The published differences in average IQ between theists and atheists are well known, but i had no idea they were so apparent as this video is testomony to.
I read your posts re "canopy theory". Have you read Dr Brown's book? He believes as you do and gives and excellent argument defending his reasons. He has math formulas as well as other sources to dispel why the canopy couldn't work. Of course, it seems you believe that he is all "fantasy science which cannot be measured or demonstrated, to whit 'pseudoscience'". However, it is worth the read.
Not any more than than you can support the super natural nothing became something (big bang) the miracle of non life evolving into life or the faith that life form has evolved into more complex life forms, despite the fact that the fossil record proves contrary (no intermediate forms)... I guess it's a stalemate and, as I said, we will hang on to our respective religious beliefs and faith. btw...
There are only two views: evolution or intelligent design. So, if I ask you for scientific evidence without using evolutionist sources you have nothing to base your beliefs upon.
Just read many of your previous posts. As I said, we have a different world view and I have learned it is almost impossible to change ones religious views. Yes, evolution is a faith based religion, with too many assumptions (faith) with little TRUE scientific proof. Good luck on finding that missing link.
I know that we have a different worldview, however, we do know that the world was once a much different place than today. The fossil record shows us that plants and animals were much larger than today. The oxygen levels were higher as well. Under different conditions such as these and no pollution, ozone depletion as today, life was different before some drastic changes took place. It is feasible for man to live much longer and healthier, so a 500 yo would be middle aged and sons in their prime
Explain managing the ark? No one today knows how the pyramids were built. It only took 3 yrs for the Titanic to be built. Four men working 60 hrs per week
( remember there were no distractions ie: TV, internet, radio, football, etc) that is 60 X 4=240hrs per week, X 52= 12,480 hrs per yr X 120yrs = 1,497,600 man hours, assuming he didn't hire additional help.
@Iclb0001 Alex, I can see this whole interchange with you is an utter waste of time. You accept your base assumptions uncritically because you want them to be true; not because they actually are so. You reject, (and ridicule) any theory that goes against your beliefs, thinking they are "unscientific."
Your blood be on your own head, Alex. May the Lord reward you according to your works.
@Iclb0001 Never said I don't support the underlying establishment of the Biblical account, but I do not appeal to the miraculous in order to explain present phenomenon. If God created a world with subterranean chambers, and subjected them to tidal stress and super-heating for over 1200 years so that they finally broke forth at a certain time, Hydroplate theory gives a valid, SCIENTIFIC explanation for it.
God prophetically warning Noah is the only supernatural event in the account.
@Iclb0001 Well then, why are there so many MODELS trying to explain the mechanism of subduction? Why is PT still a THEORY if subduction can be measured? (Or am I the only one having troubles with logic?)
@Iclb0001 Vapor Canopy does not fail if it is paired with Hydroplate, for its main criticism, (too much vapor occluding the Earth,) is negated when paired with Hydroplate. In other words, a THINNER canopy provides the mechanisms for higher air pressure, higher Earth temps, etc, which explain the phenomenon of longer ages and tremendous carbon growth necessary to produce "fossil fuels."
@Iclb0001 But then I did suggest the possibility that both Vapor Canopy AND Hydroplate where in operation together, (the Biblical account says the windows of heaven were opened and the fountains of the deep were broken up.) Both answer to phenomenon currently visible, and explain how humans could live so long in the pre-Flood world.
@Iclb0001 Okay, I'll call you by your full name: Alexander the Coppersmith.
That some continental plates have subducted is evident by the existing data. HOW these plates have moved is a matter of speculation, i.e. THEORY. Plate Tectonic THEORY has several MODELS that attempt to explain how this happened - none of which have been fully embraced because none of them have fully explained all the existing phenomenon.
What you arrogantly accept as fact, others (rightly) relegate as theory.
@Iclb0001 Vapor Canopy Theory is opposed because the amount of water vapor necessary to flood the world up to 5 miles high would have been so thick it would have caused excessive air pressure and extreme temperatures, either very hot or very cold.
However, the combination of Vapor Canopy and Hydroplate allows much of the flood water to have been contained in both the atmosphere and subterranean chambers, thereby allowing both mechanisms to co-exist.
@Iclb0001 If the Biblical account is true, the Earth was a very different place than it is today. That the Bible records not just one or two but ALL of the men at that time as being very long lived. Other MODELS have been proposed to explain this, one of which is the Vapor Canopy Theory, which says the Earth was at one time surrounded by a thick water canopy, much like the planet Venus. This canopy increased air pressure significantly, which is very beneficial to living beings.
@Iclb0001 There is water in rocks under China, Alex. It is a huge amount of water, perhaps as much as is contained in one of the Earth's oceans.
Water does not get into rocks without some mechanism. Water being UNDER continental plates is explained by Hydroplate Theory, whereas Plate Tectonics would say that water could not get down that deep because of the Earth's internal heat.
Sorry you're having such trouble accepting any of this, Alex. Your Christian education is not serving you well.
@Iclb0001 Hydroplate theory is neither supernatural nor miraculous. It uses the Bible's account of the Flood as its framework and goes from there. It exists as a very real and scientific theory, and explains much existing phenomenon, such as why a huge portion of the Earth's mantle lies exposed upon the Atlantic seafloor.
Hydroplate theory is opposed because it of its underlying assumptions, not because it is any less "scientific" than Plate Tectonic THEORY.
@Iclb0001 Hydroplate theory is neither supernatural nor miraculous. It uses the Bible's account of the Flood as its framework and goes from there. It exists as a very real and scientific theory, and explains much existing phenomenon, such as why a huge portion of the Earth's mantle lies exposed upon the Atlantic seafloor.
Hydroplate theory is opposed because it of its underlying assumptions, not because it is any less "scientific" than Plate Tectonic THEORY.
@Iclb0001 Real science depends on facts. You have none to support "theories," (or has it been changed to the LAW of Plate Tectonics?) Conjecture, speculation, hypothesis, guesswork. It all hinges on the underlying ASSUMPTIONS supporting the view, i.e. continental plates have shifted over "millions of years," riding on a lithosphere that supposedly is fluid enough to allow such shifting. By what mechanism do these plates shift? Well, there are several MODELS that attempt to explain this.
@iclb002810 In place of responding to factually presented data, you choose to be an elitist. (As though no one had any relevant or meaningful information except a "world class" whatever.) As though the approval of like-minded men proved anything more than a commonality of opinion.
Daniel Criswell has given a figure of 30,000 extant species that could very easily have developed over the last 4400 years from15,000 or so species surviving in an ark. Yet you choose to ridicule and ignore.
@iclb002810 I never once mentioned the Bible or any supernatural explanation for the Hydroplate Theory. Sorry you can't view this issue impartially.
Of course, YOU just want to turn this into a pulpit for your secular, atheistic, unproven, narrow-minded, intolerant, bigoted, elitist clap-trap. All you have done is ridicule, belittle, condescend, and lecture about something neither you (nor anyone else) can factually disprove. Why? BECAUSE YOU WEREN'T THERE.
"Hundreds of years ago real scientific innovation was scoffed due to the seemingly irreligious nature of the scientist. Today we have swung the pendulum the other way and real scientific innovation and theory is being scoffed because it comes from a source that is religious. History may well show that the secular strand of science has become as bigotted as the institutional church was many centuries ago."
@iclb00289 A bunch of deceived people are not "peers," but are committed antagonists, displaying the same refusal to examine their own "faith based" assumptions as you do. Simply saying something is factual does not make it so - no matter how many people believe it. (Sorry you're having so much trouble accepting this.)
All your invective, spite, nay-saying, and out and out BIAS does not advance your agenda one bit. You disagree with religionists for forcing their views, yet YOU do the same.
@iclb00289 "lso there is not one scintilla of data from seismology that suggests that Brown's subterranean chambers ever existed. Show me one piece of evidence from one independent study that shows they did."
Google "Scientists Discover Subterranean 'Ocean' Under Eastern Asia"
@iclb00289 And did you notice - an enormous portion of the ASSUMED 8.7 million species are in the water, (which do not need the saving presence of an Ark.)
@iclb00289 "8.7 million species projected to exist today." You're really good at both accepting speculation as fact, and confusing the issue. 8.7 million species is a PROJECTION based on ASSUMPTIONS. "The authors of the paper, published Tuesday evening by the scientific journal PLoS Biology, *****SUGGEST**** that 86 percent of all terrestrial species and 91 percent of all marine species have yet to be discovered, described and catalogued."
@iclb00289 From one of your links: "The theory, called plate tectonics, is that the Earth's crust, or lithosphere, is comprised of many plates that slide over a lubricating 'asthenosphere layer'.
@iclb00289 The issue is not, "are the continents plates," but rather, how did they come to their respective positions. Plate Tectonics uses the assumptions based in "uniformitarianism," that everything has progressed at their currently observed rates. Hydroplate Theory bases its assumptions in a world-wide flood, (of which there is an abundance of evidence to support it.) Walt Brown's theory is not preposterous, neither anti-scientific, but provides a solid basis for understanding the flood.
@iclb00289 Written debate or oral debate. Take your pick. Thorough written response to his ENTIRE theory, (not nit pick here and there, avoiding the answers he gives in other places,) or oral debate - open to anyone of any qualification. You're obviously well-versed enough on both theories to refute me. Perhaps you're ready to take on Walt.
@iclb00289 BTW - Walt Brown has a standing challenge to anyone wanting to debate him. He will put his theory up against anyone's, in a written or verbal debate, to all comers. Perhaps those "debunkers" of your will accept this challenge, and put this "wild bull" to pasture once and for all.
