• This is a new section being rolled out to attract people interested in exploring the origins of the universe and the earth from a biblical perspective. Debate is encouraged and opposing viewpoints are welcome to post but certain rules must be followed. 1. No abusive tagging - if abusive tags are found - they will be deleted and disabled by the Admin team 2. No calling the biblical accounts a fable - fairy tale ect. This is a Christian site, so members that participate here must be respectful in their disagreement.

49 million-year-old beetle looks like it was squashed yesterday

marke

Well-known member
Three physical items: Sediment, cement, water.
Three processes: Deposition, drainage, drying.

Notice "time" is not a relevant consideration, as there can be billions of years, but one of those six missing and nothing would be fossilized, or you can achieve fossilization in a few minutes with all six.
Pressure is also essential. Soft muds do not turn to rock without pressure. Fossils of living creatures could not have been encased in roick without pressure, like the amount of pressure that would be caused by thousands of feet of floodwater coverings.
 

Stripe

Teenage Adaptive Ninja Turtle
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
Pressure is also essential.
For some rocks.

Soft muds do not turn to rock without pressure.

Ever mixed concrete?

Fossils of living creatures could not have been encased in roick without pressure, like the amount of pressure that would be caused by thousands of feet of floodwater coverings.

Depends. Is the fossil a 2D or 3D structure? A 3D structure would be impossible under too much pressure.

There is always going to be pressure involved in rock formation, but the only necessary items and processes are the ones I outlined. Mix water, sediment and cement then remove the water and you'll get some kind of rock. No pressure required.

Likewise, it is always going to take time to form a rock, but there is no requirement that the time be millions of years, let alone any years.
 
Last edited:

Right Divider

Body part
It's already been done:

His claims are bogus. He claims that the crust had to stretch as a whole. That is incorrect. The water under the crust was generally between the pillars and helped support. it The stretching happened predominately in segments between the pillars. No problems there.

His graphics were so far off that his conclusion is as well. He shows the pillars as little nubs descending down from the granite plates. That is completely incorrect. Also, his proportions to not reflect the assumed starting conditions that Dr. Brown states.

He also makes the false claim that Dr. Brown said that "no miracles were involved". That is false. Dr. Brown makes it clear the the creation of the planet was miraculous (i.e., the starting conditions). It is ALL of the following physical phenomena that do not require any miraculous steps according to Dr. Brown. They are ALL simply physics in action.
 
Last edited:

marke

Well-known member
For some rocks.



Ever mixed concrete?



Depends. Is the fossil a 2D or 3D structure? A 3D structure would be impossible under too much pressure.

There is always going to be pressure involved in rock formation, but the only necessary items and processes are the ones I outlined. Mix water, sediment and cement then remove the water and you'll get some kind of rock. No pressure required.

Likewise, it is always going to take time to form a rock, but there is no requirement that the time be millions of years, let alone any years.
A fossil of a fish eating a fish preserved in a lake varve rock formation proves the mud was compressed by massive pressures shortly after the sediment deposition buried the fish in the act. No other explanation makes sense.
 

Stripe

Teenage Adaptive Ninja Turtle
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
A fossil of a fish eating a fish preserved in a lake varve rock formation proves the mud was compressed by massive pressures shortly after the sediment deposition buried the fish in the act. No other explanation makes sense.

I'm not arguing with you.

Also, this is not a point that requires a correction on my part.

Pressure is not a necessary component of the rock-making process.
 

Stripe

Teenage Adaptive Ninja Turtle
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
Why would that require "massive pressure"?
Flattening a fish and the sediment it is in requires great pressure applied very swiftly.

It was achieved by the final collapse (at that depth) of a liquefaction cell.

But this is kinda a rabbit trail. :D
 

marke

Well-known member
I'm not arguing with you.

Also, this is not a point that requires a correction on my part.

Pressure is not a necessary component of the rock-making process.
Rapid burial and preservation is a process necessary to capture living creatures in mid-breath. If not for rapid burial the creature could not be preserved. Also, slowly hardening lake varves cannot preserve the pristine remains of birds and fish without some pressure being applied to the sediments that rapidly covered them and preserved them. Researchers are not digging in soft mud today and finding pristine remains of living creatures that were rapidly buried under that soft mud.
 

Stripe

Teenage Adaptive Ninja Turtle
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
Rapid burial and preservation is a process necessary to capture living creatures in mid-breath. If not for rapid burial the creature could not be preserved. Also, slowly hardening lake varves cannot preserve the pristine remains of birds and fish without some pressure being applied to the sediments that rapidly covered them and preserved them. Researchers are not digging in soft mud today and finding pristine remains of living creatures that were rapidly buried under that soft mud.


My post was solely about making rocks.

You're arguing with things that are not there.
 

Alate_One

Well-known member
There are marine fossils at the tops of every major mountain range.
Okay and? Many places on earth has been underwater at one time or another.
That is a silly opinion. Please "pick it apart" for us. Use actual facts.
Lesse the energy involved would have either knocked the earth out of its orbit, exploded it or just melted the whole thing, killing all life on earth. You couldn't have mountains at all or your water layer would have split prematurely. You cannot have continents moving at the speed of vehicles on a highway without melting them.

Consider this. The tsunami in Southeast Asia back in 2004 was caused by an earthquake that ruptured over a mere 800 miles and lifed up only a few meters, and the energy released was enormous. This tiny rupture, so powerful indicates that having continents move at breakneck speed is impossible or so damaging as to destroy the planet or at least all life on it.
 

marke

Well-known member
Okay and? Many places on earth has been underwater at one time or another.

