No it hasn’t been. Just for the gorge. Not In the hundreds of millions of years of strata it cut through twenty five times in the rwo thousand years between 15 and 13 thousand years ago.
1 Like
None of the significant geologists or paleontologists you have referenced was YEC. Not Johannes Walther. Not Laurence Sloss. Not Jack Horner. Not J. Harlen Bretz.
Geology generally and sequence stratigraphy specifically are well developed disciplines which are concerned not just the the observation of facies but also detailed analysis of the processes by which they arise. The explanatory principle is change in sea level over geological time, and the depositional patterns to be expected and are observed due to that long term process. These are explicitly not the same patterns as would ensue from any rapid or high energy process.
For centuries, mainstream scholars thought the the world to be young and the center of the universe. It took many decades for Galileo’s insights to prevail. The next error to be corrected was the idea of a young earth, which the geologist James Hutton disproved. Again, it took years for his evidence to be accepted. Science is not fickle, and it can take time for new paradigms to take hold, but eventually after a full deliberation the truth wins out. New discoveries may supersede these yet again, but there is never any going back to the discredited prior views. A flat earth, stationary earth, and young earth are gone forever, incontrovertibly consigned to the dustbins of history.
4 Likes
Ron, you missed my quotation marks. In other words, I wasn’t saying Bretz was literally a YEC advocate–but that he, not upholding the uniformitarian interpretation of the Scablands, was dismissed just like YEC’ers today.
So, what do you think the sequence patterns would look like for the Flood model?
And, how does the uniformitarian model–with flooding waters transgressing and regressing at a rate of only 1/4 inch per year account for not only the erosion layers (unconformities) separating the megasequences, but even separating the multiple sequences within each megasequence? How do slowly, slowly creeping, oozing waters create–and preserve–these well-defined lines?
In fact, we can study ancient inland seas among us (like the Caspian Sea and Hudson Bay), and study the sediments at the sea bottoms. Do we find the discrete packages of sedimentary rock layers, separated above and below by unconformities, that we find in the fossil record? Not at all. All we find is sediment ooze (nor do we find any marine fossils in them).
You speak of “depositional patterns,” yet in true inland seas, there are no depositional patterns of rock layers.
Yes it does–but, as with the case of Bretz, it can come very slowly.
The comments above on the scablands reminded me of this video from some years ago. To be fair, I don’t think we find any oxbow lakes or 180 degree Paleozoic meanders at the channeled scablands, but we do find them around the grand canyon. The video touches a bit on this toward the end.
Not that Genesis really ever described modern 21st century scientific concepts anyway…
In the six hundredth year of Noah’s life, in the second month, on the seventeenth day of the month, on that day all the fountains of the great deep burst forth, and the windows of the heavens were opened.
Genesis 7:11
the fountains of the deep and the windows of the heavens were closed, the rain from the heavens was restrained,
Genesis 8:2
(Verses in reference to the video on the raqia)
The church could use some help in the science department, but it seems to be a bit difficult for scientific information to make it’s way through when there are so many theological obstacles blocking the path.
2 Likes
Are you referring to kabash? 1 Kings does not use the same Hebrew as that of Genesis when referring to “subdue”. That is, strongs concordance 3533:
https://biblehub.com/hebrew/3533.htm
NASB Translation
assault (1), brought them into subjection (2), forced into bondage (1), forcing (1), subdue (1), subdued (5), subjugate (1), trample (1), tread our under foot (1), under foot (1).
It’s meaning involves war conquest, enslavement, trampling underfoot, and sexual assault throughout scripture.
I believe you’re referring to the second word, to rule over or to have dominion over, the animals. Radah 7287.
Throughout scripture, the ruling and having dominion over inhabitants occurs alongside subduing the land which they’re within, and so two go hand in hand.
So Moses said to them, “If you do this—if you take up arms to go before the Lord for the war, and all those of you who bear arms cross the Jordan before the Lord, until he has driven out his enemies from before him and the land is subdued before the Lord—then after that you may return and be free of obligation to the Lord and to Israel, and this land shall be your possession before the Lord.
Numbers 32:20-22
At that time, I charged you as follows: “Although the Lord your God has given you this land to occupy, all your troops shall cross over armed as the vanguard of your Israelite kin. When the Lord gives rest to your kindred, as to you, and they too have occupied the land that the Lord your God is giving them beyond the Jordan, then each of you may return to the property that I have given to you.”
Deuteronomy 3:18, 20
Essentially, once the land which possesses the inhabitants has been subdued, mankind may then rule over the inhabitants. Much like the land of Canaan was first subdued through war and conquest and it’s inhabitants then further were as a product, killed, enslaved, subjugated or otherwise ruled over. And some could also be ruled over with respect.