@iclb00289 As a firm advocate of PT theory, you have nothing except assumption and interpretations based on those assumptions. Ergo, you are a devotee of a faith-based belief.
PT THEORY, (you do recognize the difference between theory and fact, don't you?) cannot answer many geologic phenomenon - namely, how can tectonic plates have moved to their current locations without being crushed? Hydroplate theory answers it quite adequately.
@iclb00289 The Sun certainly appears to be moving, rather than the Earth. It goes against all natural observation and rational conclusion. To accept something other than this seems ludicrous and certainly heretical. (It wasn't just Luther and the rest of the church that rejected Galileo; it was the entire scientific community which ridiculed, lambasted, criticized, and entirely rejected his observations.
@iclb00289 The Roman Church denied Galileo's observations because they were contrary to the accepted scientific beliefs of the day, (not that they were wise to do so.) His ideas were radical, and seemed to fly in the face of clear observations. The SCIENTISTS of the day rejected Galileo, not just the Church.
Now, hydroplate theory (and they that accept it,) receives the same close-minded, intolerant, bigoted, and arrogant treatment. Can YOU see the difference?
@iclb00289 The "mainstream" condemned Galileo - ARROGANTLY belittling his writings that were against the mainstream, calling it pseudoscience and a bunch of claptrap, etc.
Your beliefs about plate tectonics are based on faith, not science. (Unless a bunch of people agreeing with you is now accepted as "science." Just like in Galileo's day.)
Sorry your religion causes to you be so close-minded, and unwilling to see its flaws. (You would have made a good inquisitor.)
@iclb00289 Googling your term produced many drawings. Look them up and you'll see.
Independent verifications are as subjective as the verifier. The tomography does not prove tectonics. "Mountains of data" is like the fossil record, which is likewise subject to interpretation. Your "mountains" are images that do not show plates in three dimensions. The tomographical "proof" for your theory is ambiguous at best.
Is it possible for you to respond sans arrogance? If not, why not?
@iclb00289 I followed you term and found lots of drawings, (which were clearer than the actual images, I'll give you that.) I also discovered Walt Brown's table showing 15 reasons "Why Plates Have Not Subducted." I don't accept everything he says as fact, but his theory is stable and gives explanation for many physical features of the Earth. He points out problems with Plate Tectonics which are, in my estimation, reasonable.
You treat them like personal attacks. Most odd, (and unstable.)
@iclb00289 Hydroplates are moving away from each other because they are riding on subterranean waters. Not against rock. When the waters are mostly expelled, they are then above the crust and have become the seas as we know them.
Your attitude is arrogant. Your beliefs about plate tectonics are speculative, (you were not there.) Your beliefs are predicated on faith. Your faith suffers challenge and you respond as a zealot. Not very impressive.
@iclb00289 Tsunamis are only devastating when they reach shore. In mid ocean, they are almost indiscernible. (Or do I have my facts wrong?)
Why the invective? Why the slurs? Anything you believe on this matter is based on an assumption. Tectonic plate theory has never been proven, no matter how many scientists believe it. When you verbally abuse, you make yourself no different than the Roman Catholics who persecuted Galileo.
There is a very interesting online textbook where Walt describes much of his theory in detail.
What puzzles me most is the vitriol coming from those opposing this view. Since no one actually witnessed any of these original unrepeatable events, ALL beliefs about them ultimately rest on a foundation of faith.
Why then such anger and vehemence against something that is entirely plausible and highly likely?
"A thin spherical shell, about half a mile thick." Nope, still not enough water. You'd need at least eight times that much water to cover Mt. Ararat. Not to mention that the temperature at ten miles depth is 200 degrees, and water being ejected at supersonic speed would have turned into superheated steam. The water piling up that fast would have created more heat. At three miles depth, the water would be hot enough to disintegrate all living matter. Noah would have been cooked to death.
@Acrimonator The existence of creations proves a Creator. That you refuse to see this is evidence of something other than a lack of physical evidence.
Hydroplate theory is an attempt to explain geological processes in light of the Biblical account of a global, catastrophic flood, (the evidence of which is global.)
Arrogant claims to the contrary changes nothing. In fact, it mimics those with an intolerant attitude, (like the Roman Catholics towards Galileo.)
@jrneumiller "The existence of creations.../...lack of physical evidence."
"Arrogant claims to the contrary changes nothing. In fact, it mimics those with an intolerant attitude, (like the Roman Catholics towards Galileo.)"
Thanks for the lulz... Just in case, I hope you've noticed the irony of accusing me of making arrogant claims when you say that I refuse to see evidence without providing any.
BTW Hydroplate is not a theory, rather an unfounded hypothesis. Please, take a geology course.
Which of Noah's pure noble family members had crabs, herpes, syphilis and Chlamydia since most human diseases including STDs can't survive outside the human body?
The Chinese classic called the Hihking tells about "the family of Fuhi," that was saved from a great flood. This ancient story tells that the entire land was flooded; the mountains and everything, however one family survived in a boat. The Chinese consider this man the father of their civilization. This record indicates that Fuhi, his wife, three sons, and three daughters were the only people that escaped the great flood. It was claimed that this family re-populated the earth
@kkp5200 A spring? Apples and oranges, kiddo. Please tell me how a spring can change the weak force. But now, I'm going to continue with a little palyonology, since we just barely touched on it. In Lake Marcaibo, Venezuela, core samples have been taken that extend back to the Cretaceous. Within this core one can find a progression of pollen types appearing and going extinct, where if there had been a flood, all types would be mixed together (continued)
@NorthForkFisherman pollen changes throughout every season.. and remember, tides, along with seasons, and volcanos, rain, dry weather. everything effects pollen.. some years around here the pollen count is really low, almost extinct.
@kkp5200 And another, whoosh! Right over your head. Had there been an actual flood there would be a single layer and all the pollens mixed uniformly through it. The references I sent show both the extinction of species and their regular cycling according to the season.
every season the same weather pattern. I should measure some things that happened yesterday, and extrapolate that into 4 million years ago.. It will be really accurate.
@kkp5200 You know what. I'm glad you replied. Simply because, watching you trying to grasp these normally simple concepts, is just fucking hilarious. Do the words "single layer" and "mixed" hold any meaning for you? Yes? No? 42? E=mc2? If I could write this in big red crayon, would that help?
@NorthForkFisherman back to insulting, yet never answering or realizing your blatant disregard for taking static measurements and drawing dynamic conclusions.
@kkp5200 Well, If you would actually ask a question that was bounded in reality, I might spend less time laughing at you. Cause right now, it's monkey fucking a football time, and I'm just dying here. I'll ask once again, if a flood happened, why are the pollens found in these sediments segregated by species over time rather than mixed in a single flood layer? I cannot make it any simpler than that for you.
@kkp5200 Swing and a miss. You just get more, umm, "interesting" with each post. Exactly what does this have to do with palyonology? Hmmm? And if you were dropped as a baby, it's OK. Otherwise I'm about to call POE and start ignoring you.
@NorthForkFisherman seems as though your quick to pass insults and slow to answer any of the questions presented to you, along with trying to direct away from the original posts. Not too surprised though... have a good one.. TTYL
@kkp5200 So you want me to answer all your questions, but gods forbid you should actually answer one of mine. Which very simply is: why are all the pollens found stratified by species over time rather than mixed as in a flood? But that's typical of a YECer when confronted with real data and by somone who actually thinks: they run away. I'll answer all those little questions, but you answer just that one first.
@gregrutz Hey greg! Are my questions to kkp5200 making any kind of sense to you? Am I not being clear, or is there some other way I can phrase this data so that he can understand it? I thought that I was typing in english? Is it coming out in Klingon or something?
@gregrutz You know, considering the amount of money being made off yokels like kkp5200 and all the rest by hovind et al, maybe we're on the wrong side? Oh wait, we've got integrity and a passing respect for truth. Sucks to be us I guess. LOL. But really, this last guy, dropped as a baby. Gotta be.
@gregrutz : You know perfectly well, as an adult human being, that there ARE lakes of oil and water, and reservoirs of natural gas, in the earth's crust. Why are you trying to convince everyone that you're stupid? Seems kind of pointless.
@buzzclick500 You do realize their isn't over 4 billion gallons of water under the earths crust, or mantle right? It's molten metal.... There is an under ground bit of tap water and oil. But that doesn't mean a flood water reached the height of Mt. Fuji.
Not to mention out of all the fossils we have, Only about 1% of anything could be fossilized. If this idiots claim were true, it would be more like 60-70%
@buzzclick500 Cont... We would have absolutely NO fresh water what so ever if the great flood ever happened. Salt would over turn all of the water, the great lakes in america that have fresh water would be non-existent.
Also, where would this water have come from? Matter cannot be created nor destroyed as far as we know.
Why would a deity choose to flood the world when he could just say BOOM and everything he wanted dead would be dead.
This sounds absolutely bat shit crazy if you ask me.
@Microtardz : Well, I only figured out a couple of years ago why the oceans are salty--cause everything's been PEEING in them for a long time. If that sounds stupid, well, that's what I came up with. As for how God decides to do stuff...I'd be one of the last ones to get in His face about it; He's done more than right by me.
@buzzclick500 I'd be the first one to get in his face about it. Depending on how powerful he is. An omnipotent omniscient omnipresent god has NO FUCKING EXCUSE. The biblical god has NO FUCKING EXCUSE. But a weaker god that only created the universe. Does. In fact, a deistic god doesn't need an excuse. He didn't do anything but create the universe.
