The Mudcat Café TM
Thread #156666 Message #3701170
Posted By: Stu
11-Apr-15 - 06:50 AM
Thread Name: BS: BBC v. Jeremy Clarkson.
Subject: RE: BS: BBC v. Jeremy Clarkson.
"but it is part of the flood model also, minus the sloooooooooow !"
Except . . . this would have had to happen in times we have written records for, and as far as I am aware these make no mention of the Himalayas, the Rockies or the Andes (to name but a few) rising in the last few thousand years. Surely this event didn't go unnoticed? Your flood is mentioned in texts older than Christian, your lot merely appropriated them for their own use (a typically Christian habit, it appears), so why no mention of the of the Alpine orogeny?
Also, why do you discount erosion and weathering? Did God speed these processes up after the deposits were thrust to high elevation. We can observe these processes now and understand the speeds they occur and their mechanisms of action. Were these changed supernaturally, then slowed at some point? At what point were they slowed? What would be the purpose of this?
"So, stu you are privy to groundbreaking research that will validate your contentions and claims, and finally undo what experimental science has afore to held to"
No! No! NO! Listen man! I saw new data presented at a conference (along with hundreds of others) on the survival of soft tissue in a dinosaur that's not been reported before. The findings were preliminary and might not be borne out, hence the embargo. It's another piece of the jigsaw rather than a definitive answer, that's how science progresses. I really don't understand your issue with soft tissue survival. Did you think we'd discovered the sum total knowledge of palaeontology when Cope and Marsh were battling for Brontosaurus?
"why the flood model only thousands of yr ago should produce an uninterrupted total column "
Surely if all the sedimentary layers we see were laid down in a single event, which happened mere thousands of years ago, then they haven't had time to arrange themselves as we see today? See comments above. Provide explanation.
" Take Pasteur , as you found quotes about him, which you think helps your case. The fact that his faith did not hinder his science seems rather to hinder your contention"
Faith doesn't hinder science, we've discussed this at length on other threads pete. Plenty of scientists have faith, but you're an extremist. What hinders science is ignorance, a lack of curiosity and the desire to conform. Also things have moved on since Pasteur's day, as you might notice if you actually understood anything about science.
"and finally undo what experimental science has afore to held to"
That is such poorly constructed entrance it's almost poetry. I actually quite like it! Nice one.