nsTeam2RO, nsTeam2RW, nsTeam2_talkRO, nsTeam2_talkRW
13,254
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 308:
Line 308: + + + +
→You Just Gotta Be Kidding Me: It also depends on the rate; you need to understand within the paradigm
:::: Your comment on the depths of the ocean increasing at the end of the flood really confused me. How is that possible? Ocean depths tend to increase the further away you get from mid-ocean ridges, as gravity drags things down as a result of pressure - which is the result of time again!. As for the seafloor magnetic stripes, yes some of these are quite short, but others are very wide. The Earth's magnetic field is hard to understand.
:::: Your comment on the depths of the ocean increasing at the end of the flood really confused me. How is that possible? Ocean depths tend to increase the further away you get from mid-ocean ridges, as gravity drags things down as a result of pressure - which is the result of time again!. As for the seafloor magnetic stripes, yes some of these are quite short, but others are very wide. The Earth's magnetic field is hard to understand.
:::: I think that we are going to have to agree to disagree, because to me YEC geology makes no sense when I look at the evidence that I have seen. I stand by the mainstream view. Sorry. [[User:Darkmind1970|Darkmind1970]] 19:17, 23 January 2008 (EST)
:::: I think that we are going to have to agree to disagree, because to me YEC geology makes no sense when I look at the evidence that I have seen. I stand by the mainstream view. Sorry. [[User:Darkmind1970|Darkmind1970]] 19:17, 23 January 2008 (EST)
::::: Flood geology explains the glacial valleys as being the result of glaciers! The difference, to a fair extent, would be simply the timescale. As I indicated above, many people have been led to believe that certain things ''require'' vast amounts of time, but in many cases, it has been shown that the required time is much less. Glacier movement rates are high enough to account for the lower ends of glaciers being at the upper ends within the last few thousand years, I believe. Furthermore, creationists say that only the biblical flood account can adequately explain the (one) ice age. Lower temperatures world-wide would not produce the ice sheets of the ice age, as there would be reduced evaporation and thus reduced precipitation. Higher temperatures world-wide would increase evaporation and precipitation, but it would be too warm for the ice sheets to develop. However, a cool Earth with warm oceans following the flood would have high evaporation and therefore precipitation, but ice sheets would form on the cooler land masses.
::::: You say that gravity drags things down as a result of pressure, and that this takes time, but of course it depends both on time ''and the rate'' of drag. In many such cases creationists will agree with non-creationists (or the other way around) on ''what'' happened, but not on ''how fast'' it happened.
::::: I suggest that YEC geology makes no sense to you because you simply have very little idea of it. If you are interested in learning more, I suggest that you read some of the geology papers published in the [http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/2011/ ''Journal of Creation'']. You could also check out [http://www.biblicalgeology.net/ this]. But of course you would need to read more than just a paper or two to get a good understanding.
::::: [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 22:01, 23 January 2008 (EST)