Difference between revisions of "Cretaceous"

From Conservapedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
m (Copyedit footnote)
Line 5: Line 5:
 
The Cretaceous was named from the [[Latin]] word for ''chalky'', and was first used in 1832.<ref>[http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=cretaceous Online Etymology Dictionary]</ref><ref>[http://www.geol.ucsb.edu/Outreach/TimeScale/jurassic.html Jurassic Period] (Department of Earth Science, University of California, Santa Barbara).</ref>
 
The Cretaceous was named from the [[Latin]] word for ''chalky'', and was first used in 1832.<ref>[http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=cretaceous Online Etymology Dictionary]</ref><ref>[http://www.geol.ucsb.edu/Outreach/TimeScale/jurassic.html Jurassic Period] (Department of Earth Science, University of California, Santa Barbara).</ref>
  
−
Under the uniformitarian dates assigned by secular geologists, it represents approximately the period of Earth's history from 145 million years ago to 65 million years ago.<ref>Gradstein, F.M., and Ogg, J.G.,[http://www.stratigraphy.org/scale04.pdf Geologic Time Scale 2004 – Why, How, and Where Next!]</ref>  [[Flood Geology|Flood geologists]] use a geological system that more heavily relies on [[catastrophism]] and reject the [[Uniformitarianism|uniformitarian]] assumptions behind the dates derived by secular geologists, and thus reject these dates (see [[geologic system]]).  Instead, most would consider most if not all Cretaceous strata to be laid during [[Great Flood|Noah's Flood]].<ref>Snelling, Andrew, Where should we place the Flood/post-Flood Boundary in the Geological Record?, ''Journal of Creation'' 10(1) 29-31, April 1996.</ref>
+
Under the uniformitarian dates assigned by secular geologists, it represents approximately the period of Earth's history from 145 million years ago to 65 million years ago.<ref>Gradstein, F.M., and Ogg, J.G.,[http://www.stratigraphy.org/scale04.pdf Geologic Time Scale 2004 – Why, How, and Where Next!]</ref>  [[Flood Geology|Flood geologists]] use a geological system that more heavily relies on [[catastrophism]] and reject the [[Uniformitarianism|uniformitarian]] assumptions behind the dates derived by secular geologists, and thus reject these dates (see [[geologic system]]).  Instead, most would consider most if not all Cretaceous strata to be laid during [[Great Flood|Noah's Flood]].<ref>Snelling, Andrew, Where should we place the Flood/post-Flood Boundary in the Geological Record?, ''Journal of Creation'' 10(1) 29-31, April 1996.</ref> Flood geologists also point out that catastrophism is increasingly being accepted in the field of geology. <ref>http://www.grisda.org/origins/12061.htm</ref>
 +
<ref>http://www.icr.org/index.php?module=articles&action=print&ID=84</ref>  In addition, creationists also assert that old earth uniformitarian geology has numerous [[Anomoly|anomolies]].  For example, creationists cite the work of [[William R. Corliss]] who catalogued numerous anomalies in the old earth uniformatarian geology [[paradigm]]. <ref>http://www.science-frontiers.com/sourcebk.htm</ref><ref>http://www.apologeticspress.net/articles/184</ref> Corliss wrote regarding [[Paraconformity|paraconformities]]/unconformaties the following:
 +
 
 +
<blockquote style="background: #F9F9F9; border: 1px solid #AAAAAA; padding: .3em;">
 +
"Potentially more important to geological thinking are those unconformities that signal large chunks of geological history are missing, even though the strata on either side of the unconformity are perfectly parallel and show no evidence of erosion. Did millions of years fly by with no discernible effect? A possible though controversial inference is that our geological clocks and stratigraphic concepts need working on." William R. Corliss, Unknown Earth (Glen Arm, Maryland: The Sourcebook Project, 1980), p. 219. <ref>http://www.cs.unc.edu/~plaisted/ce/flood.html</ref>
 +
</blockquote>
 +
 
