The Geologic Column as Taught Is An Evolutionary Myth, Existing Only In Textbooks. (worship, Christian)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Polystrates are especially common in coal formations. For years and years, students have been taught that coal represents the remains of swamp plants slowly accumulated as peat and then even more slowly changed into coal (1987, p. 168).
If polystrate fossils must form quickly in order to be preserved, and if (as many evolutionists believe) coal has been formed over periods lasting millions of years, how could there be so many (or any!) polystrate fossils in coal veins? The answer, of course, is that the evolutionary scenario requiring vast eons of time for the origin of coal (and, for that matter, oil) is wrong. Yet tree trunks are not the only representatives of polystrate fossils. Even animals’ bodies form polystrate fossils (like catfish in the Green River Formation in Wyoming—see Morris, 1994, p. 102).
The above is quoted under the fair use doctrine.
The ND column as textbook strata intact as depicted in the charts in fairy tale books is a fairy tale to try to bolster the fairy tale.
It is debunked here http://creationwiki.org/Geological_column
-and here;
Quote:
http://creationwiki.org/Geological_c...orth_DakotaThe conclusion that they have a complete geologic column in this area is based on the assumption of the existence of the geologic column. This is circular reasoning.
If that is not enough there is a place where a rock layer labeled Devonian can be found between rock layers labeled Carboniferous. Devonian is alleged to be older than Carboniferous, but this would suggest that they are really the same age.
Curiously while the theoretical column thickness is 100 miles, the maximum thickness of sediment found any place is only 16 miles. That means that at any given location at least 84% of the geologic column is missing.
Oh stop it, they were not a problem to explain in the 19th century, and are still not a problem now. John William Dawson (1868) described a classic Carboniferous-age locality at Joggins, Nova Scotia, where there are upright giant lycopod trees up to a few metres tall preserved mainly in river-deposited sandstones. These trees have extensive root systems with rootlets that penetrate into the underlying sediment, which is either a coal seam (i.e. compressed plant material), or an intensely-rooted sandstone or mudstone (i.e. a soil horizon). Dawson considered and rejected anything but an in situ formation for these fossils, and his interpretation is closely similar to current interpretations of sediments deposited on river floodplains.
The only sediments containing “polystrate” trees were laid down quite rapidly. (Though "quite rapidly" could be over several hundred years in the case of a standing dead tree rooted in a seasonal swamp, wide standing trees in Reelfoot Lake, TN, drowned by the formation of the lake during the New Madrid earthquake, ca 1814.) There are sediments laid down as a paper-thin layer per year accumulating over hundreds of thousands of years (varves) and there are sediments laid down in tens of meters in a day or less (turbidite flows). Both are extremes. But the deposition of most sediments is probably episodic, with an average of a few inches per century resulting from accumulations of several inches over a short time, followed by long periods with no net accumulation. The people who know what is happening are the geologists, they've carefully looked into it. Why not try reading some of their work? Not from apologetics ministries - what do they know, I mean the actual research, in _Journal of Sedimentology_, for example, or _Journal of Paleontology_.
The polystrate tree argument is merely one of the old creationists canards developed to attempt some objection to Geology to equip the ill equipped. However, it brings to mind this scripture.
Quote:
If a blind man leads a blind man, both will fall into a pit.
— Matthew 15:14
Quote:
The ND column as textbook strata intact as depicted in the charts in fairy tale books is a fairy tale to try to bolster the fairy tale.
It is debunked here http://creationwiki.org/Geological_column
-and here;
Do you have ADD? I already debunked whoever made up that tripe.
Thank you for the antique geology lesson, circa 1894.
Now, for something significantly more modern, and also far more readable! Your offering provides us with the conclusion section preceeding the datacollection section (quite an interesting experimental reporting technique! Distinctly non-scientific, but then, who cares' huh?.). In fact, your tome is only a discussion paper format, and of dubious origin. Pretty pictures do not make it credible, BTW.
Here's a much shorter one. Read the points and onlythen refute them. They PROVE sedimentary science with simple and incontrovertible logic. less than half a page, unless that's too much for you.
There's also a bibliography of modern geotechnical references should anyone be interested!
Hmm... varves in Lake Baikal reliably countable to dates of >5 million years. What, are you now going to say that seasons were "different" then? That our current sedimentary year had millions of similar events contained in the same period of time back then? Super-Sedimentation?
How absurd, but I don't discount that you'll use it anyways. After all, it's all you can say, except "I'm sorry; I was wrong!"
Only those ignorant of world history can deny such truths, for many ruins of ancient cities which were built by giants, are spread around the tebel/globe/world.
There are ancient tablets from Sumer -Babylon- which depict 25-30+ foot tall giants compared to 'normal' sized human beings depicted on the same tablets. Lions depicted on the same tablets are as small dogs, in size comparison to the giants. Num 13:33 And there we saw the giants, the sons of Anak, [which come] of the giants: and we were in our own sight as grasshoppers, and so we were in their sight.
Goliath and his brothers were descended from Anak, who was a nephillim =offspring of fallen sons of God and daughters of Adam, who did the same thing after the flood as the chained angels did before the flood.
By the time of Goliath, the Anakim had "devolved" to the smaller size of Goliath and his brothers.
Ya know, those peyote buttons had a very similar effect on me, I just didn't take the visions seriously.
