Show Me the Fossils!

[progressive hunter]

You can see how long something takes to happen now. You then calculate the length of time required to form similar formations from long ago.

A good friend of mine is a geologist like myself, but also a devout Catholic. I asked him how he reconciled creationism with geologic time.

I am paraphrasing but he essentially said how long is a day in God time? We are incredibly arrogant to think a God day, is the same as OUR day.

Don't you think?

now thats some funny shit right there,,,

in reference to isotope testing, tell me how long does an uncovered object take to decay verses a covered object??

and how do you see something that happened long ago without guessing??

 

[Hollie]

now thats some funny shit right there,,,

in reference to isotope testing, tell me how long does an uncovered object take to decay verses a covered object??

and how do you see something that happened long ago without guessing??

Seeing something that happened wouldn't need any guessing.

Such are the stunted critical thinking skills of the religiously addled.

 

[westwall]

now thats some funny shit right there,,,

in reference to isotope testing, tell me how long does an uncovered object take to decay verses a covered object??

and how do you see something that happened long ago without guessing??

Radioactive isotopes decay at a regular rate whether they are covered or not. We can see how long sediment takes to accumulate right now. You extrapolate that back. Over decades we have been building up a database that places the formations around the world into a time line that is fairly accurate.

I don't care if you believe me, but the 6000 year old claim was calculated by the Bishop Usher by adding up the lifetimes of the people in the Bible.

So, I am happy for you to believe what you do, so respect my opinion as well.

 

[occupied]

Yes, actually.

You seem to be making post after post to convince me, while presenting no evidence at all.

I'll make fun of dumbasses all day. It's kind of a hobby of mine and entirely self-indulgent.

 

[progressive hunter]

Radioactive isotopes decay at a regular rate whether they are covered or not. We can see how long sediment takes to accumulate right now. You extrapolate that back. Over decades we have been building up a database that places the formations around the world into a time line that is fairly accurate.

I don't care if you believe me, but the 6000 year old claim was calculated by the Bishop Usher by adding up the lifetimes of the people in the Bible.

So, I am happy for you to believe what you do, so respect my opinion as well.

youre wrong,, an uncovered object decays faster than a covered one.. and it varies more depending on how deep or covered it is and by whats covering it,,

as for sediment,, the world is a far more different place today than it was thousands or millions of yrs ago,, so all we can do now is assume or guess,,

I do respect your opinion because thats all it is is an opinion devoid of any facts,,

 

[Seymour Flops]

I'll make fun of dumbasses all day. It's kind of a hobby of mine and entirely self-indulgent.

Ah.

Sort of a mental masturbation thing?

Carry on, then . . .

 

[Hollie]

youre wrong,, an uncovered object decays faster than a covered one.. and it varies more depending on how deep or covered it is and by whats covering it,,

as for sediment,, the world is a far more different place today than it was thousands or millions of yrs ago,, so all we can do now is assume or guess,,

I do respect your opinion because thats all it is is an opinion devoid of any facts,,

Did you miss that your ''.... because I say so '' opinion is devoid of any facts?

No?

I knew that.

 

[westwall]

youre wrong,, an uncovered object decays faster than a covered one.. and it varies more depending on how deep or covered it is and by whats covering it,,

as for sediment,, the world is a far more different place today than it was thousands or millions of yrs ago,, so all we can do now is assume or guess,,

I do respect your opinion because thats all it is is an opinion devoid of any facts,,

Not radioactive elements. They decay at a fixed rate. Biological decay is more regulated by oxygen availability. Depth is not important until you get real deep then heat from the Earth's crust takes over.

And, no, the Earth is the same now as it was a billion years ago. The processes that operated then, operate now.

Thanks for making plain your intolerance for free, independent thought. You sound just like a progressive.

 

[Dadoalex]

You said "theory" five times.

Does that mean that you don't object to public schools reminding students that evolution, in particular Darwinian evolution is theory, not fact?

I have to assume you don't know of any fossil evidence that proves that Darwin is fact, or even supports Darwin, or you would have listed it.

