Mud from rivers into the oceans

[_sabotage_]

I will respond in the Christian vote thread.

[BigBallinStalin]

why should there be a trail of sediment across the ocean floor? continents dont float on top of water dumping sediment over their edge onto the ocean floor like an overfilled dumptruck would leak a dirt trail while it drove down the road...

I understand the use of comical language to make my contentions seem childish and unscientific, but Continents do dump sediment over their edge onto the ocean floor. The mechanism is called rivers. Every continent has rivers. Yes even Antarctica has a river of ice. And each river deposits sediment (from the continent) onto the ocean floor.
Therefore, since there is no trail of sediment on the ocean floor from the Mid-Atlantic ridge to current mouths of rivers, then there are two viable options:
A. The continents had zero rivers and therefore no mechanism to deposit sediment for a trail. Not likely.
B. The continents moved quicker in the beginning of the break up of Pangea and the age of the break up of Pangea is not 120 million years ago but roughly 4,500 years ago around the time of Noah's flood.

So ask yourself, since you didn't know that Continents dump sediment over their edge onto the ocean floor, maybe there are other things you may not know, but believe just because someone told you. Check it out for yourself. Look at maps of the ocean floor and maps of river deltas, and ponder the lack of sediment deposit at the deltas. And ask yourself is it possible that the continents moved quickly at the break up of Pangea? Yes, it's possible and this explains the lack of a sediment trail from MidAtlantic ridge to the Amazon and also explains why rivers around the globe don't have enough sediment deposited at the deltas to support 120 million year old continents.

This hypothesis is not only possible, but plausible.
The observable evidence: The amount of sediment rivers deposit, the amount of deposit that only supports 4500 years and the lack of trail deposit on the ocean floor..
The testability: The rate of deposit/amount of deposited sediment equals rough estimate of 4500 years

You have yet to address your many critics' questions; therefore, you're not interested in rational debate. You're here to spout some silly monologue, grow tired, fart, and sit down.

[universalchiro]

why should there be a trail of sediment across the ocean floor? continents dont float on top of water dumping sediment over their edge onto the ocean floor like an overfilled dumptruck would leak a dirt trail while it drove down the road...

I understand the use of comical language to make my contentions seem childish and unscientific, but Continents do dump sediment over their edge onto the ocean floor. The mechanism is called rivers. Every continent has rivers. Yes even Antarctica has a river of ice. And each river deposits sediment (from the continent) onto the ocean floor.
Therefore, since there is no trail of sediment on the ocean floor from the Mid-Atlantic ridge to current mouths of rivers, then there are two viable options:
A. The continents had zero rivers and therefore no mechanism to deposit sediment for a trail. Not likely.
B. The continents moved quicker in the beginning of the break up of Pangea and the age of the break up of Pangea is not 120 million years ago but roughly 4,500 years ago around the time of Noah's flood.

So ask yourself, since you didn't know that Continents dump sediment over their edge onto the ocean floor, maybe there are other things you may not know, but believe just because someone told you. Check it out for yourself. Look at maps of the ocean floor and maps of river deltas, and ponder the lack of sediment deposit at the deltas. And ask yourself is it possible that the continents moved quickly at the break up of Pangea? Yes, it's possible and this explains the lack of a sediment trail from MidAtlantic ridge to the Amazon and also explains why rivers around the globe don't have enough sediment deposited at the deltas to support 120 million year old continents.

This hypothesis is not only possible, but plausible.
The observable evidence: The amount of sediment rivers deposit, the amount of deposit that only supports 4500 years and the lack of trail deposit on the ocean floor..
The testability: The rate of deposit/amount of deposited sediment equals rough estimate of 4500 years

You have yet to address your many critics' questions; therefore, you're not interested in rational debate. You're here to spout some silly monologue, grow tired, fart, and sit down.

I've tried to answer each inquiry, if I've missed one, re-ask and I'll try to answer it.

[BigBallinStalin]

I'm not willing to help you that much, so you'll have go back a few pages and skim through the thread. Go look at player's response. That's a treasure trove of stuff.

While you're at it, why not dig into similar threads where you exemplify the same behavior?

[hotfire]

http://geography.howstuffworks.com/29267-100-greatest-discoveries-continental-drift-video.htm

so if that same dump truck driver spills coffee while driving down the road will that coffee leave a trail behind on the road to follow or a puddle in his cab only?
what im trying to tell u is that the river sentiment should only be at the mouth of the river and what ur saying is that it should be there and in the middle of the ocean for some reason dumping into 2 places at once... places that are far apart and always have been...and even if the continents floated on top of the ocean floor instead of being fixed to the ocean floor, wouldn't florida and the carribbean islands block that sendtimentary trail or have been made from it?

[Artimis]

universalchiro, I can't work out if you're just having a big laugh out of winding everyone up or if you're really serious in your assertion that the Earth is only thousands of years old instead of billions of years old.

