Scientists baffled by a perfect example of Biblical kinds

[Jose Fly]

Yet you know what the definition is.

I know what your definition is. Clearly other creationists don't agree with it though.

What is the question?

Sheesh...try and keep up. How do you propose we use genetics to determine which organisms share a common ancestry?

Nope.

Do you believe that natural selection occurs?

Nope. My definition is sufficient.

So the other attempts at definitions posted by other creationists are wrong?

 

[6days]

Please explain to me how one gigantic flood laid down a layer of granite (a volcanic rock formed from magma; weird that would be a layer in a flood:think, then a layer of shale, then a layer of sandstone, then a layer of limestone, and so on.

Greg... I answered you by suggesting you do a wee bit of research before asking silly questions. I also asked you a few easy questions to see how well you understand what you 'argue' against.
BTW.... I also suggested that the various layers are best explained by the flood model.

 

[Greg Jennings]

Greg... I answered you by suggesting you do a wee bit of research before asking silly questions. I also asked you a few easy questions to see how well you understand what you 'argue' against.
BTW.... I also suggested that the various layers are best explained by the flood model.

Yes, I know you've [incorrectly] stated that a great flood model matches the rock strata before. But it doesn't, and that's why I keep asking you to post an article by a YEC that you think explains this phenomenon so that I can examine it. I suggest you do that instead of plainly dodging yet another question.

I can't find any credible YEC geology research. If you have something that you think is credible and explains the issues of rock stratification, then by all means post it. But your continued chants of "the flood model explains Earth's geology best" is totally, 100% hollow until you post some real information to back them up.

 

[6days]

I can't find any credible YEC geology research

Of Course you can't..... You start with your belief that Genesis is not correct. Your 'science' starts with your belief and is unwilling to follow evidence that leads to our Creator.

http://static.icr.org/i/pdf/technical/Can-Flood-Geology-Explain-Thick-Chalk-Layers.pdf

http://www.icr.org/article/lateral-layers-geologic-strata/

http://www.icr.org/earth-formation/

http://creation.com/continent-wide-sedimentary-strata

https://answersingenesis.org/geology/rock-layers/the-case-of-the-missing-geologic-time/

https://sixdays.org/Fossils-Confirm-the-Biblical-Creation-and-the-Genesis-Flood

 

[6days]

Yet you know what the definition is.

You asked for the definition of kind (again). I answered.

Nope. My definition is sufficient.

But a week from now (or sooner) one of the evolutionists will say a definition has never been provided.

 

[Greg Jennings]

Of Course you can't..... You start with your belief that Genesis is not correct. Your 'science' starts with your belief and is unwilling to follow evidence that leads to our Creator.

http://static.icr.org/i/pdf/technical/Can-Flood-Geology-Explain-Thick-Chalk-Layers.pdf

http://www.icr.org/article/lateral-layers-geologic-strata/

http://www.icr.org/earth-formation/

http://creation.com/continent-wide-sedimentary-strata

https://answersingenesis.org/geology/rock-layers/the-case-of-the-missing-geologic-time/

https://sixdays.org/Fossils-Confirm-the-Biblical-Creation-and-the-Genesis-Flood

Thank you. I'll examine them one by one and get back to you.

Creation.com was ridiculous. It said because similar sediments are found worldwide, like chalk deposits, that they must have gotten there by way of a great flood. That's beyond stupid, because chalk must be formed by an organic process that involves bacterial sediment deposition.

 

[6days]

Creation.com was ridiculous.

Naturally Greg... That was the expected response.
You start with the wrong history so everything can be explained away as ridiculous.

But as to chalk.... the global flood is the BEST explanation of the evidence.
http://www.icr.org/article/4456/275/
or
"With such a slow rate of accumulation, how did such monumental chalk beds form on an earth, which is, according to the Bible, a little over 6000 years old? For the chalk formations to have reached the thickness they are today in a few thousand years, the production of microorganisms would have had to greatly increase sometime in the past. In fact, under the right conditions, rapid production and accumulation of these microorganisms on the ocean floor is possible. These conditions include turbulent waters, high winds, decaying fish, and increased temperature and nutrients from volcanic waters and other sources
"With catastrophic volcanic activity warming the oceans and releasing large amounts of CO2, and with the torrential rains and the churning and mixing of fresh and salt waters, the Flood of Noah’s day produced the right conditions for a “blooming” production of microorganisms and the chalk’s rapid accumulation. The three major sections of the White Cliffs of Dover give evidence of three major “blooms” in chalk formation, which would have taken place during the year-long Flood.

