There is one choice, 3 votes for Doom Pickels' debate

The Geological columb. Proof of millions of years?

What do you believe of the geological columb? Is it possible for it to take millions of years to form? Or could it all form at one catastrophic event? Is it possible for 5 million years to go past without erosion? Are fossiles on the bottom really "simpler"? Other questions can be put down.
  • Updated to avoid plagerism... =P
    1- the coconino sandstone formation inside the grand canyon (that is 100m thick and is about 250,000 km2) Shows that it was all laid down quickly in deep fast flowing water. (sediments do settle down in fast flowing water, It happens in rivers) Plus all the layers look as if they were rapidly deposited with little time breaks. One of the evidences supporting this is that the whole canyon sequence is bent at a place called the kaibab upwarp. (some places are bent dramatically without even cracking). This means that the rocks should have been soft when they were deposited. The cigarette wraped in aluminum foil isn't a good argument because the medium that is surrounding the cigarrette is malleable. Thus the ciragette wouldn't break because the aluminum foil is extremely bendable. A more accurate representation of rocks would be a hard tube of plastic fit snugly around the cigaratte. If the plastic is bent, the cigarette will break. As the "rocks" surrounding the "cigarrete" would be hard like the plastic, not tin foil. More evidence supporting fast deposition would be tree fossiles that stretch through multiple rock layers. That would mean the tree would have to be standing for 5-10 million years allowing another rock layer to be put on top of it. But tree's can't stay standing that long. Even in dry places like the sahara desert, were sand storms would eventually erode away at the tree. It can't be in a moist area or it will decay. It can't be fossilized if it is not underground were minerals could saturate into the cells of the tree. If the tree were to sink to the bottom of a lake. (Or simply sink into deep water of a global flood), the process would have to be fast, and the water would have to be deep. Or scavangers would soon eat away at the tree. Not allowing fossilization. Proof that trees just didn't fall into lakes would be that some trees are petrified, and turned into coal on the other end. This would mean the tree actually had to be covered in multiple layers with no time gap to allow it to be both petrified and coalerized. Delicate surface features (Between rock layers) like ripples and footprints would have been eroded completely away long before the 5 million years were up. Meaning that there couldn't be substantial time breaks between the settling sediments to allow the images to be preserved. Lack of fossilized soil between the rock layers is pretty evidence proof that there wasn't enough time for rocks to break down and be converted into coil. A possibility would be that soil would be completely wiped (through a catastrophic explosion away as a new layer would be formed, but that would mean that all delicate structures (explained above) would also be completely wiped away. Lack of any erosion between the rock layer show that there wasn't a large time gap between the creation of the rock layers. And clastic dykes and pipes of water saturated sand was sqeezed up through multiple rock layers. But in order for this to happen, the sand should have still been unsettled, and still very "squishy" to allow it to puch into rock layers. And the rokc layers above it must've been soft, or it would cause substantial cracks.

    Plus there is very hard evidence that humans and dinosaurs coexsisted. There are many historical record of "dragons" that fit descriptions of some dinosaurs perfectly. Some of thease are triceritops, T-rex, allosaurus (Known as burrunjor for aboriginal people), ankylosaurus, and stegasaurus, sauropods (Diplodocus and Aptasaurus types), and a plesiosaurus (known as the nessie, or yarru for aboriginal people). There is also unfossilized dinosaur bones that still have flexible tissue in it with red blood cells. Such as the bones of the "Kulta". The Kulta was an allosaurus type animal (according to aborigines). There was even T-res bones found with it's soft tissue still in tact.

    Other facts to support the young earth theory is that there are human artifacts in rock layers, and some even in coal. There are also many times were there are human footprints found right next to dinosaur footprints. Some people also tell me that the human foot prints could easily have been made millions of years after the dinosaur footprints. This is first off is a crazy implication. First of all the ground would have to remain untouched by any form of erosion for millions of years without it being buried in sediments (Witch would be needed in order for it to fossilize) Then a person would have to walk over hard rock and make a footprint, or walk over soft ground that has a dinosaur footprint from millions of years ago.... If the ground is soft, then you are saying a lot if you say the dinosaur footprint was able to stay in moist ground for that much time. There has also been human bones found in rock layers with dinosaur bones...

    Plus the fossiles look as if they have been buried in a global flood. As less mobile creatures would tend to be buried faster, not allowing them to decay if they were to be able to move up. Ocean plants would be buried first, then swampy plants, then high plants last . (This would cause confusion, as it would look like ocean plants would evolve into land plants)

    "Another factor is the sorting action of water. A coal seam at Yallourn in Victoria, Australia, has a 0.5 m thick layer of 50% pollen. The only way such a layer of pollen could be obtained is through the sorting action of water in a massive watery catastrophe that gathered the plant material from a large area and deposited it in a basin in the Yallourn area." Quote from Answersingenesis.com

    Thats all I have to say now =P
    100%  Voted for by Doom Pickels, frndofyaweh, Dwn.
    View 36 comments
  • :

 

None of the choices fit your opinion?  Add one →