PLAYER57832 made some very good points in this post: http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=198357#p4336156
As did hotfire with this post: http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=198357&start=75#p4338141

If you sat down and really thought about it you'd realise why the rivers don't leave a trail sediment across the ocean floor. If we leave aside human and biological activity there is still the basic fact outstanding that the oceans are not static bodies of water. They have currents that are stirred up by the motion of Earth as it rotates round it's axis and by the gravitational interplay between the Earth, the Moon(which produces high/low tides) and to a lesser degree the other celestial objects within the solar system. These currents will most certainly have picked up the sediments in question and will have moved them on. In the event that said sediments are left undisturbed then they will get buried by yet more sediment which will press down until enough weight is piled onto to transform the sediment into rock(this type of rock is called sedimentary rock), so naturally that will be the end of the sediment laid down by the rivers. -That's the basic no frills answer on water currents and rock formation because I wanted to keep it short and sweet.

Rivers themselves are not static features of geology either, if left undisturbed by humans a river will natural change it's own course as Player mentioned in her post. The only type of water flow(for want of a better word) that would maintain the same course over a period of thousands of years would be a glacier. Even then any material the glacier might carry would not travel quickly enough to keep up with your... hypothesis that Pangea broke up a mere 4,500 years ago. However, this point is moot because of the action of ocean currents as I described them in the above paragraph.

I'll let someone else open up the can of worms on marine life and anthropic interference with your "sediment trails", otherwise this post will just bloat out of sight.

[PLAYER57832]

I am not using the Bible to back up my point, I'm only presenting what the opponents of intelligent design propose.

No, you are only presenting a small portion of what some people say.

[PLAYER57832]

in biblical terms of course, the animals are here for our use and benefit. we have dominion over them.

i think this is a cunning biblical trick. an even newer testament would surely prohibit the eating of flesh

"Use and benefit" also requires care. Wise people don't destroy that upon which they depend.

AND, for all the talk of preservationists ... the species that are definitely NOT endangered are cows, sheep --aka livestock upon which we have come to depend.

[PLAYER57832]

You have yet to address your many critics' questions; therefore, you're not interested in rational debate. You're here to spout some silly monologue, grow tired, fart, and sit down.

I've tried to answer each inquiry, if I've missed one, re-ask and I'll try to answer it.

You might try answering my posts.. or several others.

The truth is you have answered no one, just spouted off.

[khazalid]

in biblical terms of course, the animals are here for our use and benefit. we have dominion over them.

i think this is a cunning biblical trick. an even newer testament would surely prohibit the eating of flesh

"Use and benefit" also requires care. Wise people don't destroy that upon which they depend.

AND, for all the talk of preservationists ... the species that are definitely NOT endangered are cows, sheep --aka livestock upon which we have come to depend.

actually, there is no biblical imperative to 'care' for the animals at all. being a veggie i'd be inclined to agree with you, but the point is one of cultural relativity, which is worth noting

[PLAYER57832]

in biblical terms of course, the animals are here for our use and benefit. we have dominion over them.

i think this is a cunning biblical trick. an even newer testament would surely prohibit the eating of flesh

"Use and benefit" also requires care. Wise people don't destroy that upon which they depend.

AND, for all the talk of preservationists ... the species that are definitely NOT endangered are cows, sheep --aka livestock upon which we have come to depend.

actually, there is no biblical imperative to 'care' for the animals at all. being a veggie i'd be inclined to agree with you, but the point is one of cultural relativity, which is worth noting

IN fact, there very much is. Although those in the west have often used the term "domination" in its negative sense, the original really refers to more of a stewardship. Remember the root of "domination" is domos.. (spelling might be off on the greek part).

[khazalid]

kjv or go home

[_sabotage_]

I am not using the Bible to back up my point, I'm only presenting what the opponents of intelligent design propose.

No, you are only presenting a small portion of what some people say.

Well this is UC's thread and he is looking to have his ideas challenged to see if they hold water, so go for it, present the evidence that challenges him as the fringe idea of the Big Bang obviously offends your sensibilities.

[universalchiro]

so if that same dump truck driver spills coffee while driving down the road will that coffee leave a trail behind on the road to follow or a puddle in his cab only?

Amazon deposits 1100 X 10exp6 tons of sediment each year.
The continents are moving at 1.5inches per year,
If the continents drifted apart from Pangaea some 120 million years ago, you bet there would be a trail. The logic is unassailable.

So using your analogy, you are aiding my point. For if the driver of the dump truck is traveling slow enough, there will be a trail. But since there is no trail, then the driver of the dump truck drove faster in the past and has slowed to a crawl of 1.5 inches per year.

To argue for the lack of sediment deposit on the ocean floor because there was no rivers, is silly. I know you didn't pose this, but another person did.

[betiko]

so if that same dump truck driver spills coffee while driving down the road will that coffee leave a trail behind on the road to follow or a puddle in his cab only?

Amazon deposits 1100 X 10exp6 tons of sediment each year.
The continents are moving at 1.5inches per year,
If the continents drifted apart from Pangaea some 120 million years ago, you bet there would be a trail. The logic is unassailable.

So using your analogy, you are aiding my point. For if the driver of the dump truck is traveling slow enough, there will be a trail. But since there is no trail, then the driver of the dump truck drove faster in the past and has slowed to a crawl of 1.5 inches per year.

