicating rapid burial.
Some of the fossilized trees are inclined, not directly in vertical growth positions. A few are found upside down. None of the tree root systems are complete; all have been truncated.
The marine tubeworm, Spirorbis, frequently found in fossilized association with the fossil trees, implies that all were exposed to seawater.
The surrounding sandstones are crossbedded, implying rapidly moving water.
The hollow vertical trees are typically filled with different sediments than the surrounding matrix. The internal sediments are themselves crossbedded.
The long axis of both the partial roots and the rootlets have a preferred orientation as would result from movement, not growth in place. The direction parallels current direction as discerned from ripple marks and crossbedding.
A Remaining Enigma
The fact that the trees are so different from modern trees, coupled with the fact that the depositional environment was quite different from environments observed today, defies attempts at a complete reconstruction. We certainly will not find the solution in uniformitarian thinking. On the other hand, the myriad of complex events necessarily occurring during the Flood of Noah's day provide a framework within which to consider possible solutions.
Keep in mind that the Joggins coal region with its polystrate trees is not dissimilar from many carboniferous coal deposits.6 Scheven has proposed that many pre-Flood forests may have actually grown on the water surface.7 With their light weight, hollow structure, and extensive flat-lying root systems, they may have formed essentially a growing mat of vegetation. Intertwined roots would have given it stability, becoming a possible home for small amphibians and reptiles.
Perhaps as the Flood began, these forest islands continued to float, but began to die and break up, and their soft inner pulp decayed. Waterlogged organics could accumulate under the mat, to be covered frequently by mud flows from the open ocean. A succession of coal deposits could thus accumulate in one area. A similar scenario has been observed in the Mount St. Helens floating log mat, as the terrestrial forest floated and sank to the bottom of Spirit Lake.8As at Yellowstone's fossil forests, some trees would be trapped and buried in mud flows, with some retaining a upright posture.9 The succession of individual layers transgressed by polystrate fossils in each case necessitates rapid sedimentation and a short period of time.
While a fuller understanding awaits more research, we can say with confidence that the "just-so story" told by Lyell and his modern-day disciples simply doesn't fit the facts. His story was unfortunately sufficient in his day to convince many scientists and theologians to abandon the doctrines of recent creation and global flood, but it is insufficient today, now that more is known.
References
1 Lyell, Charles, Elements of Geology, 1882, New York, Harper and Brothers, pp. 409-419.
2 This author's master's thesis (1977) dealt with the use of this extreme tidal range to generate electricity, but the April 1999 field work on which this article is partially based was his first visit to the Joggins fossil cliffs.
3 Ferguson, Laing, The Fossil Cliffs of Joggins, 1988, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Nova Scotia Museum.
4 Coffin, Harold, "A Paleoecological Misinterpretation," in Scientific Studies in Special Creation, Nutley, N.J. Presbyterian and Reformed, 1971, pp. 165-168.
5 Coffin, Harold, Origin by Design, 1993, Hagerstown, Maryland Review and Herald Hagerstown, Maryland, pp. 117-133.
6 Rupke, N.A., "Prolegomena to a Study of Cataclysmal Sedimentation," in Why Not Creation, Nutley, N.J. Presbyterian and Reformed, 1970, pp. 141-179.
7 Scheven, Joachim, "The Carboniferous Floating Forest?-An Extinct Pre-Flood Ecosystem," Creation Ex Nihilo Technical Journal, vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 70-81.
8 Austin, Steven A., "Mount St. Helens: Explosive Evidence for Catastrophe" (video) 1995, Institute for Creation Research.
9 Morris, John D. "The Yellowstone Petrified Forest," Acts & Facts, Impact No. 268, October 1995.
* Dr. Morris is President of the Institute for Creation Research and professor of geology for the ICR Graduate School.
Upright Trees in Coal
We certainly will not find the solution in uniformitarian thinking. On the other hand, the myriad of complex events necessarily occurring during the Flood of Noah's day provide a framework within which to consider possible solutions.
Is Earth Really Round?
by John Morris, Ph.D.
Without a doubt, Earth is round, or nearly so. Using careful measurements from the ground and observations from space we can be certain it is essentially a sphere, with only minor bulging near the equator. If reduced to the size of a billiard ball, it would be perfectly smooth, and we wouldn't even be able to feel the highest mountains or deepest oceans. The erosive action of rainfall, glaciers and wind couple with gravity to relocate material from higher elevations to lower ones, rounding the globe. We actually observe these familiar mechanisms at work in the present.
By the way, the Bible has always taught a spherical Earth. There are, of course, instances of phenomenological language, where the author refers to what the viewer can see, just as we do today when communicating. We talk about "flat" terrain or a "flat" ocean even though we know they follow Earth's curvature. It is flat to our eyes and to our listener's eyes. But when the issue of Earth's shape is addressed in Scripture, the Hebrew wording implies sphericity (see Isaiah 40:22, etc.).
This may seem unimportant, but evolutionists often belittle creation thinking by comparing it to belief in a flat Earth. Certainly most who do so are merely repeating catchy insults from others, even though there are many who make the claim maliciously and purposively. While this may make them feel superior it belies a great misunderstanding (or misrepresentation) of creation and of the nature of science itself!
Of course creationists and evolutionists agree fully on Earth's shape. It involves observational science. Earth can be observed to be round. This is not a matter of interpretation. This is simply an observational fact. To deny it is to deny observation, and no one does.
Compare this with macroevolution, the theory that basic plant and animal types have changed into others. This is not and has never been observed. Instead, we observe stasis, that things "stay" the same, with only minor adaptations to the basic types. Evolutionists recognize this fact of the present too, but they claim things underwent major changes in the unobserved past when no one was present to observe it, and that all of life experienced these major changes. Indeed, their claim is that all of life came from a common ancestor. They argue about the mechanism by which this happened, but not the truth of the claim.