Lesse the energy involved would have either knocked the earth out of its orbit, exploded it or just melted the whole thing, killing all life on earth. You couldn't have mountains at all or your water layer would have split prematurely. You cannot have continents moving at the speed of vehicles on a highway without melting them.

Consider this. The tsunami in Southeast Asia back in 2004 was caused by an earthquake that ruptured over a mere 800 miles and lifed up only a few meters, and the energy released was enormous. This tiny rupture, so powerful indicates that having continents move at breakneck speed is impossible or so damaging as to destroy the planet or at least all life on it.
The earth does move, crack, and divide. So what? Secularists were extremely slow to accept the fact that dinosaur remains are found in Alaska, and secularists with bad training still refuse to believe the scientific data that shows dinosaur remains dated at less than 50,000 years. Secularists were and are extremely slow to accept that soft tissues are still preserved in young dinosaur bones. Secularists cannot explain the presence of tropical vegetation under thousands of feet of Alaskan frozen muck, a fact that can only be explained by the flood of Noah.
 

Right Divider

Body part
Okay and? Many places on earth has been underwater at one time or another.
One time it happened all at once.
Lesse the energy involved would have either knocked the earth out of its orbit, exploded it or just melted the whole thing, killing all life on earth.
Wild speculation; just what I would expect from an evolutionist.
You couldn't have mountains at all or your water layer would have split prematurely. You cannot have continents moving at the speed of vehicles on a highway without melting them.
You clearly know nothing at all about the hydro-plate theory.
Consider this. The tsunami in Southeast Asia back in 2004 was caused by an earthquake that ruptured over a mere 800 miles and lifed up only a few meters, and the energy released was enormous.
So was the energy that launched all of the comets, asteroids and trans-Neptunian objects into space.
This tiny rupture, so powerful indicates that having continents move at breakneck speed is impossible or so damaging as to destroy the planet or at least all life on it.
We've enjoyed your wild-eyed speculation. You should be a science fiction writer; then you can also write books about "evolution".
 
Last edited:

JudgeRightly

裁判官が正しく判断する
Staff member
Administrator
Super Moderator
Gold Subscriber
Okay and? Many places on earth has been underwater at one time or another.

Again, "the tops of mountains."

The only time in recorded history when that occurred is during the Flood of Noah.

Lesse the energy involved would have either knocked the earth out of its orbit,

The amount of energy involved DID affect the rotational speed of it, from 360 days per year, to 365.24 days.

But enough to "knock the earth out of its orbit"? Please. At best, the orbit might have changed a miniscule amount.

exploded it

It did explode. The crust did, at least. "The fountains of the great deep broke forth." That's an explosion.

or just melted the whole thing,

The core of the earth DID melt.

killing all life on earth.

Uh, yeah, that was the point of the flood, to wipe out all life on earth.

But the fountains were cold, not hot. And even if they WERE hot... have you ever held your hands vertically next to the sides of the flame of a bunsen burner where the flame's temperature is a few thousand degrees fahrenheit?

It's quite doable, and there's no risk to burning yourself.

You couldn't have mountains at all

The mountains formed when the continental plates came to an abrupt stop from about 50 mph after being pushed.

or your water layer would have split prematurely.

Define "prematurely." Relative to what?

You cannot have continents moving at the speed of vehicles on a highway without melting them.

You can if you have a sufficient lubricant.

Have you never heard of supercritical fluids?

Consider this. The tsunami in Southeast Asia back in 2004 was caused by an earthquake that ruptured over a mere 800 miles and lifed up only a few meters, and the energy released was enormous. This tiny rupture, so powerful indicates that having continents move at breakneck speed is impossible or so damaging as to destroy the planet or at least all life on it.

Apples to oranges comparison.

This post of yours shows quite clearly that you have absolutely no idea what the Hydroplate Theory proposes.

I recommend going and reading "In the Beginning" by Dr. Walt Brown.

Or, at the very least, watching THIS series of videos on YouTube by Brian Nickel, who does a fantastic job of demonstrating through visuals what exactly happened during the flood.
 

marke

Well-known member
Lesse the energy involved would have either knocked the earth out of its orbit, exploded it or just melted the whole thing, killing all life on earth. You couldn't have mountains at all or your water layer would have split prematurely. You cannot have continents moving at the speed of vehicles on a highway without melting them.
Yes, the earth has "its orbit." That fact alone also proves God created the universe with order and 'orbits.'
 

Right Divider

Body part
Lesse the energy involved would have either knocked the earth out of its orbit, exploded it or just melted the whole thing, killing all life on earth.
Let's look at some of these claims.
  • Would have knocked the earth out of its orbit
    The explosion that started the flood was projected in all directions from the earth. Therefore, there was not the type of force needed to push the earth out of its orbit.
  • Exploded it
    The explosion that started the flood was near the earths surface and projected away from the earths surface. Below this surface was the vast majority of the earths solid and dense liquid mass. Once the granite plates cracked and ruptured, the majority of the energy contained within the subterranean highly pressurized and super heated water would be released into space (taking a small portion of the earths crust with it).
  • Or just melted it
    Again, this energy store was located just ~60 miles below the earths surface. The earths radius is ~4000 miles. So the vast majority of the earths mass, which is far more dense than the earths crust, was below the activities that caused the flood.
So please give us some reasons for your comments. Since they are far from an accurate representation of the actual facts.
 
Last edited:

Ktoyou

Well-known member
Hall of Fame
Gee I wonder why we never find mummified dinosaurs like those lion cubs or mammoths etc. Those organisms can contain actual preserved soft tissue because they simply aren't that old. You can get rare preservation of dinosaur soft tissue - via mineral replacement, but
It is a big hoax.
 
Top