The purity of the chalk itself also points to rapid accumulation. One cannot imagine a scenario where deposits over millions of years could maintain such purity without accumulating some contaminating sediments from other events.

Additional evidence for a global Flood in the White Cliffs of Dover includes the layering of the chalk in alternating thin, hard layers and thick, soft layers. In these hard layers, called hardgrounds, we find fossils of mollusk shells and other sea creatures, some as large as 3 feet (1 m) across (ammonites), which could not have been buried alive slowly! The same chalk formation in the Netherlands has yielded a very large Mosasaurus skull. Since sea life was not part of Noah’s cargo on the Ark, they had to endure the ravages of the Flood. Marine life would have been swept into the rapidly forming chalk and other sedimentary layers and quickly buried by successive deposits. That is why we find fossils of sea creatures in even the highest chalk layers, now far above the ocean" From AIG

 

[Greg Jennings]

Naturally Greg... That was the expected response.
You start with the wrong history so everything can be explained away as ridiculous.

Oh the irony. I based my answer on my knowledge of how chalk beds form, not a prior religious belief. And funny thing is, your own creationist source agrees with me. I have boldnened below the qualifiers that your own source made apparent but you chose to ignore. It seems that not all creationists are as sleazy as you.

But as to chalk.... the global flood is the BEST explanation of the evidence.
http://www.icr.org/article/4456/275/
or
"With such a slow rate of accumulation, how did such monumental chalk beds form on an earth, which is, according to the Bible, a little over 6000 years old? For the chalk formations to have reached the thickness they are today in a few thousand years, the production of microorganisms would have had to greatly increase sometime in the past. In fact, under the right conditions, rapid production and accumulation of these microorganisms on the ocean floor is possible. These conditions include turbulent waters, high winds, decaying fish, and increased temperature and nutrients from volcanic waters and other sources
"With catastrophic volcanic activity warming the oceans and releasing large amounts of CO2, and with the torrential rains and the churning and mixing of fresh and salt waters, the Flood of Noah’s day produced the right conditions for a “blooming” production of microorganisms and the chalk’s rapid accumulation. The three major sections of the White Cliffs of Dover give evidence of three major “blooms” in chalk formation, which would have taken place during the year-long Flood.

The purity of the chalk itself also points to rapid accumulation. One cannot imagine a scenario where deposits over millions of years could maintain such purity without accumulating some contaminating sediments from other events.

Note the "according to the bible part"? That's important, because the article is addressing a creationist problem (how did such massive chalk beds form in just 6000 years?), not an evolutionary one. As the article itself makes clear, the cliffs of Dover are thought by most (including "evolutionists") to have been formed over millions of years, not merely 6000. Ironically, this article illustrates just another reason how the real-world evidence suggests an Earth far older than 6000 years. Even your creationist buddies honestly recognize this dilemma, yet you refuse to :chuckle:

Additional evidence for a global Flood in the White Cliffs of Dover includes the layering of the chalk in alternating thin, hard layers and thick, soft layers. In these hard layers, called hardgrounds, we find fossils of mollusk shells and other sea creatures, some as large as 3 feet (1 m) across (ammonites), which could not have been buried alive slowly! The same chalk formation in the Netherlands has yielded a very large Mosasaurus skull. Since sea life was not part of Noah’s cargo on the Ark, they had to endure the ravages of the Flood. Marine life would have been swept into the rapidly forming chalk and other sedimentary layers and quickly buried by successive deposits. That is why we find fossils of sea creatures in even the highest chalk layers, now far above the ocean" From AIG

Aww man. This paragraph here demonstrates a pretty fundamental lack of understanding of plate tectonics and mountain building processes. I'll post these sites with explanations of how that works here for you to never open and read:
http://snobear.colorado.edu/Markw/Mountains/05/CaliforniaMtns/California_geologic_history.ppt
http://www.nps.gov/gumo/learn/nature/geologicformations.htm
http://www.uh.edu/~geos6g/1376/tectonics7.html

 

[Stripe]

I know what your definition is. Clearly other creationists don't agree with it though.