Biblical god has Killed people, set punishments for things he thinks are wrong, then expects us to bow down to him.
You do realize the great lakes have fish in them and fish PEE!
They also have deer in michigan and. Ughh, *face palm*
Pee? Salt isn't the only mineral that occurs in the ocean. Not to mention if Pee was such an important factor we'd be more worried about AMMONIA than we would salt.
@Microtardz : At any rate, when Jesus Christ returns, ammonia and fire will be the order of the day--the two elements most destructive to life. There won't be any time to worry, because it'll be faster than any of us can imagine.
@buzzclick500 Yes, change the topic from the destruction of the pitiful story of noahs ark to the story of how i'm going to burn in hell. Tsk tsk. Even though the bible contradicts itself every left turn you still believe it like a fundamentalist.
Or are you going to be slightly more open minded and have an open discussion about this?
Shall we say i'm burning in hell.
Or shall we discuss further into why I don't believe your god nor your hell fires exist?
The super critical water theory is the only physics explanation that even comes close to explaining not only what happened from the flood on but also allows ofr how the world appeared before the flood.
Paleontologists claim Pteradactyls could not have gotten airborne unless the atmosphere was twice as dense as it is today.
Even though science only discovered the holes in the ozone layer in 1987 it is likely they have been there since the flood.
@gregrutz Noah's Flood. The entire ecosystem of our planet changed drastically. When Noahs family reached land God spoke to Noah again and said I give you the rainbow in the sky as a covenant that I will never destroy all of the earth by flooding again. So one must think then what was different about our atmosphere then for rainbows to have never appeared before? Would an increased pressure and density of air prevent water droplets forming in the air for the refraction process to take place?
@gregrutz The entire fossil record is part of the trace and the ribbon shapes of mountain ranges as well. When you look at a mountain that looks like a piece of ribbon candy in waves do you actually believe that was done over millions of years with the rock in a solid state? Or is it more likely it happened very quickly when the mass was in a plastic state of liquifaction?
I am asking you serious questions. Do you have serious answers or just wisecracks?
@gregrutz How could you possibly even believe solid rock could bend into wavelike ribbons ever no matter how long they had?
Did you read the free book at creationscience to give it an honest evaluation? You did not, and you will not, because you are afraid to lose your humanistic relgious belief in what you were taught.
If you change your mind get back to me with honest evaluations, back up your statements, and leave the immature name calling and derisiveness at home.
@Johannwyss82 If you are familiar with the process of radiometric dating you will know it can onl apply to dating the actual material and does nothing to indicate the state of the material at the time of the flood. Furthermore fossilization has been done in laboratories so it does not take millions of years.
Naturally it can only date organic material, but why do we see a systematical age range in the fossil record?
In the lower geological layers we find the oldest material in the top we find the newest?
why do we not see any evidence supporting this global flood, you need to keep in mind that there are many Christian geologists who would be eager indeed to find evidence supporting the global flood.
Yet all we get are crackpots like Mr Brown here attempting to deceive people.
@Johannwyss82 Thank you for the polite response. If the fossil record were indeed arranged the way you say it is then why would fossils exist with human footprints inside of dinosaur footprints. It has long been known that every significant mountain has fish fossils at their peaks, which is why there has been a consensus there was indeed a worldwide flood. However there is no consensus on how the flood happened or when. BTW Walt brown is a PHDs so please drop the mister and give him his due.
The Paluxy River fossils prove nothing lad, as they have never been proven to be human footprints. You also neglected to mention the size of thees footprints (Double the size of a human footprint) or the fact that the distance between them differs greatly within the same alleged stride. Obviously this does not conform with human behavior.
Fish fossils are found on mountains this is not at all odd once you consider that
What is a mountain now may have once been a deep sea trench millions of years ago. With the tectonic plates moving the way they do the landmass is constantly being manipulated hence Earthquakes and volcanoes.
There is no consensus at all that there was a global flood, in fact it is throughly debunked.
@Johannwyss82 We have perhaps reached an impasse on the fossil data. There are many footprints and evidence is given for and against the afore mentioned conclusions. You will believe the articles against humans and dinos together and I will believe the ones for it. try this forbiddenhistory dot "info/?q=node/55"
@rollinshultz What we find in nature is distinct layers of different kinds of rock, floods don't do that. And he does not explain why we don't find bunnys buried with the dinosaurs. Or dinosaurs buried with the trilobites.
@kkp5200@kkp5200 You are going to come to a point at some time, aren't you? I'm quite familiar with Casteroides (Pliestocene epoch) and Meganeura (Carboniferous periods). But again, what does this have to do with radioactive decay. Or do you think Godzilla was real? I'm going to take a short break. If you actually come to a point....I'd be truly suprised.
Can Dr walt Brown explain why the fossil record does not coincide with his theory? If there were a global flood how does he explain the complete lack of evidence supporting it i.e humans on the top layers of the fossil record and dinosaurs at the bottom?
goes to show you have not done much to research his theory. he explains this in great detail. there are many proccesses that happened to explain why things are sorted in the manner they are. liqifaction being one of them. look into it.
liqifaction does not begin to explain how the fossil record was arranged in order of complexity after the supposed global flood. Who do you think you are kidding?
first off the fossil record is not sorted by complexity lol. Creatures found at the very bottom layer(cambrian) are found alive today, like trilobites, with the most complex eye systems on earth. animals are sorted logically. I.E bottom dwelling sea creatures at the very bottom, then you have other creatures sorted by density. and where they would be depending on their natural habitat. It has nothing to do with complexity. If you believe this, you need to look into this matter further.
The fossil record starts with the Pre-Cambrian with the first Animal traces such as soft bodied Metazoans etc, It moves on to the Cambrian with the first fishes and Chordates, we then find in the Ordovician a diverse range of Metazoan family's, after that comes the Silurian with land plants, the Devonian with the first amphibians and a diverse range of jawed fish, Carboniferous provides the first reptiles, trees and Ferns, The Permian brings the diversity of reptiles tbc.
The Triassic shows the first dinosaurs and the beginning of the mammals, The Jurassic provides the first birds and a wide variety of dinosaurs, the Cretaceous shows the extinction of dinosaurs the first primates and the first flowers, in the Tertiary mammals are diverse leaving us in the Quaternary with the first discovered humans. That is the level of complexity I was referring too.
If as you suggested the fossil record is "sorted by density. and where they would be depending on their natural habitat." if this were true why would birds be found before humans? Why would Dinosaurs be found before Humans? (They would be much more buoyant and have a higher density ) You are a fool! Pistolpete.
@rollinshultz Pistol pete simply regurgitated nonsense! Neither won the debate because there was never a debate to win.
My first rule to debating is to Find an actual intellectual rather than an ignorant fool who has been sucked into a web of deceit built by the modern Church! There is no evidence to support this nonsense and that's a fact!
@wowplayer6541011 sad, just sad, The magic pink unicorn, creator of all things , does not FLY. He wills himself to be ignored by gravity and FLOATS MAJESTICALLY from place to place. You might as well claim the Flying Spagehti Monster did it .
@Johannwyss82 there's no such nicely layered column. if u go to the sahara, you can find dinosaur fossils at ground level just by brushing off a little sand.
@Johannwyss82 that would mean the layer was pretty recent. if it were 65 million years ago, that entire layer containing the fossil would be rock solid. instead its sand, topsoil. not too long ago, the africans were living in this same region but on a Savannah.
@kkp5200 Organized fossil record? Actually, I can. All I need to do is cross the road to the cut for the new highway. It's all nearshore/offshore marine creatures with species appearing and disappearing through time. Brachiopods, Crinoids, Urchins, Corals. Now if you want to discuss things, you really need to start providing references, not your personal incredulity. Cause that means jack shit here. Show me a Cambrian bunny, damn it.
@NorthForkFisherman how bout a duck fossilized with dino's, fossils are mixed up across the whole planet.. just look for fossilized graveyards, they are from florida to canada, there is no organization, do you remember the coelacanth.
@kkp5200 Actually birds are known from the Jurassic. And what you are atttempting to state regarding Vegavis iaai is of course incorrect. Among modern birds, Vegavis is most closely related to ducks and geese (Anatidae), but it is not considered to be a direct ancestor of them. Ref: Nature 2005, Clarke, J.A., Tambussi, C.P., Noriega, J.I., Erickson, G.M. and Ketcham, R.A. (2005). "Definitive fossil evidence for the extant avian radiation in the Cretaceous."
@kkp5200 Now as far as your ludicrous proposition that the "fossils are mixed up across the whole planet", why have we not found ground sloths mixed in with triceatops or scutosaurs and eyrops? Please, try to explain that. I'd really like to hear what you "think".
@kkp5200 Got awful quiet there. I'm gonna give you the benefit of the doubt and say you were busy with RL issues. Which is just fine. However the question still stands. Where are the sloths found deep in the rock record and the velociraptors found at the top? And plese give source material. Your opinion simply won't cut it.
@kkp5200 The onus of proof is on you sir. You need to provide clear and concise references to support your claims. A search engine is not a reference, execept to those who are willing to be intellecually lazy. It's a start point, not an end. As you've noticed, I do provide references. And Walt Brown's theory? Bullshit of the highest order. Spread that on dry concrete and you could farm it. The Opeche Shale in Texas directly refute it.
