The Flood

[Lionz]

Woodruff,

Where do I have a statement saying we shouldn't have as many fossils as we do?

And there's little to no sedimentary rock fossil that the flood doesn't nicely explain perhaps. Consider where the Morrison Formation's located at maybe.

http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewto ... 9#p2643629

[Lionz]

My bad if I was rude maybe... I'm an herb smoker and haven't smoked in a bit perhaps.

[PLAYER57832]

I have usually stayed out of religious and evolutionary threads, but I will finally put my 2 cents in.

Evolution seems to make sense, but I also attribute that to changes in molecules depending on how much of what chemicals are in the air or what the planetary temperature may be at the time, and even gravity, amongst many other things.

I also think there is much more to the story, possibly supernatural, or uber intelligent. I do not know what it is nor could I try to explain it. I just know that nobody ever will be able to know for sure, at least for a very long time.

I would agree, though perhaps not in the details of what you believe happened.

[PLAYER57832]

Woodruff,

Where do I have a statement saying we shouldn't have as many fossils as we do?

Technically, you did not give a statement saying that we should not have as many fossils as we do, by yourself. In fact, technically you have never truly said anything affirmative.

What you did was refer, multiple times, to a quote of Goulds and some other people referring to supposed gaps in the fossil record. And, you have been answered more than once by anyone who would bother to do so. Yet, you still keep asking again.

This is part of why I say you simply waste people's time. You provide no new information, not even really new questions, you just repeat the same stuff in an endless loop.

And there's little to no sedimentary rock fossil that the flood doesn't nicely explain perhaps.

Again, I dealt with this pretty extensively in the "young earth creationism.. again" thread.
Of course, most sedimentary rock is formed in water, much of it can be said to have formed in "floods". That, however, is quite different from saying they were all buried in one, single flood. The layers of sediment very much affirm evolution, not matter how much these creationist websites try to say otherwise.

oops.. almost said "you", but as I noted above, you yourself won't say anything affirmatively.

[PLAYER57832]

My bad if I was rude maybe... I'm an herb smoker and haven't smoked in a bit perhaps.

Not sure I heard you give this excuse before. Usually you refer to OCD, fear of lying, poor knowledge of English.. and a few other things.

[Lionz]

You say most sedimentary rock is formed in water? Is there any that's not and has there been a dead animal encased in sedimentary rock that was not quickly and deeply buried by an onslaught of wet sediment? You might have referred to one or more site that mentioned methods having to do with one or more non-sedimentary rock type fossil being formed, but did you refer to one that gave a non-flood explanation for sedimentary rock fossils?

Maybe you shouldn't be surprised if it seems you come across loops on Bumpage if you discuss controversial subjects with people holding views you're opposed to. You've provided some theories that have not been convincing to me and shouldn't expect me to back down and not say anything if I see a view of me challenged by someone even if you personally think it's a view you've already successfully refuted maybe.

[PLAYER57832]

You say most sedimentary rock is formed in water? Is there any that's not

As I already told you more than once, yes. Wind, erosion (landslides, etc) can each cause sedimentary rock to form.

and has there been a dead animal encased in sedimentary rock that was not quickly and deeply buried by an onslaught of wet sediment?

Again, already answered.. more than once. Yes, there is.

You might have referred to one or more site that mentioned methods having to do with one or more non-sedimentary rock type fossil being formed, but did you refer to one that gave a non-flood explanation for sedimentary rock fossils?

here we go again.... try reading through my answers. If you cannot be bothered to read them through the first time I post, don't ask for a repeat.

Maybe you shouldn't be surprised if it seems you come across loops on Bumpage if you discuss controversial subjects with people holding views you're opposed to. You've provided some theories that have not been convincing to me and shouldn't expect me to back down and not say anything if I see a view of me challenged by someone even if you personally think it's a view you've already successfully refuted maybe.

Back down? No. Read what I actually write instead of endlessly asking the same questions over and over and over... yes, we ALL pretty much expect that.

jay is stubborn, sticks to his points. You question, but then ignore almost all responses. Jay might be irritating. You move to waste everyone's time.