For some animals, such as cattle, this concept of ruling over or having dominion may relate to domestication.
Though, verse 28 also refers to birds and fish, and it is inclusive of wild animals, which aren’t domesticated. And so aside from serving us as food, it’s not quite clear how we might subjugate something like a wild fish. Or what the Bible means when it says to subdue the land, what would be resisting man that would require subduing?
1 Like
I wonder how long Putin’s Layer will last?
With genetic engineering in a fish farm. We’ve just cracked that for octopuses.
1 Like
He was neither the only one, nor the first. Geologists as a body were starting to suspect that the earth was much older than human history in the late 1600s, and were very confident of great antiquity of the earth by the 1770s.
1 Like
I can understand the unscienced, the unlearned masses having folk religion, even strongly, although the majority won’t, apart from the fallacy of incredulity whenever they look up at the Milky Way; ‘Of course there’s a God/Allah/Great Spirit’. Then I remember my own story of fundamentalism. I was terrified in to it mid-teens. A terror aching in the basement right now.
What happened to you @donpartain?
1 Like
“To be fair, I don’t think we find any oxbow lakes or 180 degree Paleozoic meanders at the channeled scablands, but we do find them around the grand canyon. The video touches a bit on this toward the end.”
I think you meant this to be an argument against the global Flood’s carving the Grand Canyon?
Yet, meandering canyons would result from receding Flood waters, cutting through soft sediments.
Great discussion here, Adrian, about the relationship of “subdue” to “rule.” And, yes, I was actually discussing radah (rule) rather than kabash (subdue)–though, I was seeing them as being used more or less interchangeably.
But I think you are right that they “go hand in hand.” Thanks for pointing this out!
But I still see “subduing” the earth and life upon it as less militaristic, maybe, than you do. I believe the Lord is simply saying that we humans are charged with learning to bring the rest of creation under our control (“subdue”), so that we might more effectively manage (“rule”) it. Not only for our own sake, but also the sake of the rest of creation–so that we might be faithful stewards of creation.
For example, with the wild fish…if we notice a certain species is dying in large numbers, in a certain location, we might have to catch some (“subdue”) to try to discover whatever it is that’s killing them, and so protect (rule) them.
Where I live, wild animals like grizzly bears, wolves, etc. are often trapped (“subdued”) in order to be tagged, so they can be monitored more closely (“ruled”)–both for their own safety and for the safety of the public.
Sorry to hear you have been traumatized, Klax.
Actually, (through no doing of my own!) I was brought up in a very balanced, spiritual and loving family.
1 Like
Then what do you make of structural deformation of Paleozoic layers that predate later mesozoic and Cenozoic deposition?
Hint: Remember that only superposition is necessary to determine an order of events. When you have deformation of deep layers, overlain by layers that are undeformed, then you can conclude logically that deformation of the underlying layers, predates deposition of the overlying layers. Else the overlying layers would be deformed as well.
You can’t really have structural deformation in soft layers anyway. Things like slickenlines for example, or brecciated fault gouge. Such features, by their nature, necessitate the presence of dense rock. Same with things like low angle thrust faults of the laramide orogeny. In which case, the presence of such features, forming as a product of the laramide orogeny, predating erosion from the overlying stream, mandates a situation in which the stream must erode through dense rock.
So, to propose that some water running off the land, was flowing slow enough to produce meanders, and that the layers were all soft sediment washed away in some brief period of time, doesn’t align with the observed evidence, and add up with basic physics.
1 Like
How about a break from this thread and making a visit here (especially since it was at your instigation ; - ).
Bless your heart, Dale–you are determined. But save it for another thread, o.k.?
Actually, most of this thread, already, has taken a “break” from the OP.
So, can you find any scientific example of marine bones fossilizing–becoming permineralized (as most fossils are)–at the bottom of true ancient inland seas, like the Caspian Sea, Black Sea, or Hudson Bay?
Again, evolutionary doctrine teaches that marine bones became fossilized by drifting down into the sediments of supposed ancient inland seas. I am challenging this doctrine, since it lacks empirical support; it violates what we know about fossilization processes.
Can you address this, Dale?
You can’t get 2,000 feet of crinoid plates from a single catastrophic event. Catastrophic floods don’t produce life. You need a stationary sea to get that many crinoids stacked up.
3 Likes
Finding one geologic feature that formed quickly does not refute the conclusion that others formed slowly.
So the Earth is flat?
Indeed, when will YEC flood geologists learn these lessons and see the differences between the two formations?
2 Likes
Um, what do you think I’m talking about. Precisely that, another thread.
Not any better than the several professional scientists and well-informed and astute laypeople that have tried to educate you and point out your misunderstandings. You preoccupation is almost idolatrous?
1 Like