@kkp5200 Considering that, while I'm not a geologist, I've more than a passing familarity with all the subject matter you've just covered. You might want to actually strike the polystrate bit out first. Debunked over 142 years ago: Ref: Dawson, J.W., 1868. Acadian Geology. The Geological Structure, Organic Remains, and Mineral Resources of Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, and Prince Edward Island, 2nd edition. MacMillan and Co.: London, 694pp.
@kkp5200 The same goes for the other two terms. Bullshit science promogulated by those who've not actually read the data. When you find a fossil you find a snapshot of it's environment. The plants, animals, and microbes that make up the ecosystem. A careful examination of both the fossils and the matrix found in show both where it was, and what it was doing. This is a forensic, historical science.
@NorthForkFisherman okay tell me something new please, have you done your research on mixed up fossils yet..? are they all stacked neatly older ones on the bottom and young ones on top.. I'll give you a simple search, "coal with artifact of a bell" i guess man lived 300 million years ago too.. or if you want to get more broad, search for "artifacts found in coal." or perhaps maybe you started with prostrate fossils.. whatever you like
@kkp5200 Actually, it's a catholic communion bell that was found encrusted with coal dust creating a concretion. Nice try, but when you actually read the data, you'll see there is no support whatsoever for a young Earth, unless you lie to yourself. I truely doubt there were catholics much farther back than say, oh 2000 years, hmmmm? And again, provide a reference, 'k?
@NorthForkFisherman plenty of documentation, just keep looking for artifacts found in coal.
its not too hard.. is it? maybe it hurts getting your beliefs drilled with out of place artifacts... keep looking , the pain will go away when you start realizing you've been created. :) got hopes for you..
@kkp5200 Dude, like I said I already have. Try actually reading what's written here.All items of realatively modern manufacture carried down, forgotte, and encrusted with the dust. If you want to talk ooparts, show me a bunny rabbit in cambrian rocks. If all were created at the same time, should be a snap. Well, Can you?
dude? dude.. just look for fossil graveyards. they are all over the planet, perhaps think about what created them, and look at whats in there. Dinosaurs, sharks, whales, horses, rhinos, mastodons, elephants, deer, mammoths,pigs, dogs, and sheep.... ect...ect...ect...... "The Ashley Beds" do a lil research in something that perhaps isn't so neat and as organized so called fossil record.... it's not hard at all.. really...
@kkp5200 You mean the Ashfall Fossil Beds in Nebraska? Yeesh. That's an excellent example of onshore preservation by means of layers of volcanic ash from the Yellostone hotspot. And as such it gives a precisely dated age. The monument, as it is now under Park Servie control shows a snapshot of Miocene animal life on land. Again, it's a nice try, but since you are unable to define one single place, it's obvious you don't have the slightest clue of which you speak.
anyway.. they are plenty of fossil graveyards and a simple search can yeild a wealth of understanding. I think it's funny, one of the worlds largest fossil graveyards was just found in Canada about a month ago, just now the scientific community is re-thinking the dinosaur extinction.. to something like a major flood.. really.? doesn't the Bible talk about that..? writte almost 4000 years. ago.. hmm. must have been a hurricane in Canada
@kkp5200 And now you've shown that you REALLY don't understand what you've been talking about. I'm very well aware of the ceratopsians found and the conditions under which they were discovered. Where is the rest of the ecosystem? Where's the damn rabbits and sloths? NOWHERE. It's dated back before the KT boundry before such critters even evolved. You need to learn basic geology before you can even start this. YT does offer and excellent starter set of videos that address this. Use them.
The published differences in average IQ between theists and atheists are well known, but i had no idea they were so apparent as this video is testomony to.
Roj0307 1 hour ago
LOL
DrSpooglemon 3 weeks ago in playlist Idiots
I read your posts re "canopy theory". Have you read Dr Brown's book? He believes as you do and gives and excellent argument defending his reasons. He has math formulas as well as other sources to dispel why the canopy couldn't work. Of course, it seems you believe that he is all "fantasy science which cannot be measured or demonstrated, to whit 'pseudoscience'". However, it is worth the read.
jimf50 2 months ago
Not any more than than you can support the super natural nothing became something (big bang) the miracle of non life evolving into life or the faith that life form has evolved into more complex life forms, despite the fact that the fossil record proves contrary (no intermediate forms)... I guess it's a stalemate and, as I said, we will hang on to our respective religious beliefs and faith. btw...
jimf50 2 months ago
There are only two views: evolution or intelligent design. So, if I ask you for scientific evidence without using evolutionist sources you have nothing to base your beliefs upon.
Just read many of your previous posts. As I said, we have a different world view and I have learned it is almost impossible to change ones religious views. Yes, evolution is a faith based religion, with too many assumptions (faith) with little TRUE scientific proof. Good luck on finding that missing link.
jimf50 2 months ago
I know that we have a different worldview, however, we do know that the world was once a much different place than today. The fossil record shows us that plants and animals were much larger than today. The oxygen levels were higher as well. Under different conditions such as these and no pollution, ozone depletion as today, life was different before some drastic changes took place. It is feasible for man to live much longer and healthier, so a 500 yo would be middle aged and sons in their prime
jimf50 2 months ago
His talk started to make sense at 5:21
synsei1 2 months ago
Dr. Brown is a former atheist with a couple of Phd's. Do you have similar credentials? If so, why not take him up on his offer for debate?
jimf50 3 months ago
Explain managing the ark? No one today knows how the pyramids were built. It only took 3 yrs for the Titanic to be built. Four men working 60 hrs per week
( remember there were no distractions ie: TV, internet, radio, football, etc) that is 60 X 4=240hrs per week, X 52= 12,480 hrs per yr X 120yrs = 1,497,600 man hours, assuming he didn't hire additional help.
jimf50 3 months ago
@Iclb0001 Alex, I can see this whole interchange with you is an utter waste of time. You accept your base assumptions uncritically because you want them to be true; not because they actually are so. You reject, (and ridicule) any theory that goes against your beliefs, thinking they are "unscientific."
Your blood be on your own head, Alex. May the Lord reward you according to your works.
jrneumiller 5 months ago
@Iclb0001 Never said I don't support the underlying establishment of the Biblical account, but I do not appeal to the miraculous in order to explain present phenomenon. If God created a world with subterranean chambers, and subjected them to tidal stress and super-heating for over 1200 years so that they finally broke forth at a certain time, Hydroplate theory gives a valid, SCIENTIFIC explanation for it.
God prophetically warning Noah is the only supernatural event in the account.
jrneumiller 5 months ago
@Iclb0001 Well then, why are there so many MODELS trying to explain the mechanism of subduction? Why is PT still a THEORY if subduction can be measured? (Or am I the only one having troubles with logic?)
jrneumiller 5 months ago
@Iclb0001 Vapor Canopy does not fail if it is paired with Hydroplate, for its main criticism, (too much vapor occluding the Earth,) is negated when paired with Hydroplate. In other words, a THINNER canopy provides the mechanisms for higher air pressure, higher Earth temps, etc, which explain the phenomenon of longer ages and tremendous carbon growth necessary to produce "fossil fuels."
jrneumiller 5 months ago
@Iclb0001 But then I did suggest the possibility that both Vapor Canopy AND Hydroplate where in operation together, (the Biblical account says the windows of heaven were opened and the fountains of the deep were broken up.) Both answer to phenomenon currently visible, and explain how humans could live so long in the pre-Flood world.
jrneumiller 5 months ago
@Iclb0001 Okay, I'll call you by your full name: Alexander the Coppersmith.
That some continental plates have subducted is evident by the existing data. HOW these plates have moved is a matter of speculation, i.e. THEORY. Plate Tectonic THEORY has several MODELS that attempt to explain how this happened - none of which have been fully embraced because none of them have fully explained all the existing phenomenon.
What you arrogantly accept as fact, others (rightly) relegate as theory.
jrneumiller 5 months ago
@Iclb0001 Vapor Canopy Theory is opposed because the amount of water vapor necessary to flood the world up to 5 miles high would have been so thick it would have caused excessive air pressure and extreme temperatures, either very hot or very cold.
However, the combination of Vapor Canopy and Hydroplate allows much of the flood water to have been contained in both the atmosphere and subterranean chambers, thereby allowing both mechanisms to co-exist.
jrneumiller 5 months ago
@Iclb0001 If the Biblical account is true, the Earth was a very different place than it is today. That the Bible records not just one or two but ALL of the men at that time as being very long lived. Other MODELS have been proposed to explain this, one of which is the Vapor Canopy Theory, which says the Earth was at one time surrounded by a thick water canopy, much like the planet Venus. This canopy increased air pressure significantly, which is very beneficial to living beings.
jrneumiller 5 months ago
@Iclb0001 There is water in rocks under China, Alex. It is a huge amount of water, perhaps as much as is contained in one of the Earth's oceans.
Water does not get into rocks without some mechanism. Water being UNDER continental plates is explained by Hydroplate Theory, whereas Plate Tectonics would say that water could not get down that deep because of the Earth's internal heat.
Sorry you're having such trouble accepting any of this, Alex. Your Christian education is not serving you well.
jrneumiller 5 months ago
@Iclb0001 Hydroplate theory is neither supernatural nor miraculous. It uses the Bible's account of the Flood as its framework and goes from there. It exists as a very real and scientific theory, and explains much existing phenomenon, such as why a huge portion of the Earth's mantle lies exposed upon the Atlantic seafloor.
