Re: The geological column

Jim Willemin wrote:
"[M]adman" <grat@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote in
news:BQKzl.21740$i9.16978@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx:

Jim Willemin wrote:
"[M]adman" <grat@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote in
news:TLGzl.22353$qa.13411@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx:


.
The geological column is incomplete. It is also dated with guess
work.

As to incompleteness: I suppose if you need a continuous hourly
record of the history of the earth for the geological column to be
complete, you're right, it's incomplete. So what? We cannot know
everything with the confidence of Absolute Truth(tm). However,
current mainstream geology makes pretty damn good sense out of the
record we do have, which is essentially complete for the Quaternary
and gets spottier as you go back in time.

As to dating: You have been corrected on this before. Quit lying.



Please start over and get it right this time. Because it is very
misleading as it is now.


If you think we geologists have done such a bad job, go ahead and
redo it yourself. If such work is beneath you, shut up. Better
yet, learn something about the field - the autobiography of a planet
is fascinating reading.


Stop being so 'thin skinned'.

I did not say YOU did a bad Job. And there is MUCH that you guys do
in the field of geology that has furthered mankind.

However you know as well as i know that the original column was dated
with fossils, but, they had no idea what the date of the fossils were
because there was no dating methods when the column was written. So
the fossils were dated using guess work and the column. Kinda like
the old chasing your tail thingy.

So what? Fossils were (and are) used to correlate strata, forming a
relative dating framework (and no, relative dating is not taking your
cousin out for a good time). That relative dating framework is quite
robust, and provides an order of events. Note that relative dating
does not require knowledge of ages, nor does it provide such
information. It merely provides a sequence of events. Folks who use
the tools of correlation and relative dating understand their
limitations, and do not attempt to use a hammer to tighten a screw.
You, on the other hand, do not appear able to tell the difference
between a hammer and a screwdriver, mistaking establishing an order
of events for establishing dates for those events.

So what? How can you use the fossil to date the strata when you do not know
how old the fossil is?

How can you say a fossil is (X) years old because of it's location in the
strata when the strata is being dated with the fossil?

Geesh...



You want dates, use radiometric methods or count varves. Sheesh. The
depth of your misunderstanding is phenomenal when you don't even get
the difference between an order of events and absolute ages of those
events.

Well, if SO many people are misunderstanding then you must be doing a
terrible job at educating


In addition you have no complete record of the column anywhere on
earth.


So what if there is no complete record in any single spot? That is
what correlation is good for, so one can assemble the bits.

Again with the so what? Do you, or do you not want an accurate 100% complete
record?



Pieces of a puzzle can look like one picture when partially
assembled and then when all of the pieces are in place the picture
can be quite different.


In detail, yes. In broad outline, no. And although there are some
very intersting places on earth for which the geology is are not
mapped very well, nor like to be anytime soon (e.g. eastern
Afghanistan), enough of the earth is mapped well enough that it is
doubtful in the extreme that the picture we have now will change
radically. It could, of course, but it ain't likely.

Details are important


Back to the drawing board and make a good one.

Why? The one we have is damn good - the only critics are those who
don't know what the hell they're talking about. Those who do
understand the geologic column don't seem to complain at all.

Standard evolutionist PAT answer # 70

"You do not know what the hell you are talking about"



This time consider the
time lines in many of the ancient texts that are available. They may
give some clues to help you. Who knows?


Look. The oldest stories in the oldest of ancient texts are a million
years younger than the youngest non-volcanic rocks, and a million
years younger than the events those rocks record. Ancient texts are
useless in deciphering the history of the planet. I can pretty much
guarantee that any timelines extracted from any ancient texts will be
flatly contradicted by the rocks. Hell, what ancient text tells us
about the 22 to 24 major ice ages in the last two million years?
You're the ancient text expert. I want specifics - an unambiguous
description of the number of major continental glaciations in the
Pleistocene. Surely that is not too much to ask - these events had
global effects like profound climate shifts and significant changes
in sea level (on the order of tens of meters), so must be clearly
recorded in the ancient wisdom, right? And since we know that there
were a mess of these glaciations, surely several have been recorded.
Go ahead - make my day.

Again with the evolutionist tricks. You ask for information that you know
cannot be provided.

Who cares what happened 200 million years ago. Science cannot tell us
exactly how life began so why is dating rocks a plus?


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: The geological column
    ... The geological column is incomplete. ... the field of geology that has furthered mankind. ... relative dating framework (and no, relative dating is not taking your ... The oldest stories in the oldest of ancient texts are a million ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: The geological column
    ... in the field of geology that has furthered mankind. ... relative dating framework (and no, relative dating is not taking your ... How can you use the fossil to date the strata when you do not know ... The oldest stories in the oldest of ancient texts are a million ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: The geological column
    ... The geological column is incomplete. ... in the field of geology that has furthered mankind. ... relative dating framework (and no, relative dating is not taking your ... The oldest stories in the oldest of ancient texts are a million ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: The geological column
    ... The geological column is incomplete. ... in the field of geology that has furthered mankind. ... fossils were because there was no dating methods when the column was ... the time lines in many of the ancient texts that are available. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: The geological column
    ... The geological column is incomplete. ... in the field of geology that has furthered mankind. ... fossils were because there was no dating methods when the column was ... the time lines in many of the ancient texts that are available. ...
    (talk.origins)