Flat Earth

jjvw said:
Like the age of the Earth?
Click to expand...
Yes. I said that.

and in all fairness to @Equilibrium31, I can see how you might think I held to relativism. But I do believe there is an interpretation of reality that is objective and knowable, though not exhaustive.

But I’m really here for Jeep discussion, so I am heading that way. 😀
 
JMT said:
Yes. I said that.

and in all fairness to @Equilibrium31, I can see how you might think I held to relativism. But I do believe there is an interpretation of reality that is objective and knowable, though not exhaustive.

But I’m really here for Jeep discussion, so I am heading that way. 😀
Click to expand...

Ok. Do you believe that we can know through observation with some certainty that the Earth is closer to a 4.5 billion years old than it is to 6000 years old?
 
jjvw said:
Ok. Do you believe that we can know through observation with some certainty that the Earth is closer to a 4.5 billion years old than it is to 6000 years old?
Click to expand...
what are we observing? Starlight? Microwave background radiation? Fossils? A volcano on Hawaii? Coral formation?What? It depends

i guess I should limit it to the earth. I spaced out there a bit😂
 
JMT said:
what are we observing? Starlight? Microwave background radiation? Fossils? A volcano on Hawaii? Coral formation?What? It depends
Click to expand...

Is the Earth closer to 6000 years old?
 
jjvw said:
Ok. Do you believe that we can know through observation with some certainty that the Earth is closer to a 4.5 billion years old than it is to 6000 years old?
Click to expand...
This chart demonstrates what I am trying to say. Not out of any I’ll will, but I am doing to you what you do to people who come on the forum and ask, “can I run 32’s on no lift?” And you go into cycling suspension and shock length, etc... You just want them to think it through and they just want an answer. You can stop phishing, because I can do this forever. All I ever said was the two issues brought up were of a different nature. I think that is fair enough, and I think this chart is a realistic depiction of the limitations of human knowledge.
DCA7F558-195A-4499-B64D-118C396F43BF.jpeg
 
mrblaine said:
That was likely me. Ever been to someplace like the Carlsbad Caverns and looked at the formations created by deposits of micro thin layers of dissolved limestone? If you have a slight understanding of the process and have observed the build rate, it isn't hard to imagine that all that didn't happen in a few thousand years. If you understand erosion and how it works, it isn't difficult to imagine that something like the Grand Canyon didn't happen in a few thousand years. My point was if you have an open mind and some basic understanding of nature, it is impossible to believe that the earth is only 5000 years old.
Click to expand...

False about the GC.
The layered stratification points to a massive flood and a younger GC with a tumultuous history.

Even in a secular college (sdsu 2005), I remember this topic in a geology national parks course.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: JMT
Sancho said:
False about the GC.
The layered stratification points to a massive flood and a younger GC with a tumultuous history.

Even in a secular college (sdsu 2005), I remember this topic in a geology national parks course.
Click to expand...

California has and is seeing the effects from drought to flooding and how quick just a little water (compared to a flooded earth) can destroy so much. This alone should spark an open mind to question or at least explore the possibility of a younger rather than older earth.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sancho
Paparock1 said:
California has and is seeing the effects from drought to flooding and how quick just a little water (compared to a flooded earth) can destroy so much. This alone should spark an open mind to question or at least explore the possibility of a younger rather than older earth.
Click to expand...
Yes, high energy events (catastrophe) seem to be powerful explanations of mega sequences and other physical evidence.
 
JMT said:
Yes, high energy events (catastrophe) seem to be powerful explanations of mega sequences and other physical evidence.
Click to expand...

How deep is the GC, and how long does it take to form the layers of rock and built up sediment?
 
jjvw said:
How deep is the GC, and how long does it take to form the layers of rock and built up sediment?
Click to expand...
Up to a mile or so. As long as it takes the water to lay them down. The time depends on the volume of water present and the amount of sediment in the water.

EDIT: we should all be able to agree the sedimentary rock was laid down in water and by water. 😊
 
JMT said:
Up to a mile or so. As long as it takes the water to lay them down. The time depends on the volume of water present and the amount of sediment in the water.
Click to expand...

Are the sediment layers consistent with rapid formation or slow formation?
 
jjvw said:
Are the sediment layers consistent with rapid formation or slow formation?
Click to expand...
I already answered that question. What is your quest or goal?
 
I wonder how much flack Gould and Eldridge received in 1972 for their postulation of punctuated equilibrium.
 
how would layers hold up submerged in water? We know that in any area that is dry and then receives a lot of rain there is potential for flash flooding because the ground cannot absorb the water fast enough. But what if the ground was saturated with water and the water is running off. That is very destructive as we see in small areas that have been flooded, now compared that to a global flood.
 
Top Bottom
Back