Topic: The Geologic Column (Read 2927 times)

Anthony Horvath · « **Reply #20 on:** January 25, 2006, 12:29:08 PM »

"I can't imagine that a scientist would just assume that 2 fossils found at similar depths on opposite sides of the world are the same age."

lol. Oh man. I'm so sorry. Ok, two things. First of all, it is very unlikely that you will be able to independantly test both fossils AND get the same age. Its been awhile since I've acquainted myself with these types of minute details, but I think such instances are very rare, if even non-existant altogether. Sorry, guy. They would just make that assumption.

Second of all, this practice is already well known and documented. They have what they call 'index fossils.' See this: http://pubs.usgs.gov/gip/geotime/fossils.html

As you can see, that is the US Geological Survey, and not any creationist or even explicitly evolutionist organization. You should ask yourself- which came first, evolutionary theory which told them which animals came first, or absolute dating of the animals. My favorite line came from the page linked off of that page (http://pubs.usgs.gov/gip/geotime/relative.html) : "Today, such a proposal appears to be quite elementary but, nearly 200 years ago, it amounted to a major breakthrough in scientific reasoning by establishing a rational basis for relative time measurements"

A major breakthrough in SCIENTIFIC REASONING. a RATIONAL BASIS. lol, so... in otherwords, it was merely a new way of looking at the data, and not any real set of empirical experiments. It was a new interpretation, and I would suggest specifically antagonistic to any notion that Genesis might be true. The site gives us evidence of that bias on its own: "At the close of the 18th century, the haze of fantasy and mysticism that tended to obscure the true nature of the Earth was being swept away."

If you thought there was a wide body of actual unbiased, direct experimentation supporting the modern notions of the geologic column, I'm afraid you are mistaken.

Here is a link to the google search of 'absolute dating of index fossils'

Good luck finding any evidence that fossils themselves are very often dated using absolute dating methods.

Sorry.

Anthony Horvath · « **Reply #21 on:** January 25, 2006, 12:37:40 PM »

While you consider these things, consider something else. One would hope that one could observe these things going on today. Fossilization, sedimentary hardening, etc. In the last 18 months we have had a tsunami in the Indian Ocean and a massive hurricane in the Gulf of Mexico. Both caused a tremendous amount of flooding.

Would you like to study these incidents to see A. Did they form any of the pre-conditions of fossilization or geologic rock formation? B. If so, do we see that the type of rock formed in New Orleans is the same kind as formed in Indonesia? C. If they are not the same kind of sedimentary rock (assuming A), would not humans a million years from now be mistaken in looking at the type of sediments of each and concluding they were not formed at the same time? D. What was the observed rate of fossilization (pre-fossilization, or other)? E. How much (given A, again) sedimentary rock was made, in inches?

I think these are fantastic questions that, if I were a geologist, I would be interested in knowing. This would give me good direct empirical evidence of the geologic column and the so-called fossili record. Or, at least, it would give me insight into them. What do you think, Pete? Have geologists descended into these regions to study these issues?

pete · « **Reply #22 on:** January 25, 2006, 01:48:56 PM »

Like I said I am not that familiar with geology.For some reason I either skipped or misread part of one of your previous posts. I would have to say that I agree with you that using the geologic column only to determine the age of two fossils in the same strata is wrong. I am not sure how that relates to religion.

Also, wouldn't a worldwide flood cause at least one single unform layer?

Anthony Horvath · « **Reply #23 on:** January 25, 2006, 02:03:11 PM »

"I would have to say that I agree with you that using the geologic column only to determine the age of two fossils in the same strata is wrong."

I don't know if its 'wrong,' but it is certainly not what I had in mind when I think of something as 'scientific.'

"I am not sure how that relates to religion."

Well, I don't happen to think my view that there is was a global catastrophic flood is specifically a 'religious' one. Apparently the USGS thinks it is 'fantasy and mysticism,' but that's their opinion, not mine. I do not consider my view that there was such a flood to be a religous one. Nor do think it is a 'scientific' one. I think it contains elements of both, but is a belief about history, mainly. But that's me.

"Also, wouldn't a worldwide flood cause at least one single unform layer?"

Why do you think that?

pete · « **Reply #24 on:** January 25, 2006, 02:12:52 PM »

Quote

"Also, wouldn't a worldwide flood cause at least one single unform layer?"

Why do you think that?

Do you believe that it only lasted 40 days? If so, how many layers could be formed that quickly?

Anthony Horvath · « **Reply #25 on:** January 25, 2006, 02:28:08 PM »

If I'm taking Genesis as the source for my historical data, it rained for 40 days, but water remained on the earth long afterwards. It took at least 150 days for the water to go down enough for the Ark to rest on the top of a mountain (Gen. 8:3). Genesis 8:13 tells us how long it took for the water to finally 'dry up' from the earth relative to Noah's 'six hundredth and first year.' I haven't taken it all and lined it all up, even though Gen. 6-9 provides precise dates, but it looks like it took really 6-12 months.

Still, none of that has anything to do with your belief that it takes more or less time for layers to be made. It seems to me that the critical factors would be things like the volume of water, the speed at which it flowed, and the size and weight and composition of the dirt-turned-sediment. That is something that you could determine experimentally.

Are you aware of any scientific experiments that are designed to find out how fast or slow sedimentary rock is formed, or how fast or slow it COULD be formed, for different sorts of soil, etc? I see no justification for your view that a global flood suggests a uniform layer, or that 40 days or 40 million years significantly relates to the question.

Anthony Horvath · « **Reply #26 on:** January 25, 2006, 02:31:32 PM »

Do you have access to a Bible? Its pointless to give you references if you don't. Also, I don't think you can fairly consider my position without one. I'd be glad to send you one, if you don't have one.

Author Topic: The Geologic Column (Read 2927 times)