Hydroplate theory is opposed because it of its underlying assumptions, not because it is any less "scientific" than Plate Tectonic THEORY.
jrneumiller 5 months ago
@Iclb0001 Hydroplate theory is neither supernatural nor miraculous. It uses the Bible's account of the Flood as its framework and goes from there. It exists as a very real and scientific theory, and explains much existing phenomenon, such as why a huge portion of the Earth's mantle lies exposed upon the Atlantic seafloor.
Hydroplate theory is opposed because it of its underlying assumptions, not because it is any less "scientific" than Plate Tectonic THEORY.
jrneumiller 5 months ago
@Iclb0001 Real science depends on facts. You have none to support "theories," (or has it been changed to the LAW of Plate Tectonics?) Conjecture, speculation, hypothesis, guesswork. It all hinges on the underlying ASSUMPTIONS supporting the view, i.e. continental plates have shifted over "millions of years," riding on a lithosphere that supposedly is fluid enough to allow such shifting. By what mechanism do these plates shift? Well, there are several MODELS that attempt to explain this.
jrneumiller 5 months ago
@iclb002810 In place of responding to factually presented data, you choose to be an elitist. (As though no one had any relevant or meaningful information except a "world class" whatever.) As though the approval of like-minded men proved anything more than a commonality of opinion.
Daniel Criswell has given a figure of 30,000 extant species that could very easily have developed over the last 4400 years from15,000 or so species surviving in an ark. Yet you choose to ridicule and ignore.
jrneumiller 5 months ago
@iclb002810 I never once mentioned the Bible or any supernatural explanation for the Hydroplate Theory. Sorry you can't view this issue impartially.
Of course, YOU just want to turn this into a pulpit for your secular, atheistic, unproven, narrow-minded, intolerant, bigoted, elitist clap-trap. All you have done is ridicule, belittle, condescend, and lecture about something neither you (nor anyone else) can factually disprove. Why? BECAUSE YOU WEREN'T THERE.
Or were you?
jrneumiller 5 months ago
"Hundreds of years ago real scientific innovation was scoffed due to the seemingly irreligious nature of the scientist. Today we have swung the pendulum the other way and real scientific innovation and theory is being scoffed because it comes from a source that is religious. History may well show that the secular strand of science has become as bigotted as the institutional church was many centuries ago."
jrneumiller 5 months ago
@iclb00289 "Speciation and the Animals on the Ark " google.
jrneumiller 5 months ago
@iclb00289 A bunch of deceived people are not "peers," but are committed antagonists, displaying the same refusal to examine their own "faith based" assumptions as you do. Simply saying something is factual does not make it so - no matter how many people believe it. (Sorry you're having so much trouble accepting this.)
All your invective, spite, nay-saying, and out and out BIAS does not advance your agenda one bit. You disagree with religionists for forcing their views, yet YOU do the same.
jrneumiller 5 months ago
@iclb00289 "lso there is not one scintilla of data from seismology that suggests that Brown's subterranean chambers ever existed. Show me one piece of evidence from one independent study that shows they did."
Google "Scientists Discover Subterranean 'Ocean' Under Eastern Asia"
jrneumiller 5 months ago
@iclb00289 "Whatever?" You slam me repeatedly for "pseudoscience," and you don't even both to get your facts straight? Nice habit you've got there.
jrneumiller 5 months ago
@iclb00289 And did you notice - an enormous portion of the ASSUMED 8.7 million species are in the water, (which do not need the saving presence of an Ark.)
jrneumiller 5 months ago
@iclb00289 "8.7 million species projected to exist today." You're really good at both accepting speculation as fact, and confusing the issue. 8.7 million species is a PROJECTION based on ASSUMPTIONS. "The authors of the paper, published Tuesday evening by the scientific journal PLoS Biology, *****SUGGEST**** that 86 percent of all terrestrial species and 91 percent of all marine species have yet to be discovered, described and catalogued."
jrneumiller 5 months ago
@iclb00289 From one of your links: "The theory, called plate tectonics, is that the Earth's crust, or lithosphere, is comprised of many plates that slide over a lubricating 'asthenosphere layer'.
By what mechanism? What causes the sliding?
jrneumiller 5 months ago
@iclb00289 The issue is not, "are the continents plates," but rather, how did they come to their respective positions. Plate Tectonics uses the assumptions based in "uniformitarianism," that everything has progressed at their currently observed rates. Hydroplate Theory bases its assumptions in a world-wide flood, (of which there is an abundance of evidence to support it.) Walt Brown's theory is not preposterous, neither anti-scientific, but provides a solid basis for understanding the flood.
jrneumiller 5 months ago
@iclb00289 Written debate or oral debate. Take your pick. Thorough written response to his ENTIRE theory, (not nit pick here and there, avoiding the answers he gives in other places,) or oral debate - open to anyone of any qualification. You're obviously well-versed enough on both theories to refute me. Perhaps you're ready to take on Walt.
jrneumiller 5 months ago
@iclb00289 BTW - Walt Brown has a standing challenge to anyone wanting to debate him. He will put his theory up against anyone's, in a written or verbal debate, to all comers. Perhaps those "debunkers" of your will accept this challenge, and put this "wild bull" to pasture once and for all.
jrneumiller 5 months ago
@iclb00289 As a firm advocate of PT theory, you have nothing except assumption and interpretations based on those assumptions. Ergo, you are a devotee of a faith-based belief.
PT THEORY, (you do recognize the difference between theory and fact, don't you?) cannot answer many geologic phenomenon - namely, how can tectonic plates have moved to their current locations without being crushed? Hydroplate theory answers it quite adequately.
jrneumiller 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@iclb00289 No more than you.
jrneumiller 5 months ago
@iclb00289 The Sun certainly appears to be moving, rather than the Earth. It goes against all natural observation and rational conclusion. To accept something other than this seems ludicrous and certainly heretical. (It wasn't just Luther and the rest of the church that rejected Galileo; it was the entire scientific community which ridiculed, lambasted, criticized, and entirely rejected his observations.
Just like hydroplate theory.
jrneumiller 5 months ago
@iclb00289 The Roman Church denied Galileo's observations because they were contrary to the accepted scientific beliefs of the day, (not that they were wise to do so.) His ideas were radical, and seemed to fly in the face of clear observations. The SCIENTISTS of the day rejected Galileo, not just the Church.
Now, hydroplate theory (and they that accept it,) receives the same close-minded, intolerant, bigoted, and arrogant treatment. Can YOU see the difference?
jrneumiller 5 months ago
Comment removed
jrneumiller 5 months ago
@iclb00289 I have one. Enjoy yours, while you have it.
jrneumiller 5 months ago
@iclb00289 The "mainstream" condemned Galileo - ARROGANTLY belittling his writings that were against the mainstream, calling it pseudoscience and a bunch of claptrap, etc.
Your beliefs about plate tectonics are based on faith, not science. (Unless a bunch of people agreeing with you is now accepted as "science." Just like in Galileo's day.)
Sorry your religion causes to you be so close-minded, and unwilling to see its flaws. (You would have made a good inquisitor.)
jrneumiller 5 months ago
@iclb00289 Googling your term produced many drawings. Look them up and you'll see.
Independent verifications are as subjective as the verifier. The tomography does not prove tectonics. "Mountains of data" is like the fossil record, which is likewise subject to interpretation. Your "mountains" are images that do not show plates in three dimensions. The tomographical "proof" for your theory is ambiguous at best.
Is it possible for you to respond sans arrogance? If not, why not?
jrneumiller 5 months ago
@iclb00289 I followed you term and found lots of drawings, (which were clearer than the actual images, I'll give you that.) I also discovered Walt Brown's table showing 15 reasons "Why Plates Have Not Subducted." I don't accept everything he says as fact, but his theory is stable and gives explanation for many physical features of the Earth. He points out problems with Plate Tectonics which are, in my estimation, reasonable.
You treat them like personal attacks. Most odd, (and unstable.)
jrneumiller 5 months ago
@iclb00289 And how did these land masses become curved?
jrneumiller 5 months ago
@iclb00289 Hydroplates are moving away from each other because they are riding on subterranean waters. Not against rock. When the waters are mostly expelled, they are then above the crust and have become the seas as we know them.
Your attitude is arrogant. Your beliefs about plate tectonics are speculative, (you were not there.) Your beliefs are predicated on faith. Your faith suffers challenge and you respond as a zealot. Not very impressive.
jrneumiller 5 months ago
@iclb00289 Tsunamis are only devastating when they reach shore. In mid ocean, they are almost indiscernible. (Or do I have my facts wrong?)
Why the invective? Why the slurs? Anything you believe on this matter is based on an assumption. Tectonic plate theory has never been proven, no matter how many scientists believe it. When you verbally abuse, you make yourself no different than the Roman Catholics who persecuted Galileo.
jrneumiller 5 months ago
creationscience dotcom slash onlinebook
jrneumiller 6 months ago
Comment removed
jrneumiller 6 months ago
There is a very interesting online textbook where Walt describes much of his theory in detail.
What puzzles me most is the vitriol coming from those opposing this view. Since no one actually witnessed any of these original unrepeatable events, ALL beliefs about them ultimately rest on a foundation of faith.
Why then such anger and vehemence against something that is entirely plausible and highly likely?
jrneumiller 6 months ago
"A thin spherical shell, about half a mile thick." Nope, still not enough water. You'd need at least eight times that much water to cover Mt. Ararat. Not to mention that the temperature at ten miles depth is 200 degrees, and water being ejected at supersonic speed would have turned into superheated steam. The water piling up that fast would have created more heat. At three miles depth, the water would be hot enough to disintegrate all living matter. Noah would have been cooked to death.
artgoat 7 months ago
3 miles per second.
completely around the earth in 2 hours.
circumference of the earth 24901,47 miles.
