30 Nov 12
http://phys.org/news/2012-11-grand-canyon-dinosaurs.html
New study suggests the GC may be as much as 70 million years old.
The reason: a canyon, deeply buried, has just been found.
It cannot have been created by any kind of flood since as RJ suggests, the present GC was created by the 'flood'.
If so, how would you explain the presence of another older buried canyon that was out of reach of any flood?
- Joined
- 30 Dec 04
- Moves
- 97448
01 Dec 12
Originally posted by sonhouse"If it were simple, I think we would have solved the problem a long time ago," said Flowers. "But the variety of conflicting information has caused scientists to argue about the age of the Grand Canyon for more than 150 years. I expect that our interpretation that the Grand Canyon formed some 70 million years ago is going to generate a fair amount of controversy, and I hope it will motivate more research to help solve this problem."
http://phys.org/news/2012-11-grand-canyon-dinosaurs.html
New study suggests the GC may be as much as 70 million years old.
The reason: a canyon, deeply buried, has just been found.
It cannot have been created by any kind of flood since as RJ suggests, the present GC was created by the 'flood'.
If so, how would you explain the presence of another older buried canyon that was out of reach of any flood?
Doesn't sound like anything conclusive to me. Seems like good research that may or may not be correct.
Originally posted by sonhousehttp://nwcreation.net/mtsthelens.html
http://phys.org/news/2012-11-grand-canyon-dinosaurs.html
New study suggests the GC may be as much as 70 million years old.
The reason: a canyon, deeply buried, has just been found.
It cannot have been created by any kind of flood since as RJ suggests, the present GC was created by the 'flood'.
If so, how would you explain the presence of another older buried canyon that was out of reach of any flood?
lets play links, input not required.
Kelly 🙂
01 Dec 12
Originally posted by sonhouseCome on, you are talking to creationists here. These are people who disregard all of geology and astronomy and most of biology and physics. All they need to do to counter you is say that there was another local flood prior to the big one, or that you are 'interpreting the data all wrong and making too many assumptions'. After all, you cannot back up your evidence with dates or time periods as they already dispute those. If they have already fitted a kilometre or so of sedimentary layers and a global flood erroding it away, into a few thousand years, then fitting another flood and a few more layers in will be no problem at all.
It cannot have been created by any kind of flood since as RJ suggests, the present GC was created by the 'flood'.
If so, how would you explain the presence of another older buried canyon that was out of reach of any flood?
01 Dec 12
Originally posted by sonhousePure speculation by stupid evolutionists. 😏
http://phys.org/news/2012-11-grand-canyon-dinosaurs.html
New study suggests the GC may be as much as 70 million years old.
The reason: a canyon, deeply buried, has just been found.
It cannot have been created by any kind of flood since as RJ suggests, the present GC was created by the 'flood'.
If so, how would you explain the presence of another older buried canyon that was out of reach of any flood?
01 Dec 12
Originally posted by sonhouseisn't it nice the way we dumb down everything the science community discovers and takes for granted just so brain dead people who refuse to think could be presented with yet another fact that absolutely destroys their view on the world. Like it wasn't enough that we know the grand canyon wasn't caused by a flood, we had to discover a buried canyon and go "ok dumbasses, let's say the grand canyon was indeed caused by noah's flood, how do you explain this under it?".
http://phys.org/news/2012-11-grand-canyon-dinosaurs.html
New study suggests the GC may be as much as 70 million years old.
The reason: a canyon, deeply buried, has just been found.
It cannot have been created by any kind of flood since as RJ suggests, the present GC was created by the 'flood'.
If so, how would you explain the presence of another older buried canyon that was out of reach of any flood?
if you discuss santa claus , you don't need to prove he doesn't exist by explaining how going around the globe to deliver all the gifts in one night would turn him and his sleigh into a ball of fire.
01 Dec 12
Originally posted by ZahlanziIt’s your facts I have an issue with; because, more than a few times assumptions
isn't it nice the way we dumb down everything the science community discovers and takes for granted just so brain dead people who refuse to think could be presented with yet another fact that absolutely destroys their view on the world. Like it wasn't enough that we know the grand canyon wasn't caused by a flood, we had to discover a buried canyon and ...[text shortened]... deliver all the gifts in one night would turn him and his sleigh into a ball of fire.
are the foundations of your facts. At least those of us that believe in the flood
acknowledge it is faith we are talking about when we discuss our points of view.
Kelly
01 Dec 12
Originally posted by KellyJayI don't see how someone from the 20th and 21st century could still believe in that poppy cock tale of a world wide flood. Answer this: where was the water supposed to have come from, and where did it go?
http://nwcreation.net/mtsthelens.html
lets play links, input not required.
Kelly 🙂
If it all of a sudden went underground the ground would still have water in it and we have for instance, the oglalla aquifer which came from melt water from the last ice age and there was a lot of water there but in just 50 odd years of tapping it that source of water is being run dry. If that came from the flood there should have been a thousand times the water that we see there now.
The 40 days and nights of rain in the bible version was fresh water so how come with miles high layers of water on the earth, fresh water, why are the oceans salty? It should have been diluted down to nearly fresh but what we see is 3 to 5 percent salt and minerals.
If you have ever been to Israel you can see the dead sea, extremely salty.
If there had been a flood, all that highly salty water would have been washed away and there would have been very little salt left.
It is salty as hell. I can testify to that personally. It is much overrated as a place to swim.
So what do the creationist say about all that?
And how do you think a buried canyon came about near the GC, buried way underneath anything we see today?
The flood was a fairy tale, just looking at the world of today shows that to anyone with an open mind.
01 Dec 12
Originally posted by sonhouseRussell Crowe will give us the answer when his new movie comes out.
I don't see how someone from the 20th and 21st century could still believe in that poppy cock tale of a world wide flood. Answer this: where was the water supposed to have come from, and where did it go?
If it all of a sudden went underground the ground would still have water in it and we have for instance, the oglalla aquifer which came from melt water ...[text shortened]... od was a fairy tale, just looking at the world of today shows that to anyone with an open mind.
He's playing Noah.🙂
01 Dec 12
Originally posted by sonhouseYou believe life came from non-life without any plan or design do you not?
I don't see how someone from the 20th and 21st century could still believe in that poppy cock tale of a world wide flood. Answer this: where was the water supposed to have come from, and where did it go?
If it all of a sudden went underground the ground would still have water in it and we have for instance, the oglalla aquifer which came from melt water ...[text shortened]... od was a fairy tale, just looking at the world of today shows that to anyone with an open mind.
You believe life formed over the years billions without any plan or design, and
managed to not only stay alive by change into more complex life forms do you
not? I'd say you have your poppy cock tales being spun and yours in my view
are much harder to believe than mine, yet you do.
Kelly