:darwinsm:

Name one.

How do you propose we use genetics to determine which organisms share a common ancestry?

:idunno:

Do you believe that natural selection occurs?

Sure.

So the other attempts at definitions posted by other creationists are wrong?

English is your second language, isn't it?

 

[Stripe]

But a week from now (or sooner) one of the evolutionists will say a definition has never been provided.

Exactly.

They aren't interested in understanding the challenges to their ideas.

 

[gcthomas]

One of 6days' links has the entire chalk deposits of southern England deposited in six days. The amount of carbon dioxide that would have needed to have been dissolved in the sea for the organisms to have used for making their shells would have made the water so acidic that it would have dissolved them.

Catch 22, which makes the whole process impossible. Unless 6days has some magic
he'd like us to consider.

 

[6days]

Note the "according to the bible part"? That's important, because the article is addressing a creationist problem (how did such massive chalk beds form in just 6000 years?

No Greg..... You misunderstood.
The problem is for evolutionists who think it took millions of years. The best answer to the large chalk deposits is found in God's Word.

The article explains "For the chalk formations to have reached the thickness they are today in a few thousand years, the production of microorganisms would have had to greatly increase sometime in the past. In fact, under the right conditions, rapid production and accumulation of these microorganisms on the ocean floor is possible. These conditions include turbulent waters, high winds, decaying fish, and increased temperature and nutrients from volcanic waters and other sources
"With catastrophic volcanic activity warming the oceans and releasing large amounts of CO2, and with the torrential rains and the churning and mixing of fresh and salt waters, the Flood of Noah’s day produced the right conditions for a “blooming” production of microorganisms and the chalk’s rapid accumulation. The three major sections of the White Cliffs of Dover give evidence of three major “blooms” in chalk formation, which would have taken place during the year-long Flood."

 

[alwight]

One of 6days' links has the entire chalk deposits of southern England deposited in six days. The amount of carbon dioxide that would have needed to have been dissolved in the sea for the organisms to have used for making their shells would have made the water so acidic that it would have dissolved them.

Catch 22, which makes the whole process impossible. Unless 6days has some magic
he'd like us to consider.

It could only have been magic.

 

[Stripe]

One of 6days' links has the entire chalk deposits of southern England deposited in six days. The amount of carbon dioxide that would have needed to have been dissolved in the sea for the organisms to have used for making their shells would have made the water so acidic that it would have dissolved them.Catch 22, which makes the whole process impossible. Unless 6days has some magic
he'd like us to consider.

Darwinists hate sticking to the topic.

 

[6days]

It's easy to rail against a belief while silently demanding the assumption of one's own.

Yes

 

[6days]

One of 6days' links has the entire chalk deposits of southern England deposited in six days.

Which link?

 

[gcthomas]

Which link?

Didn't you read them?!!!!!

 

[6days]

Didn't you read them?!!!!!

I missed it..... or you have mis-stated something.
Which link says the deposits formed in six days?

 

[GlenG]

deleted post wrong link sorry

 

[gcthomas]

I missed it..... or you have mis-stated something.
Which link says the deposits formed in six days?

The first one. Were you hoping I was mistaken?

Since, for example, in southern England there are three main chalk beds stacked on top of one another, then this scenario of three successive, explosive, massive blooms coincides with the rock record. Given that the turnover rate for coccoliths is up to two days (Sumich, 1976), then these chalk beds could thus have been produced in as little as six days, totally conceivable within the time framework of the Flood. What is certain, is that the right set of conditions necessary for such blooms to occur had to have coincided in full measure to have explosively generated such enormous blooms, but the evidence that it did happen is there for all to plainly see in these chalk beds in the geological record