 +
The secular science journal [[New Scientist]] wrote regarding Corliss's work the following: "All I can say to Corliss is carry on cataloging." <ref>http://www.science-frontiers.com/sourcebk.htm</ref>  Young earth creationist scientists assert that paraconformaties pose a serious challenge to the old earth uniformitarian geology paradigm. <ref>http://www.grisda.org/georpts/36.pdf</ref><ref>
 +
http://www.grisda.org/2003-FSC-open/Roth-RecentCreation.htm</ref><ref>http://www.seeking-god.co.uk/id188.htm</ref> All young earth creationist scientists assert that there is an abundance of scientific arguments in addition to geology showing the earth and universe are both approximately 6,000 years in age.<ref>http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/young.asp</ref><ref>http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/astronomy.asp</ref><ref>http://www.icr.org/article/1842/</ref>  In addition, these scientists have a number of arguments against the position of an extremely old age for the earth and the universe.<ref>http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/dating.asp</ref><ref>http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/astronomy.asp</ref><ref>http://www.apologeticspress.org/modules.php?name=Read&cat=1&itemid=22</ref>
 +
 
  
 
==References==
 
==References==

Revision as of 21:34, May 6, 2007

The Cretaceous period is part of the geologic system of classifying geologic formations.

The Cretaceous period is part of the Mesozoic era, and is divided into Early and Late epochs. The Cretaceous is preceded by Jurassic era and followed by the Paleogene era.

The Cretaceous was named from the Latin word for chalky, and was first used in 1832.[1][2]

Under the uniformitarian dates assigned by secular geologists, it represents approximately the period of Earth's history from 145 million years ago to 65 million years ago.[3] Flood geologists use a geological system that more heavily relies on catastrophism and reject the uniformitarian assumptions behind the dates derived by secular geologists, and thus reject these dates (see geologic system). Instead, most would consider most if not all Cretaceous strata to be laid during Noah's Flood.[4] Flood geologists also point out that catastrophism is increasingly being accepted in the field of geology. [5] [6] In addition, creationists also assert that old earth uniformitarian geology has numerous anomolies. For example, creationists cite the work of William R. Corliss who catalogued numerous anomalies in the old earth uniformatarian geology paradigm. [7][8] Corliss wrote regarding paraconformities/unconformaties the following:

"Potentially more important to geological thinking are those unconformities that signal large chunks of geological history are missing, even though the strata on either side of the unconformity are perfectly parallel and show no evidence of erosion. Did millions of years fly by with no discernible effect? A possible though controversial inference is that our geological clocks and stratigraphic concepts need working on." William R. Corliss, Unknown Earth (Glen Arm, Maryland: The Sourcebook Project, 1980), p. 219. [9]

The secular science journal New Scientist wrote regarding Corliss's work the following: "All I can say to Corliss is carry on cataloging." [10] Young earth creationist scientists assert that paraconformaties pose a serious challenge to the old earth uniformitarian geology paradigm. [11][12][13] All young earth creationist scientists assert that there is an abundance of scientific arguments in addition to geology showing the earth and universe are both approximately 6,000 years in age.[14][15][16] In addition, these scientists have a number of arguments against the position of an extremely old age for the earth and the universe.[17][18][19]


References

  1. ↑ Online Etymology Dictionary
  2. ↑ Jurassic Period (Department of Earth Science, University of California, Santa Barbara).
  3. ↑ Gradstein, F.M., and Ogg, J.G.,Geologic Time Scale 2004 – Why, How, and Where Next!
  4. ↑ Snelling, Andrew, Where should we place the Flood/post-Flood Boundary in the Geological Record?, Journal of Creation 10(1) 29-31, April 1996.
  5. ↑ http://www.grisda.org/origins/12061.htm
  6. ↑ http://www.icr.org/index.php?module=articles&action=print&ID=84
  7. ↑ http://www.science-frontiers.com/sourcebk.htm
  8. ↑ http://www.apologeticspress.net/articles/184
  9. ↑ http://www.cs.unc.edu/~plaisted/ce/flood.html
  10. ↑ http://www.science-frontiers.com/sourcebk.htm
  11. ↑ http://www.grisda.org/georpts/36.pdf
  12. ↑ http://www.grisda.org/2003-FSC-open/Roth-RecentCreation.htm
  13. ↑ http://www.seeking-god.co.uk/id188.htm
  14. ↑ http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/young.asp
  15. ↑ http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/astronomy.asp
  16. ↑ http://www.icr.org/article/1842/
  17. ↑ http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/dating.asp
  18. ↑ http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/astronomy.asp
  19. ↑ http://www.apologeticspress.org/modules.php?name=Read&cat=1&itemid=22
Retrieved from "https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Cretaceous&oldid=146301"