Skip to main content

TR Memescape

  • Talk Rational: Spain

Topic: Testy Explains the Layers Which Include the Tonto Group (Read 9190 times) previous topic - next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
  • osmanthus
  • Administrator
  • Fingerer of piglets
Re: Testy Explains the Layers Which Include the Tonto Group
Reply #1025
Easy. Fossilised sauropod poo.
Truth is out of style

Re: Testy Explains the Layers Which Include the Tonto Group
Reply #1026
Easy. Fossilised sauropod poo.

(forehead slap) Darn, I need to think outside the Evolution box.   :p

  • osmanthus
  • Administrator
  • Fingerer of piglets
Re: Testy Explains the Layers Which Include the Tonto Group
Reply #1027
Here's a good overview of the geology of Missouri

Geology of Missouri

Maybe Dave can explain how his Majik FLUD distributed the different materials this way?

So the granite, rhyolite and diorite in the south east must be this: http://www.kfvs12.com/global/story.asp?s=6565926&ClientType=Printable

ETA: Ah, that's where your elephants are. Makes sense.

ETA2: Although I really don't think they look like elephants. :p
  • Last Edit: October 02, 2017, 07:57:24 AM by osmanthus
Truth is out of style

  • Faid
Re: Testy Explains the Layers Which Include the Tonto Group
Reply #1028
Actually you're right. The state and province boundaries didn't actually exist at the time but the elves knew that they WOULD exist in the future  and they knew where the lines would be so they were able to direct the sandstone deposition intelligently.
Look Dave, we know you're just butthurt because you couldn't support any of your claims. It happens in every thread, so we're all up to speed with the process. Why don't you go shout at your goats until you get over it?
"up to speed"

Lol

Meaning now for the first time in your life,   thanks to a creationist informing you, you are aware that a mainstream geologist - Sloss - proposed continent wide inundations which he believed covered most of the North American continent.

Congratulations! You are one step closer to becoming a YEC!

We'll get you all the way there  eventually. Give me time.
Oh, I don't know, dave. I mean, over all these years, thanks to Evilutionist Octohatters informing you, you have been made aware of all kinds of weird and wonderful things: From the truth about woodpecker tongues (heh) and the number of alleles Adam could have for each gene, to RM dating and angular uncomformities and lake K varves and burrows- Hell, just now, yours truly has informed you of the existence of vertical dinosaur tracks!

It didn't seem to do you much good.

Oh well.
Who even made the rule that we cannot group ducks and fish together for the simple reason that they are both aquatic? If I want to group them that way and it serves my purpose then I can jolly well do it however I want to and it is still a nested hierarchy and you can't tell me that it's not.

  • osmanthus
  • Administrator
  • Fingerer of piglets
Re: Testy Explains the Layers Which Include the Tonto Group
Reply #1029
...vertical dinosaur tracks!
They were just showing off.
Truth is out of style

  • Faid
Re: Testy Explains the Layers Which Include the Tonto Group
Reply #1030
Here's a good overview of the geology of Missouri

Geology of Missouri

Maybe Dave can explain how his Majik FLUD distributed the different materials this way?



I particularly like the rock formations at Elephant Rock State Park

Quote
Elephant Rocks State Park in southeastern Missouri exhibits the effects of rock fractures well. While initial cracks formed in the granite as it cooled over 1 billion years ago, during periods of continental uplift over the course of Missouri's history, the larger cracks formed in the rocks, fracturing all of the underlying granite into cubes. As the rocks were slowly uplifted and exposed at the surface, wind and rain slowly eroded, rounded, and enlarged the fractures to produce the large oval shaped boulders that are known as the Elephant Rocks (Seeger 2008).



I'm sure Dave can FLUDsplain these formations too.  :)


Fossilized Gigantonormous Sloth Pellets.


ETA aaaaaand ninja'd
Who even made the rule that we cannot group ducks and fish together for the simple reason that they are both aquatic? If I want to group them that way and it serves my purpose then I can jolly well do it however I want to and it is still a nested hierarchy and you can't tell me that it's not.

  • osmanthus
  • Administrator
  • Fingerer of piglets
Re: Testy Explains the Layers Which Include the Tonto Group
Reply #1031
39,000 of them!
Truth is out of style

  • osmanthus
  • Administrator
  • Fingerer of piglets
Re: Testy Explains the Layers Which Include the Tonto Group
Reply #1032
Hey here's a question: if cratons are just stuck together out of lots of random old bits, which seems to be the case, why are they so stable?
Truth is out of style

  • Pingu
Re: Testy Explains the Layers Which Include the Tonto Group
Reply #1033
Hey here's a question: if cratons are just stuck together out of lots of random old bits, which seems to be the case, why are they so stable?
Jesus glue
I have a Darwin-debased mind.

Re: Testy Explains the Layers Which Include the Tonto Group
Reply #1034
Hey here's a question: if cratons are just stuck together out of lots of random old bits, which seems to be the case, why are they so stable?
Jesus glue

Jebons.