To argue for the lack of sediment deposit on the ocean floor because there was no rivers, is silly. I know you didn't pose this, but another person did.

Your truck had no leak when it started its journey, and it s raining cats and dogs. What are you trying to demonstrate? I still don t get it. That the continents could not have been drifting? That 1,5 inch a year is a constant over 120M years?
And i still don t understand your last phrase. How is it silly? Do you really think the amazone existed in some form when south america and africa separated?

[Artimis]

so if that same dump truck driver spills coffee while driving down the road will that coffee leave a trail behind on the road to follow or a puddle in his cab only?

Amazon deposits 1100 X 10exp6 tons of sediment each year.
The continents are moving at 1.5inches per year,
If the continents drifted apart from Pangaea some 120 million years ago, you bet there would be a trail. The logic is unassailable.

So using your analogy, you are aiding my point. For if the driver of the dump truck is traveling slow enough, there will be a trail. But since there is no trail, then the driver of the dump truck drove faster in the past and has slowed to a crawl of 1.5 inches per year.

To argue for the lack of sediment deposit on the ocean floor because there was no rivers, is silly. I know you didn't pose this, but another person did.

You completely ignored my post, was it because I was using too many words?

Lets try this approach instead:


On the off chance you couldn't find my post, it's here: Re: Mud from rivers into the oceans.

[mrswdk]

[BigBallinStalin]

so if that same dump truck driver spills coffee while driving down the road will that coffee leave a trail behind on the road to follow or a puddle in his cab only?

Amazon deposits 1100 X 10exp6 tons of sediment each year.
The continents are moving at 1.5inches per year,
If the continents drifted apart from Pangaea some 120 million years ago, you bet there would be a trail. The logic is unassailable.

So using your analogy, you are aiding my point. For if the driver of the dump truck is traveling slow enough, there will be a trail. But since there is no trail, then the driver of the dump truck drove faster in the past and has slowed to a crawl of 1.5 inches per year.

To argue for the lack of sediment deposit on the ocean floor because there was no rivers, is silly. I know you didn't pose this, but another person did.

Consider the following:









http://volcanoes.usgs.gov/about/edu/dyn ... tshell.php

Note the role of Subduction Zones.

What implications do subduction zones have for your position?

[mrswdk]

There we go. God is burying the sediment under the sea floor inside seduction zones.

[_sabotage_]

I already tried subduction zones on him, but nice pics.

[AndyDufresne]

BBS, what proof do you have that subduction zones exist? I mean, I understand that abduction zones exist, but your wishy washy dirt moving under other dirt? This isn't a high fantasy realm we live in with elves and dwarves and oompa loompas.


--Andy

[AndyDufresne]

BBS, what proof do you have that subduction zones exist? I mean, I understand that abduction zones exist, but your wishy washy dirt moving under other dirt? This isn't a high fantasy realm we live in with elves and dwarves and oompa loompas.


--Andy

[crispybits]

I'm gonna give UC what he wants. You're right UC - Pangea was 4500 years ago and it broke up realllll quick during a worldwide flood.

Now assuming the above was serious (and no you do not have permission to selectively quote this post, all or nothing please), what do you think this proves?

[Butters1919]

The mouths of all rivers from around the globe, only have approximately 4,500 years worth of deposits. If the Continents were formed 120 million years ago as evolutionist believe, then why aren't there a sufficient amount of sediment deposits flowing from the mouths of rivers into the oceans/gulfs/seas to support this very old age. Why is there only about 4,500 years worth of sediment deposits?

In addition, as the continents broke apart and South America broke apart from Africa, why doesn't the amazon leave a trail of deposit? And like wise the Mississippi river as well?

I stumble into this forum for the first time and this is what I read! My time in "off-topics" will be rather brief. Back to the sanity that is GD (sarcasm people, sarcasm).

[BigBallinStalin]

BBS, what proof do you have that subduction zones exist? I mean, I understand that abduction zones exist, but your wishy washy dirt moving under other dirt? This isn't a high fantasy realm we live in with elves and dwarves and oompa loompas.


--Andy

BBS, what proof do you have that subduction zones exist? I mean, I understand that abduction zones exist, but your wishy washy dirt moving under other dirt? This isn't a high fantasy realm we live in with elves and dwarves and oompa loompas.


--Andy

BBS, what proof do you have that subduction zones exist? I mean, I understand that abduction zones exist, but your wishy washy dirt moving under other dirt? This isn't a high fantasy realm we live in with elves and dwarves and oompa loompas.


--Andy

BBS, what proof do you have that subduction zones exist? I mean, I understand that abduction zones exist, but your wishy washy dirt moving under other dirt? This isn't a high fantasy realm we live in with elves and dwarves and oompa loompas.


--Andy

BBS, what proof do you have that subduction zones exist? I mean, I understand that abduction zones exist, but your wishy washy dirt moving under other dirt? This isn't a high fantasy realm we live in with elves and dwarves and oompa loompas.


--Andy