3*60*60 = 21600.
24900 - 21600 = 3300 missing miles.
tiaxanderson 7 months ago
The quality of this video is terrible! Why is the sync so jacked up? It's unwatchable.
Not1Edit 8 months ago
fail
mcmadbat3 1 year ago
LOL at the handle... Like adding a PhD behind creation Science sorta validates it...
Acrimonator 1 year ago 6
@Acrimonator Same way adding a PhD behind evolution science validates it ...
jrneumiller 5 months ago
@jrneumiller the difference being that no matter how much time you look at it, creation can't be proven.
Acrimonator 5 months ago
@Acrimonator The existence of creations proves a Creator. That you refuse to see this is evidence of something other than a lack of physical evidence.
Hydroplate theory is an attempt to explain geological processes in light of the Biblical account of a global, catastrophic flood, (the evidence of which is global.)
Arrogant claims to the contrary changes nothing. In fact, it mimics those with an intolerant attitude, (like the Roman Catholics towards Galileo.)
jrneumiller 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@jrneumiller "The existence of creations.../...lack of physical evidence."
"Arrogant claims to the contrary changes nothing. In fact, it mimics those with an intolerant attitude, (like the Roman Catholics towards Galileo.)"
Thanks for the lulz... Just in case, I hope you've noticed the irony of accusing me of making arrogant claims when you say that I refuse to see evidence without providing any.
BTW Hydroplate is not a theory, rather an unfounded hypothesis. Please, take a geology course.
Acrimonator 5 months ago
"Center for Scientific Creation" is congruent with "The Center for Underwater Fire Prevention"
Neither are useful, neither make sense.
drgoldteef 1 year ago 3
was noah black, white, hispanic, asian, or something else?
Sc0ttPrian 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Which of Noah's pure noble family members had crabs, herpes, syphilis and Chlamydia since most human diseases including STDs can't survive outside the human body?
gregrutz 1 year ago 4
Was there a global flood? NO, just ask the Chinese who didn't die it a flood.
gregrutz 1 year ago
@gregrutz China
The Chinese classic called the Hihking tells about "the family of Fuhi," that was saved from a great flood. This ancient story tells that the entire land was flooded; the mountains and everything, however one family survived in a boat. The Chinese consider this man the father of their civilization. This record indicates that Fuhi, his wife, three sons, and three daughters were the only people that escaped the great flood. It was claimed that this family re-populated the earth
kkp5200 1 year ago
@kkp5200 So you're telling the chinese are all inbred, like we're also supposed ti be byw.
synsei1 9 months ago
@synsei1 : Their phone books are smaller than ours--fewer last names. ;])
buzzclick500 8 months ago
@buzzclick500 I'm sorry, when I said gallons I was incorrect. I meant Cubic meters of water.
Or is it cubic kilometers. Idk.
Microtardz 7 months ago
@kkp5200 Bull Shit ! There was no globel flood, there are trees older than 4400 years old.
gregrutz 8 months ago
PhD>>>in this case piled higher and deeper>>>shit for brains!
DClayTorosco 1 year ago
The water was under rock, yea right.
He has absolutely no evidence for this ''theory''.
gregrutz 1 year ago
@gregrutz guess you never heard of a spring
kkp5200 1 year ago
@kkp5200 A spring? Apples and oranges, kiddo. Please tell me how a spring can change the weak force. But now, I'm going to continue with a little palyonology, since we just barely touched on it. In Lake Marcaibo, Venezuela, core samples have been taken that extend back to the Cretaceous. Within this core one can find a progression of pollen types appearing and going extinct, where if there had been a flood, all types would be mixed together (continued)
NorthForkFisherman 1 year ago
@NorthForkFisherman lol,
your not paying attention, do you see the @gregrutz.. that is whom my comment was directed
kkp5200 1 year ago
@NorthForkFisherman the comment re: a spring was directed to @gregrutz :)
kkp5200 1 year ago
@NorthForkFisherman pollen changes throughout every season.. and remember, tides, along with seasons, and volcanos, rain, dry weather. everything effects pollen.. some years around here the pollen count is really low, almost extinct.
kkp5200 1 year ago
@kkp5200 And another, whoosh! Right over your head. Had there been an actual flood there would be a single layer and all the pollens mixed uniformly through it. The references I sent show both the extinction of species and their regular cycling according to the season.
NorthForkFisherman 1 year ago
@NorthForkFisherman
aaahhh, every year, Identical measurements..
every season the same weather pattern. I should measure some things that happened yesterday, and extrapolate that into 4 million years ago.. It will be really accurate.
kkp5200 1 year ago
@kkp5200 You know what. I'm glad you replied. Simply because, watching you trying to grasp these normally simple concepts, is just fucking hilarious. Do the words "single layer" and "mixed" hold any meaning for you? Yes? No? 42? E=mc2? If I could write this in big red crayon, would that help?
NorthForkFisherman 1 year ago
@NorthForkFisherman back to insulting, yet never answering or realizing your blatant disregard for taking static measurements and drawing dynamic conclusions.
kkp5200 1 year ago
@kkp5200 Well, If you would actually ask a question that was bounded in reality, I might spend less time laughing at you. Cause right now, it's monkey fucking a football time, and I'm just dying here. I'll ask once again, if a flood happened, why are the pollens found in these sediments segregated by species over time rather than mixed in a single flood layer? I cannot make it any simpler than that for you.
NorthForkFisherman 1 year ago
@NorthForkFisherman
well it's actually simple, maybe you'd figure that out yourself.
A volcano, wind, rain, or erosion buried the small critters, and the larger ones walked away... And then the CAMBRIAN EXPLOSION>>>>>>> lol
kkp5200 1 year ago
@kkp5200 Swing and a miss. You just get more, umm, "interesting" with each post. Exactly what does this have to do with palyonology? Hmmm? And if you were dropped as a baby, it's OK. Otherwise I'm about to call POE and start ignoring you.
NorthForkFisherman 1 year ago
@NorthForkFisherman seems as though your quick to pass insults and slow to answer any of the questions presented to you, along with trying to direct away from the original posts. Not too surprised though... have a good one.. TTYL
kkp5200 1 year ago
@kkp5200 So you want me to answer all your questions, but gods forbid you should actually answer one of mine. Which very simply is: why are all the pollens found stratified by species over time rather than mixed as in a flood? But that's typical of a YECer when confronted with real data and by somone who actually thinks: they run away. I'll answer all those little questions, but you answer just that one first.
NorthForkFisherman 1 year ago 5
@kkp5200 WTF does a spring have to do with an ocean 20 miles under the rocks?
Everything this guy says is just made up, it does not match the geologic record.
Or the fossil record. Or plate tectonics. it just matches the bible, imagine that.
gregrutz 1 year ago
@gregrutz
you stated
"The water was under rock, yea right."
oil is under rocks, cant be that hard to imagine water under rocks, since oil floats.
kkp5200 1 year ago
@kkp5200 No, there is no way to get an ocean under rock. He is just making up a story to fit the bible.
Read a geology book.
gregrutz 1 year ago
@gregrutz Hey greg! Are my questions to kkp5200 making any kind of sense to you? Am I not being clear, or is there some other way I can phrase this data so that he can understand it? I thought that I was typing in english? Is it coming out in Klingon or something?
NorthForkFisherman 1 year ago
@NorthForkFisherman They will just make shit up like in this video.
Then claim they look at the evidence but come to a different conclusion.
They are brainwashed, uneducated and just plain stupid.
Or they would not believe in a global flood.
I didn't believe it when the nuns told me when I was 6 years old. It is silly.
gregrutz 1 year ago
@gregrutz You know, considering the amount of money being made off yokels like kkp5200 and all the rest by hovind et al, maybe we're on the wrong side? Oh wait, we've got integrity and a passing respect for truth. Sucks to be us I guess. LOL. But really, this last guy, dropped as a baby. Gotta be.
NorthForkFisherman 1 year ago
@kkp5200 oil is under rocks
NO, it is not, it is trapped in the rocks. There is no lake of oil, or water under rocks.
gregrutz 1 year ago
@gregrutz : You know perfectly well, as an adult human being, that there ARE lakes of oil and water, and reservoirs of natural gas, in the earth's crust. Why are you trying to convince everyone that you're stupid? Seems kind of pointless.
buzzclick500 8 months ago
@buzzclick500 No, there are not LAKES of anything underground.
gregrutz 8 months ago
@gregrutz : Oh, o.k., well, thanks for telling us. I think we all understand now. ;])
buzzclick500 8 months ago
@buzzclick500 You do realize their isn't over 4 billion gallons of water under the earths crust, or mantle right? It's molten metal.... There is an under ground bit of tap water and oil. But that doesn't mean a flood water reached the height of Mt. Fuji.
Not to mention out of all the fossils we have, Only about 1% of anything could be fossilized. If this idiots claim were true, it would be more like 60-70%
(cont...)
Microtardz 7 months ago
@buzzclick500 Cont... We would have absolutely NO fresh water what so ever if the great flood ever happened. Salt would over turn all of the water, the great lakes in america that have fresh water would be non-existent.
Also, where would this water have come from? Matter cannot be created nor destroyed as far as we know.
Why would a deity choose to flood the world when he could just say BOOM and everything he wanted dead would be dead.
This sounds absolutely bat shit crazy if you ask me.