  • MikeS
Re: Testy Explains the Layers Which Include the Tonto Group
Reply #1035
Hey here's a question: if cratons are just stuck together out of lots of random old bits, which seems to be the case, why are they so stable?
Cratons are usually the center bits (i.e. the canadian shield) > 2.5Gya while everything else is glued, glommed and cemented into it.  But there's just not much left that's "original", but's broken apart and cemented together a few times over earth's history tends to mix stuff up.





Stability is a misnomer, they tilt and move but they DO float higher compared to oceanic plates, plus IIRC the continental plates, made up of sedimentary profiles, tend to buckle and roil at impact while the oceanic plates are a bit more structurally sound.  The combination is why you see subduction more often than buckling, suture or orogeny at the plate boundaries between land and ocean plates.
  • Last Edit: October 02, 2017, 09:06:27 AM by MikeS

  • borealis
  • Administrator
Re: Testy Explains the Layers Which Include the Tonto Group
Reply #1036
Hey here's a question: if cratons are just stuck together out of lots of random old bits, which seems to be the case, why are they so stable?
Jesus glue

Jebons.





Just yesterday my 82 year old friend and neighbour remarked that she'd just found out via facebook (of course) about the 'Christian cross!' shape of laminins. I'm amazed it took this long, since the thing has been floating around the internet, esp. FB and email forwards, for years.

Definitely Jesus glue.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laminin

Hahaha! It was even a glurge too far for AIG:

https://answersingenesis.org/biology/microbiology/laminin-and-the-cross/




  • JonF
Re: Testy Explains the Layers Which Include the Tonto Group
Reply #1037
No that's oodles away from Wabigoon.
Wabigoon?
Isn't that the place where all the women are strong, all the men are good looking, and all the children are above average?
No idea. Never been there. All I know is they have a slab of ancient oceanic crust under them, buried under the rest of the crust and sitting smack on top of the mantle. Must have got shoved under there last Thursday by Jesus or something.
(It's sort of a pun on Lake Wobegon)
"I would never consider my evaluation of his work to be fair minded unless I had actually read his own words." - Dave Hawkins

  • VoxRat
  • wtactualf
Re: Testy Explains the Layers Which Include the Tonto Group
Reply #1038
"sort of a pun..."  ?

It was a great pun, dammit!  :colbert:


(Though probably meaningless to our non-American friends.)
"I understand Donald Trump better than many people because I really am a lot like him." - Dave Hawkins

  • RAFH
  • Have a life, already.
Re: Testy Explains the Layers Which Include the Tonto Group
Reply #1039
You do so every post!
Are we there yet?

Re: Testy Explains the Layers Which Include the Tonto Group
Reply #1040
Has Brave Sir Davie badgered off again? 

Why is it every time someone asks him to discuss specific geologic formations instead of his usual vague generalities his testicles shrink 3 sizes?    ::)

  • RAFH
  • Have a life, already.
Re: Testy Explains the Layers Which Include the Tonto Group
Reply #1041
OK I have a question. Had any of you people ever heard of any of these six megasequences before I came along?  Be honest now. I know it's difficult.
What has that to do with anything?
Are we there yet?

  • RAFH
  • Have a life, already.
Re: Testy Explains the Layers Which Include the Tonto Group
Reply #1042
I wanna know if Martin, our geology expert had ever heard of them before. 
Why?
Are we there yet?

  • RAFH
  • Have a life, already.
Re: Testy Explains the Layers Which Include the Tonto Group
Reply #1043
OK I have a question. Had any of you people ever heard of any of these six megasequences before I came along?  Be honest now. I know it's difficult.

Well yes, I had seen reference to these before you started bringing it up.

Probably because USian YECs have a hardon for the grand canyon, probably because lots of people go there and can see it for themselves and can figure out that its very existence destroys YEC.

Now tell me David, were you aware of any geology whatsoever independent of YEC apologetics before people started responding to your ignorant repetition of said apologetics?

Restricting things to seas, were you and are you aware of any of the known ancient seas other than the Western Interior Seaway?

Eremanga?
Pannonian?
Tethys?
Working geologists are mostly about searching for fossil fuels.  They could care less about how old it is.  Oh yeah they go along with the fake millions of years bullshit ... but it really doesn't matter to their quest of finding fossil fuels.  YECs on the other hand, DO care how old it is ... and how it was formed.  Because they are curious people.

Funny about that, ever discuss much with a guy named Glen Morton?
Oh wait, that's the guy you went against about worms and their burrows, wasn't it? The discussion you badgered on most prominently. Har de har har har. Another face in the patty , Nice big hot steamy patty at that.
Are we there yet?

  • RAFH
  • Have a life, already.
Re: Testy Explains the Layers Which Include the Tonto Group
Reply #1044
Let's see if anyone can top Tim for stupid comment.
You just did.
Are we there yet?