I already did, four different links, here and on the dinosaur thread. One even examines his "ct scan" and compares it to known dinosaur tracks and the way they are formed. It is clearly a fraud. The "scientists" which they are not, no degrees from accredited universities ( which we have already proven more times than I care to discuss" have been proven frauds. I know you wont believe it and I kind of understand why, and I can honestly say that if anything you have ever posted were in fact real and were from real non creationists I would seriously consider it. I am not here to just prove you all wrong, I would love to believe there is more out there, but all the evidence points in the other direction. A book is not the truth, the real evidence is. If the bible was so true, it could not be proven wrong, but I am sorry that is not the case. And others spewing things like, the earth doesnt rotate ( which has been observed from space) and the sun does not produce light ( which it does sorry again proven)but is a crystal, just makes you guy sound nuts, how can we take anything from you seriously?
Oh yeah, it's the ole compare a CT scan to known dinosaur tracks, kinda like comparing a bowling ball to jello.
Absolutely, Goliath was a puny shrimp. But there is evidence depicting that Egypt was ruled by giants. Ramses II would have towered above the puny 36-foot tall Carthaginian giants.
OH wow!!! look at the ole Washington Monument, it is 555 ft and a few inches tall, guess that puts ole george in the giant range too.
Yeah, and I was shocked to see how big the heads were when I first saw Mount Rushmore. If their heads were that big can you imagine how large they must have been if they could have sculpted their entire bodies!
As do the Egyptian wall paintings. You have no case that the Sumerians are alone in depicting oversized authority figures. Zero.
You're exactly right. And if someone is to assume that an authority or important figure is shown larger than the subjects must somehow mean that figure must be a giant, then the same line of thinking could also be applied to the Egyptian pharaohs or the presidents on Mt. Rushmore.
YSM claims the Sumerian images are proof of giants, and yet disbelieves when the same thing is pointed out about Egyptian statues and tomb paintings where the pharaoh is shown towering over the subjects. Why not toss in Mt. Rushmore? Washington, Jefferson, Roosevelt and Lincoln must have been giants too. The point is that using the Sumerian images as evidence that they were giants proves nothing.
Could these be Egyptian giants?
If the Sumerian art "proves" they had giants, then you might as well apply the same "logic" to the Egyptians, the Greeks, the Romans, etc. It was a common form of art to portray kings and pharaohs as being larger than life because it symbolized of their position of authority over their subjects. It had nothing to do to with suggesting it meant they were physical giants.
Monuments are always larger than life, as I said before, in ancient and modern times; but giants are depicted on ancient sumerian tablets and those tablets correlate with many ancient books and with the Bible.
I think this latest mocking campaign began with that mention by me of the Sumerian tablets depicting giants 24-30+ ft in height, seated with normal human beings who stood only up to the thighs, or so, of the giant kings; but they also had other giants who were serving before them who were of huge stature, and some of those giants are chimera. One giant depicted on the same tablet is an "insect/human =insectoid, giant.
The Book of Jasher, the Book of Enoch, the Book of Jubilees, and the Book of the giants discovered in the DSS collection and attributed by the Essenes to Enoch, all tell of the mixing of the kinds by manipulating of the kinds artificially. Enoch says the sons of God taught the daughters of Adam the "cutting of roots" =gene splitting.
The Book of the Giants says they took all manner of beasts, fowl, and fish and mixed the kinds with their own kind. Jasher tells of some of those kinds, who were "giants" and mixtures of man and beasts. The Israelis called some of them "terrors" -Emim/Yemim.
The Sumerian tablets depict the same things as those books tell about, when the sons of God took daughters of Adam and took beast and fowl and committed iniquity by artificial mixing of kinds.
Only in this past century has modern man come to understand what the ancients already knew about how to manipulate the genes and mix kinds. "There were giants in those days and also after that".
Jasher says they did it to provoke God. It is called iniquity and fornication, and the angels who did it before the flood were chained in Sheol as a warning to other angels to not do the same, just as the nuking of Sodom and Gomorrah were a warning to other men to not do the same as those cities of men did do.
But more angels did do the same after the flood, as Moses wrote in Genesis 6, and more men did do the same after the nuking of Sodom and the cities as those cities; and the warnings were not heeded by those who also fell and do fall. But the warnings serve to show the end of all who do the same as those who were judged already. None will escape in the end.
So angels continued to fall and were in league with Nimrod & Co after the flood. Sumeria is ancient Babylon, and Nimrod did traffic with fallen angels and demons, as his son also did.
The fall of the Tower of Babel and the confounding of the mother tongue caused a dark age to begin, and technological information was no longer pooled in one place, as men were scattered over the face of the globe/world, from Babel. Some were more advanced because of the men in the tribes' personal skill and knowledge, and the cities they established rose to great heights, but only to fall to oblivion as they "forgot God", as Psalm 9 states.
In the Book of Jasher, there were no giant Pharaohs listed, but one counselor to Nimrod was Anak, a nephillim after the flood and ancestor of Goliath and his brothers.
The giants were all over Nimrod's area after Babel, and many historical records tell of wars with the giants in many places in the world. Some of them even battled with the armies of Rome for a period which covered 400 years? -I think it was- and there are ancient historians who wrote of the battles of the Roman armies with the giants long after they were all gone from Canaan.
You guys are not literate on true world history, which correlates with 1 Enoch, the Book of Jasher, the Book of the Giants, the Book of Jubilees, and other manuscripts in the DSS collection.
And the silly mockery by you guys is just stupid.
And the Geologic column does not exist anywhere on earth, as the fairy tale books teach it does. It began as a fabrication and continues as a fable. "Billions of Dead Things" SING-ALONG with Buddy Davis
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
1894 discussion versus 2007 science. Amazing!