Microtardz 7 months ago
@Microtardz : Well, I only figured out a couple of years ago why the oceans are salty--cause everything's been PEEING in them for a long time. If that sounds stupid, well, that's what I came up with. As for how God decides to do stuff...I'd be one of the last ones to get in His face about it; He's done more than right by me.
buzzclick500 7 months ago
@buzzclick500 I'd be the first one to get in his face about it. Depending on how powerful he is. An omnipotent omniscient omnipresent god has NO FUCKING EXCUSE. The biblical god has NO FUCKING EXCUSE. But a weaker god that only created the universe. Does. In fact, a deistic god doesn't need an excuse. He didn't do anything but create the universe.
Biblical god has Killed people, set punishments for things he thinks are wrong, then expects us to bow down to him.
Microtardz 7 months ago
@Microtardz : Hmmm. Satan not only speaks, but TYPES. ;])
buzzclick500 7 months ago
@buzzclick500 PEEING?
You do realize the great lakes have fish in them and fish PEE!
They also have deer in michigan and. Ughh, *face palm*
Pee? Salt isn't the only mineral that occurs in the ocean. Not to mention if Pee was such an important factor we'd be more worried about AMMONIA than we would salt.
Because pee is more Ammonia than it is salt.
Microtardz 7 months ago
@Microtardz : At any rate, when Jesus Christ returns, ammonia and fire will be the order of the day--the two elements most destructive to life. There won't be any time to worry, because it'll be faster than any of us can imagine.
buzzclick500 7 months ago
@buzzclick500 Yes, change the topic from the destruction of the pitiful story of noahs ark to the story of how i'm going to burn in hell. Tsk tsk. Even though the bible contradicts itself every left turn you still believe it like a fundamentalist.
Or are you going to be slightly more open minded and have an open discussion about this?
Shall we say i'm burning in hell.
Or shall we discuss further into why I don't believe your god nor your hell fires exist?
Microtardz 7 months ago
The super critical water theory is the only physics explanation that even comes close to explaining not only what happened from the flood on but also allows ofr how the world appeared before the flood.
Paleontologists claim Pteradactyls could not have gotten airborne unless the atmosphere was twice as dense as it is today.
Even though science only discovered the holes in the ozone layer in 1987 it is likely they have been there since the flood.
rollinshultz 1 year ago
@rollinshultz
What flood?
gregrutz 1 year ago
@gregrutz Noah's Flood. The entire ecosystem of our planet changed drastically. When Noahs family reached land God spoke to Noah again and said I give you the rainbow in the sky as a covenant that I will never destroy all of the earth by flooding again. So one must think then what was different about our atmosphere then for rainbows to have never appeared before? Would an increased pressure and density of air prevent water droplets forming in the air for the refraction process to take place?
rollinshultz 1 year ago
@rollinshultz ''The entire ecosystem of our planet changed drastically.''
WOW, it did all that without leaving a trace, it must be a miracle !!
And NO, water droplets form and there has always been rainbows
gregrutz 1 year ago
@gregrutz The entire fossil record is part of the trace and the ribbon shapes of mountain ranges as well. When you look at a mountain that looks like a piece of ribbon candy in waves do you actually believe that was done over millions of years with the rock in a solid state? Or is it more likely it happened very quickly when the mass was in a plastic state of liquifaction?
I am asking you serious questions. Do you have serious answers or just wisecracks?
rollinshultz 1 year ago
do you actually believe that was done over millions of years with the rock in a solid state?
YES
Do you think floods make different kinds of rock in distinct layers?
What is the name of the flood mud layer? Where is the layer of with all the dead bodies in it?
gregrutz 1 year ago
@gregrutz How could you possibly even believe solid rock could bend into wavelike ribbons ever no matter how long they had?
Did you read the free book at creationscience to give it an honest evaluation? You did not, and you will not, because you are afraid to lose your humanistic relgious belief in what you were taught.
If you change your mind get back to me with honest evaluations, back up your statements, and leave the immature name calling and derisiveness at home.
rollinshultz 1 year ago
@rollinshultz
name calling?!? I haven't called you a dumb shit yet.
creationscience is bull shit. Scientists don't do ID or creationism.
Creationist are not honest, they lie to make shit fit the bible, like the IDiot above.
gregrutz 1 year ago
@rollinshultz
Solid rock does bend!
Naturally it is under intense heat and pressure when it does, volcanoes and earthquakes both bend rocks so what is your point?
Johannwyss82 1 year ago
@rollinshultz if you go by what it looks like yeah you could get confused, lucky for us we have Blind Radiometric Dating!
Johannwyss82 1 year ago
@Johannwyss82 If you are familiar with the process of radiometric dating you will know it can onl apply to dating the actual material and does nothing to indicate the state of the material at the time of the flood. Furthermore fossilization has been done in laboratories so it does not take millions of years.
rollinshultz 1 year ago
@rollinshultz
Naturally it can only date organic material, but why do we see a systematical age range in the fossil record?
In the lower geological layers we find the oldest material in the top we find the newest?
why do we not see any evidence supporting this global flood, you need to keep in mind that there are many Christian geologists who would be eager indeed to find evidence supporting the global flood.
Yet all we get are crackpots like Mr Brown here attempting to deceive people.
Johann
Johannwyss82 1 year ago
@Johannwyss82 Thank you for the polite response. If the fossil record were indeed arranged the way you say it is then why would fossils exist with human footprints inside of dinosaur footprints. It has long been known that every significant mountain has fish fossils at their peaks, which is why there has been a consensus there was indeed a worldwide flood. However there is no consensus on how the flood happened or when. BTW Walt brown is a PHDs so please drop the mister and give him his due.
rollinshultz 1 year ago
@rollinshultz
The Paluxy River fossils prove nothing lad, as they have never been proven to be human footprints. You also neglected to mention the size of thees footprints (Double the size of a human footprint) or the fact that the distance between them differs greatly within the same alleged stride. Obviously this does not conform with human behavior.
Fish fossils are found on mountains this is not at all odd once you consider that
TBC
Johannwyss82 1 year ago
@Johannwyss82
What is a mountain now may have once been a deep sea trench millions of years ago. With the tectonic plates moving the way they do the landmass is constantly being manipulated hence Earthquakes and volcanoes.
There is no consensus at all that there was a global flood, in fact it is throughly debunked.
Johannwyss82 1 year ago
@Johannwyss82 We have perhaps reached an impasse on the fossil data. There are many footprints and evidence is given for and against the afore mentioned conclusions. You will believe the articles against humans and dinos together and I will believe the ones for it. try this forbiddenhistory dot "info/?q=node/55"
rollinshultz 1 year ago
@rollinshultz What we find in nature is distinct layers of different kinds of rock, floods don't do that. And he does not explain why we don't find bunnys buried with the dinosaurs. Or dinosaurs buried with the trilobites.
gregrutz 1 year ago
@rollinshultz They date the ash above and below a fossil, it is the most accurate.
gregrutz 1 year ago
@gregrutz tee hee, I guess you never seen fossils of giant rodents, and bugs, some almost 10x the size of todays.
kkp5200 1 year ago
@kkp5200 @kkp5200 You are going to come to a point at some time, aren't you? I'm quite familiar with Casteroides (Pliestocene epoch) and Meganeura (Carboniferous periods). But again, what does this have to do with radioactive decay. Or do you think Godzilla was real? I'm going to take a short break. If you actually come to a point....I'd be truly suprised.
NorthForkFisherman 1 year ago
@kkp5200 Yes, most of the animals, 97%, are extinct. Transitional species.
What was your point?
gregrutz 1 year ago
Can Dr walt Brown explain why the fossil record does not coincide with his theory? If there were a global flood how does he explain the complete lack of evidence supporting it i.e humans on the top layers of the fossil record and dinosaurs at the bottom?
Johannwyss82 2 years ago 10
@Johannwyss82: Ummm....Magic Man Dun It!?!?!
magick205 2 years ago 5
goes to show you have not done much to research his theory. he explains this in great detail. there are many proccesses that happened to explain why things are sorted in the manner they are. liqifaction being one of them. look into it.
pistolpete198069 2 years ago
liqifaction does not begin to explain how the fossil record was arranged in order of complexity after the supposed global flood. Who do you think you are kidding?
Johannwyss82 2 years ago
first off the fossil record is not sorted by complexity lol. Creatures found at the very bottom layer(cambrian) are found alive today, like trilobites, with the most complex eye systems on earth. animals are sorted logically. I.E bottom dwelling sea creatures at the very bottom, then you have other creatures sorted by density. and where they would be depending on their natural habitat. It has nothing to do with complexity. If you believe this, you need to look into this matter further.
pistolpete198069 2 years ago
The fossil record starts with the Pre-Cambrian with the first Animal traces such as soft bodied Metazoans etc, It moves on to the Cambrian with the first fishes and Chordates, we then find in the Ordovician a diverse range of Metazoan family's, after that comes the Silurian with land plants, the Devonian with the first amphibians and a diverse range of jawed fish, Carboniferous provides the first reptiles, trees and Ferns, The Permian brings the diversity of reptiles tbc.
Johannwyss82 2 years ago
The Triassic shows the first dinosaurs and the beginning of the mammals, The Jurassic provides the first birds and a wide variety of dinosaurs, the Cretaceous shows the extinction of dinosaurs the first primates and the first flowers, in the Tertiary mammals are diverse leaving us in the Quaternary with the first discovered humans. That is the level of complexity I was referring too.
Johannwyss82 2 years ago
If as you suggested the fossil record is "sorted by density. and where they would be depending on their natural habitat." if this were true why would birds be found before humans? Why would Dinosaurs be found before Humans? (They would be much more buoyant and have a higher density ) You are a fool! Pistolpete.