Thus evolution must deny the ubiquitous observation of stasis, relying on an unobserved mechanism to accomplish great changes. Evolution must confuse facts about the present operation of the universe based on observations in the present with speculation about its history which ignore present observations.
So in reality, evolution claims bear more resemblance to flat Earth claims than does creation thinking. Based as it is on a rather unsupported view of the past, and a denial of present observations, its supporters really shouldn't be throwing stones at those who are doing better science.
Hey Real, give us some more of your "evidence.' I love seeing farmerman rip it apart.
Not being a science major myself I wouldn't know what was a lie and what was truth in their presentations. But if it comes from a Creationist you can bet there is a lot of dishonesty involved.
xingu wrote:Hey Real, give us some more of your "evidence.' I love seeing farmerman rip it apart.
Not being a science major myself I wouldn't know what was a lie and what was truth in their presentations. But if it comes from a Creationist you can bet there is a lot of dishonesty involved.
Ahhh the love of an atheist...![]()
pooofism is alive and well.
...Thats why we (among other reasons) dont see any really well known Creationist Geologists. Those that are out there, merely stand for their stubborn belief systems which require them to ignore lotsa data and its context.
Quote:OOOH how I love this ****. "polystrate trees" are a figment of the Creationists imaginations. Cyclothems are not a worldwide layer cake of coal forests. They record climates and sea level dletas in migrating river systems that have about reached "baseline" or the approximate wetland elevation of a coastal swamp as we see in florida and the Miss delta today. . The nifty sea cliffs of te inner Fundy basinshow cross sections of these coal seams. There are quite a few besides Joggins, there are beauties along the coast of Cap Breton between Port Hood and CheticAMP, AND FROM Boularderie Island to Point Morien along the Sydney coalfields at the tip of Cap Breton. Also at Cape Enrage in New Brunswick.Upright Trees in Coal
Ive seen most all of these and Im always wondering what the shoutings about. For if you look, you can see that the only upright trees are preserved in peat layers that lie atop the upward fining sand sequences of a cyclothem. The cyclothems take about 1000 years or more to orm and the Sigillaria trees , like todays puines are preserved and only portions of their trunks are preerved as the deposit infilled the coal swamp with ever fining sediment that ultimately became peat, then cannel coal, then the bituminous coal that is what the coalfields are noted. The "polystrate trees" (PS polystrate is a bogus word that has no scientific significance because it does not represent what youd wish it to (The word does not appear AT ALL in the AGI glossary of Geologic terms 5th ed [2006]). ALL of the supposed "polystrate" trees are actually seen in cross sections of stream channels where the trees had been floated and deposited within stream beds, the deposition in which, was done by classic meander belts like the Mississippi where Ox bows contain many layers of recent sediments and catch "Snags" and pull them down to be deposited all around by varying sediment types.
To give a more technical explanation, a river will cut a channel in older sediemnts and deposit sand and gravel in its channel. Ancient trees like Calamites and Sigillarian grow along the banks, beyond which is a floodplain that supports a larger forest of Sigillaria and giant ferns and cycads. Organic forest duff in this forest builds up a layer of peat that later forms coal. During periodic flood stages of the stream, the river breaks over its banks and out of its channel. Sand is deposited , choking the forest covering the peat and building a new channel. Only the stumps are left, some upright and some wind up in the new channel getting buried by sheet sediments. A new river channel establishes itself and a new forest (cyclothem) begins. Marine or brackish waters sometimes back up into these areas bringing in some marine fossils .
RL, you have to actually visit these sites and see them in 3D, not on some screen play by AIG.
Ill argue and, in a debate, beat up any of those "experts" whove tried making supposed points about "polystrate fossils"Either They just have no idea about how to interpret field data and or they really do know and theyre just doing it for the gullible, the pros dont buy any of their **** because it doesnt even make sense. After all, these processes are still going on today. The Mississippi delta (if it were not being robbed of silt) would be a great model of how" polystrate" fossil trees get caught in the Atchafalaya cuttoff and why sometimes we find buried steamboats in "dry land" miles from a nearest river meander, and these steamboats seem to be lying in multiple sediment layers.Stream morphology and captured fossils have always been a dynamic system and if you go to the cliffs at Blomeden or Cape Enrage, you can see these river beds in cross section right down their axes of flow and they are containing tree stumps and logs that appear to be in many depositional horizons.But its just not so me boy.
The Clearing of Snags from the River
Snags were a major hazard on the river, causing the sinking of many ships. Capt. Henry Miller Shreve, Superintendent of Western River Improvements invented a boat to pull large snags from the river. With his invention, the Heliopolis, a "double hulled snagboat" he not only cleared the Mississippi but also the Ohio and Red Rivers. The Red River had been completely shut down to steamboat traffic, due to a 150 mile log jam. In appreciation of Capt. Shreve's accomplishments St. Louis has a street named, Shreve Avenue. Henry Miller Shreve spent his last days in St. Louis, dying at the home of his son-in-law, Walker Randolph Carter (his daughter being Rebecca). Shreve's grandson, Maj. Frank Carter, served in Confederate Army and later worked as a steamboat agent in St. Louis. The Shreve family is buried at Bellefontaine cemetery of St. Louis. [Note: Shreveport, Louisiana is named in honor of Capt. Shreve.]
baddog1 wrote:"...a more rigid belief system which in many cases conflict with unknown science" is probably close.
How can anything conflict with unknown science?
What are you talking about?
rosborne979 wrote:baddog1 wrote:"...a more rigid belief system which in many cases conflict with unknown science" is probably close.
How can anything conflict with unknown science?
What are you talking about?
Has this issue been clarified?
Did I miss baddog's response?