A theory supported by multitude of facts.

You are acting foolish, some may think it not an act.
Your attempt at playing word games makes your premise even more unlikely.

 

[progressive hunter]

A theory supported by multitude of facts.

You are acting foolish, some may think it not an act.
Your attempt at playing word games makes your premise even more unlikely.

dont you mean a multitude of assumptions,,,

 

[Hollie]

dont you mean a multitude of assumptions,,,

Change in populations over time due to environmental and other factors is proven.

You repeat the same falsehoods and announce your ignorance on a public message board.

 

[Dadoalex]

youre wrong,, an uncovered object decays faster than a covered one.. and it varies more depending on how deep or covered it is and by whats covering it,,

as for sediment,, the world is a far more different place today than it was thousands or millions of yrs ago,, so all we can do now is assume or guess,,

I do respect your opinion because thats all it is is an opinion devoid of any facts,,

Do you understand the meaning of "decay" in this context? Your post would indicate otherwise.

Decay rates, as used in the context, is constant for all isotopes no matter the location.
Decay of biomatter, the context you're presenting, does vary depending on many factors but is not relevant in the context.

 

[alang1216]

does a buried object decay at the same rate as one sitting on or near the surface??

My knowledge of physics says Yes. Do you know different?

 

[alang1216]

Yes, Anak Krakatoa. Look it up.

Some geologist you are.

Apples and oranges, as any good geologist would know. A volcano erupting is very different from a mountain range rising and eroding and no geologist would confuse the two.

 

[westwall]

Apples and oranges, as any good geologist would know. A volcano erupting is very different from a mountain range rising and eroding and no geologist would confuse the two.

You asked for a mountain created in days. I gave you one. The Channeled Scablands give you canyons carved in a week.

Like I said, for a supposed geologist you know very little about geology.

 

[alang1216]

You asked for a mountain created in days. I gave you one.

No, you gave me a mountain (not a mountain range) destroyed in days. Not that it matters but how long did it take to create the volcano that eventually blew up?

The Channeled Scablands give you canyons carved in a week.

A catastrophic event that happened there exactly once. Lots of erosion in that event but no mountains, let alone any mountain ranges, removed.

Like I said, for a supposed geologist you know very little about geology.

I'll be insulted once you demonstrate your expertise in geology. Until then you're just a guy and his Google on the internet.

 

[westwall]

No, you gave me a mountain (not a mountain range) destroyed in days. Not that it matters but how long did it take to create the volcano that eventually blew up?


A catastrophic event that happened there exactly once. Lots of erosion in that event but no mountains, let alone any mountain ranges, removed.


I'll be insulted once you demonstrate your expertise in geology. Until then you're just a guy and his Google on the internet.

The Channeled Scablands was a periodic event. Three times that we know of. Were you not a wiki commando you would know that. Anak Krakatoa formed in a few days, then grew to over 3000 feet over a period of months.

Then it blew up. And it will reform again.
Funny how a supposed geologist, like you, doesn't know that.

You sure backtrack, and move goalposts a lot.

 

[alang1216]

The Channeled Scablands was a periodic event. Three times that we know of. Were you not a wiki commando you would know that. Anak Krakatoa formed in a few days, then grew to over 3000 feet over a period of months.

Then it blew up. And it will reform again.
Funny how a supposed geologist, like you, doesn't know that.

You sure backtrack, and move goalposts a lot.

Volcanos and floods can happen fast but did volcanos build the Himalayas? If not what did and how long did it take?

What created the Atlantic Ocean, Hawaiian Islands, and Alaskan exotic terrain and how long did they take to form?

 

[progressive hunter]

Volcanos and floods can happen fast but did volcanos build the Himalayas? If not what did and how long did it take?

What created the Atlantic Ocean, Hawaiian Islands, and Alaskan exotic terrain and how long did they take to form?

please enlighten us,,

 

[alang1216]

please enlighten us,,

Plate tectonics. Spreading takes place at about as fast as your fingernails grow. The Atlantic has taken about 60 million years to form.

Or is there another theory that you can share?