Johannwyss82 2 years ago
@Johannwyss82 You regurgitate public school textbooks. You have done no balanced research.
My number one rule for debate "first person to resort to name calling loses. Pistol Pete wins and you lose.
If you want to open your mind and at least evaluate Dr Browns theories read the book free here creationscience web site
rollinshultz 1 year ago
They did look for evidence for a flood, over 200 years ago, They can't find any evidence for a flood. No mud layer, no hydro sorting, no evidence.
gregrutz 1 year ago
@rollinshultz Pistol pete simply regurgitated nonsense! Neither won the debate because there was never a debate to win.
My first rule to debating is to Find an actual intellectual rather than an ignorant fool who has been sucked into a web of deceit built by the modern Church! There is no evidence to support this nonsense and that's a fact!
Johannwyss82 1 year ago
Comment removed
Johannwyss82 2 years ago
and after the flood god flew down on his magical flying unicorn and destroyed all evidence by waving his finger in a effort to test our Faith
Gods + Science
= bending the facts to the conclusion
Science is supposed to build the conclusion from the facts, no bending
wowplayer6541011 2 years ago
@wowplayer6541011 sad, just sad, The magic pink unicorn, creator of all things , does not FLY. He wills himself to be ignored by gravity and FLOATS MAJESTICALLY from place to place. You might as well claim the Flying Spagehti Monster did it .
SqueakerAlpha 2 years ago
@Johannwyss82 there's no such nicely layered column. if u go to the sahara, you can find dinosaur fossils at ground level just by brushing off a little sand.
mathewjohn5174 1 year ago
@mathewjohn5174
Visit the Grand Canyon, 21 distinct layer of different kinds of rock,
not laid down by a flood, some layers are sandstone from a desert.
gregrutz 1 year ago
@mathewjohn5174
Now why would that be? Hurm perhaps due to the nature of deserts ie "moving Sands etc"?
Johannwyss82 1 year ago
@Johannwyss82 that would mean the layer was pretty recent. if it were 65 million years ago, that entire layer containing the fossil would be rock solid. instead its sand, topsoil. not too long ago, the africans were living in this same region but on a Savannah.
mathewjohn5174 1 year ago
@Johannwyss82 that's because rock layers are fictitious. you can find dino fossils at ground level in africa
mathewjohn5174 1 year ago
@mathewjohn5174
The top layers of rock were eroded away, you have never studied geology have you.
gregrutz 1 year ago
@Johannwyss82
silly.. there is no fossil record, they are all mixed up..
please show me an organized layered fossil record... you cant, because there is none.
kkp5200 1 year ago
@kkp5200 Organized fossil record? Actually, I can. All I need to do is cross the road to the cut for the new highway. It's all nearshore/offshore marine creatures with species appearing and disappearing through time. Brachiopods, Crinoids, Urchins, Corals. Now if you want to discuss things, you really need to start providing references, not your personal incredulity. Cause that means jack shit here. Show me a Cambrian bunny, damn it.
NorthForkFisherman 1 year ago
@NorthForkFisherman how bout a duck fossilized with dino's, fossils are mixed up across the whole planet.. just look for fossilized graveyards, they are from florida to canada, there is no organization, do you remember the coelacanth.
kkp5200 1 year ago
@kkp5200 Actually birds are known from the Jurassic. And what you are atttempting to state regarding Vegavis iaai is of course incorrect. Among modern birds, Vegavis is most closely related to ducks and geese (Anatidae), but it is not considered to be a direct ancestor of them. Ref: Nature 2005, Clarke, J.A., Tambussi, C.P., Noriega, J.I., Erickson, G.M. and Ketcham, R.A. (2005). "Definitive fossil evidence for the extant avian radiation in the Cretaceous."
NorthForkFisherman 1 year ago
@kkp5200 Now as far as your ludicrous proposition that the "fossils are mixed up across the whole planet", why have we not found ground sloths mixed in with triceatops or scutosaurs and eyrops? Please, try to explain that. I'd really like to hear what you "think".
NorthForkFisherman 1 year ago
@kkp5200 Got awful quiet there. I'm gonna give you the benefit of the doubt and say you were busy with RL issues. Which is just fine. However the question still stands. Where are the sloths found deep in the rock record and the velociraptors found at the top? And plese give source material. Your opinion simply won't cut it.
NorthForkFisherman 1 year ago
@NorthForkFisherman
have you googled "mixed up fossils?"
how bout "polystrate fossils", how bout dinosaur graveyard", how bout "oopart", plenty for you to study as soon as you'd like to learn
kkp5200 1 year ago
@kkp5200 The onus of proof is on you sir. You need to provide clear and concise references to support your claims. A search engine is not a reference, execept to those who are willing to be intellecually lazy. It's a start point, not an end. As you've noticed, I do provide references. And Walt Brown's theory? Bullshit of the highest order. Spread that on dry concrete and you could farm it. The Opeche Shale in Texas directly refute it.
NorthForkFisherman 1 year ago
@NorthForkFisherman
no onus, just do some basic research on those items, it doesn't take long.
thanks
kkp5200 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@kkp5200 Considering that, while I'm not a geologist, I've more than a passing familarity with all the subject matter you've just covered. You might want to actually strike the polystrate bit out first. Debunked over 142 years ago: Ref: Dawson, J.W., 1868. Acadian Geology. The Geological Structure, Organic Remains, and Mineral Resources of Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, and Prince Edward Island, 2nd edition. MacMillan and Co.: London, 694pp.
NorthForkFisherman 1 year ago
@kkp5200 The same goes for the other two terms. Bullshit science promogulated by those who've not actually read the data. When you find a fossil you find a snapshot of it's environment. The plants, animals, and microbes that make up the ecosystem. A careful examination of both the fossils and the matrix found in show both where it was, and what it was doing. This is a forensic, historical science.
NorthForkFisherman 1 year ago
@NorthForkFisherman okay tell me something new please, have you done your research on mixed up fossils yet..? are they all stacked neatly older ones on the bottom and young ones on top.. I'll give you a simple search, "coal with artifact of a bell" i guess man lived 300 million years ago too.. or if you want to get more broad, search for "artifacts found in coal." or perhaps maybe you started with prostrate fossils.. whatever you like
kkp5200 1 year ago
@kkp5200 Actually, it's a catholic communion bell that was found encrusted with coal dust creating a concretion. Nice try, but when you actually read the data, you'll see there is no support whatsoever for a young Earth, unless you lie to yourself. I truely doubt there were catholics much farther back than say, oh 2000 years, hmmmm? And again, provide a reference, 'k?
NorthForkFisherman 1 year ago
@NorthForkFisherman plenty of documentation, just keep looking for artifacts found in coal.
its not too hard.. is it? maybe it hurts getting your beliefs drilled with out of place artifacts... keep looking , the pain will go away when you start realizing you've been created. :) got hopes for you..
kkp5200 1 year ago
@kkp5200 Dude, like I said I already have. Try actually reading what's written here.All items of realatively modern manufacture carried down, forgotte, and encrusted with the dust. If you want to talk ooparts, show me a bunny rabbit in cambrian rocks. If all were created at the same time, should be a snap. Well, Can you?
NorthForkFisherman 1 year ago
@NorthForkFisherman
dude? dude.. just look for fossil graveyards. they are all over the planet, perhaps think about what created them, and look at whats in there. Dinosaurs, sharks, whales, horses, rhinos, mastodons, elephants, deer, mammoths,pigs, dogs, and sheep.... ect...ect...ect...... "The Ashley Beds" do a lil research in something that perhaps isn't so neat and as organized so called fossil record.... it's not hard at all.. really...
kkp5200 1 year ago
@kkp5200 You mean the Ashfall Fossil Beds in Nebraska? Yeesh. That's an excellent example of onshore preservation by means of layers of volcanic ash from the Yellostone hotspot. And as such it gives a precisely dated age. The monument, as it is now under Park Servie control shows a snapshot of Miocene animal life on land. Again, it's a nice try, but since you are unable to define one single place, it's obvious you don't have the slightest clue of which you speak.
NorthForkFisherman 1 year ago
@NorthForkFisherman try not to resort to putdowns.
anyway.. they are plenty of fossil graveyards and a simple search can yeild a wealth of understanding. I think it's funny, one of the worlds largest fossil graveyards was just found in Canada about a month ago, just now the scientific community is re-thinking the dinosaur extinction.. to something like a major flood.. really.? doesn't the Bible talk about that..? writte almost 4000 years. ago.. hmm. must have been a hurricane in Canada
kkp5200 1 year ago
@kkp5200 And now you've shown that you REALLY don't understand what you've been talking about. I'm very well aware of the ceratopsians found and the conditions under which they were discovered. Where is the rest of the ecosystem? Where's the damn rabbits and sloths? NOWHERE. It's dated back before the KT boundry before such critters even evolved. You need to learn basic geology before you can even start this. YT does offer and excellent starter set of videos that address this. Use them.
NorthForkFisherman 1 year ago
@NorthForkFisherman
yah, Canada generally has a problem with hurricanes and flooding.. :) definately created the fossil graveyard there. good conclusion there. thanks
silly questions...
how do you date a rock or strata?
and how do you date fossils?
and how does bone marrow survive millions of years?
what is the erosion rate of mountains?
how do polystrate trees span millions of years of strata?
why are there closed oysters on top of mountains worldwide?
please enlighten me.
kkp5200