  • RAFH
  • Have a life, already.
Re: Testy Explains the Layers Which Include the Tonto Group
Reply #1045

No. No she wasn't.  God damn you are an idiot Dave

I don't know how he managed it but Dave is even more of a moron now than he was in the last decade.
It's a natural and predictable evolution. 
Shame on you for not seeing it coming.
Are we there yet?

  • VoxRat
  • wtactualf
Re: Testy Explains the Layers Which Include the Tonto Group
Reply #1046
I wanna know if Martin, our geology expert had ever heard of them before. 
Why?
Hawkins seems to think that if he franoogles something up that Person X hasn't heard of, that's proof-positive that he's running circles around Person X.

But, in fact, it was Faid who originally brought the six cratonic sequences to our collective attention.
8 years ago.

http://talkrational.org/archive/showthread.php?p=677616

Here's where SomeCallMeTim first brings it to Hawkins's attention, two years ago:
http://talkrational.org/archive/showthread.php?p=2546319

And here's where Hawkins "discovers" it, 4 days later:
http://talkrational.org/archive/showthread.php?p=2548677
"I understand Donald Trump better than many people because I really am a lot like him." - Dave Hawkins

  • VoxRat
  • wtactualf
Re: Testy Explains the Layers Which Include the Tonto Group
Reply #1047
So, yeah.
I, for one, have learned lots and lots from the never-ending face-plant that is Hawkins's farcical attempt to defend YEC. :cheer:
Just not from him or his fellow Militantly Ignorants.  :sadcheer:
"I understand Donald Trump better than many people because I really am a lot like him." - Dave Hawkins

Re: Testy Explains the Layers Which Include the Tonto Group
Reply #1048
Any of the creationist theories even with their problems are better than the alternative ...


<  clip misrepresentation of what actual scientists think > 

People who have never cracked an elementary textbook in a given field are not in a position to judge which theories in said field are "better" than which other theories.
Actually they are.  At least with this type of stuff where mainstream scientists embrace such lunacy.  And part of Ken Ham's genius is in recognizing this.  Ken Ham's not doing anything new, by the way.  This sort of thing has been repeated all throughout history.  William Tyndale comes to mind as an example.  Same deal.  Highly educated, arrogant clergy who couldn't believe that a plough boy would someday know the Scriptures better than they did.  But sure enough, that's exactly what happened.  Today, thanks to Ken Ham, plough boys are learning more about science than the university professors.


Lol!! I'd bet money that you Hawkins-read the Bible the same way you do everything else. It's evident in the way in which you consistently avoid responding to any mention of actual scriptures or actual accepted theology.

And your Tyndale reference makes no sense. Tyndale himself was highly educated. His translation of the Bible into English is noteworthy and the response of the established church was obviously dreadful and wrong. But his translation was one among many, especially given that numerous translations were already available in quite a few other languages - I guess from your POV only English counts.

As for your 'plough boys' knowing scripture better than 'arrogant clergy', what a stupid indefensible point. As for modern 'plough boys', if they follow Ham they are 'learning' nonsense which won't help them to understand much of anything beyond Ham's modern fairy tales. In fact, modern 'plough boys' for the most part know considerably more about science than Ham, given they employ modern 'mainstream' science to make their farms productive and profitable.

Is it just me, or does "plough boys" sound like a gay redneck dating site.
A walk through the ocean of most mens souls would scarcely get your feet wet.

  • Martin.au
  • Thingyologist
Re: Testy Explains the Layers Which Include the Tonto Group
Reply #1049
I read the poster. Holy dodgem car continents, Batman. :D
According to the articles on AIG they're still clinging to Baumgardner's old "catastrophic plate tectonics", and still haven't made any attempt to get around the flaws in it.

ICR is worse. It seems to be AIG dumbed down.
Any of the creationist theories even with their problems are better than the alternative ... The mainstream theory that giant sandstone layers were deposited state by state and province by province  in calm, placid waters.  It's really a riot that so many people with advanced science degrees actually believe that shit.

Really. If the creationist "theories" are so much better, why the need to misrepresent the scientific theories?

You started this thread thinking that big layers was a problem for science, having forgotten that we've explained Walther's law to you at least once in the past.

Having explained it to you yet again, you now seem to have figured out that these layers aren't at all a problem for science. Instead, we actually have a very effective theory as to how they form, with good predictive power.

Now, let's hear your creationist theory. Just for the Tonto is fine. The caveat is, it has to be a scientific explanation. Saying "those layers were put down by a flood" is not a scientific explanation. You could as well substitute "Those layers were made by magic". Therefore, in addition, let's also see some predictions made based on the creationist model. In particular, what features would we expect to see in each layer? Where would we expect to see the layers tapering off? What will the age of the sediments do as we move along each layer?


Damn. This looks like a reboot. I was so looking forward to Dave describing the creationist theories for layer deposition.
"That which can be asserted with evidence can also be dismissed without evidence." (Dave Hawkins)