And yes, it looks like I did answer you ... again.

[Lionz]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sedimentary_rock

All sedimentary rock was formed with liquid perhaps... all from mineral and/or organic particles (detritus?) settling and accumulating or from minerals precipitating from a solution maybe. Unless He created some automatically out of nothing?

Can someone help me figure out where Player referred to a site that gave a non-flood explanation for sedimentary rock fossils? Quite a bit has been said and I'm not sure where I should look maybe. Is there a site that had one or more thing having to do with fish falling to bottoms of bodies of water that I'm slightly remembering?

[PLAYER57832]

Now you are asking other people to go back over the answers I gave you.. answers you yourself still have not bothered to read?
If you cannot be bothered, why would anyone else?

As for whether all sedimentary rock was formed with liquid, you have to get a bit technical there, because there is moisture even within most rock. However, not all sedimentary rock formed in a flood or even in real water. If your wikki article says otherwise, it is wrong. Check out any verified geological site and you will find that what I say is true. (and skip any and all creationist sites they are not verified science).

[natty dread]

Lionz goes in cycles, like clockwork. He posts the same images, website links and arguments cyclicly. When a few days has gone since one of his arguments has last been refuted he seems to think that it can be posted again as a valid argument.

Here's my theory on this phenomenon: to Lionz, admiting that his theories are wrong would steal the basis from his religious beliefs, since he associates them together in his mind. So as a self-protection mechanism he ignores anything that may threaten his worldview.

[Lionz]

Player,

Not words of my own depending on definition at least and first sentence on wikipedia page in main body of article there minus some bolding and hyperlinks perhaps...

Sedimentary rock is a type of rock that is formed by sedimentation of material at the Earth's surface and within bodies of water.

Are you right and is that wrong?

I'm not sure you even referred to a site that mentioned fish falling to the bottom of bodies of water maybe, but perhaps you should consider aerobic and anaerobic decomposers either way. If there's been a dead animal found encased in sedimentary rock and it was not from an animal who was quickly and deeply buried by an onslaught of wet sediment, then what happened? How about put things into words of your own even if you feel you provided a site with a logical alternative explanation in the past?

[Lionz]

Natty,

What's been refuted? Is Player right and wikipedia wrong when it comes to sedimentary rock?

And truth is that there's little to no one who posts on Bumpage who's ignored stuff posted to them less than me maybe. How many posts are there directed at me that I haven't responded to and how many points are there that have been made in response to something said by me that have not since been addressed by me?

[jay_a2j]

If there's a conspiracy by power hungry men to get people to be Bible believers, then what happened in the 20th century and what's been happening so far in the 21st? Who's remembers VH1 before 1995?

"....to get people to be Bible believers", if there is a conspiracy I don't think that is the motive behind it. They will merely fulfill the prophecies within it inadvertently. I remember VH1 before '95.


Just was shocked you mentioned the grove and conspiracy? You buy this stuff?

[2dimes]

'splain VH-1 before 1995. I'm a canuck so only saw it in bars where I was in no condition to be able to figure out what was on a television if it wasn't VanHalen or something.

Is there really people that deny the grove? That's awesome if there is.

[Lionz]

What do you mean Jay? Freemasonry and the Bohemian Club very much exist and it's not a big secret maybe. Trusting wikipedia for info on either might not be real wise, but...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freemasonry
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bohemian_Grove

[Lionz]

Vh1 used to be like a mom's version of MTV and it somehow got away from that and got involved with shows like Flavor of Love and I Love New York perhaps.

[2dimes]

Vh1 used to be like a mom's version of MTV and it somehow got away from that and got involved with shows like Flavor of Love and I Love New York perhaps.

Ok thanks. Like I said I didn't have access to it but thought it had music videos starting around 1988 for several years.

[2dimes]

The Nixon quotes alone are worth reading that wiki article on the grove.

[Woodruff]

Woodruff,
Where do I have a statement saying we shouldn't have as many fossils as we do?

Do you not read the images that you post on this site? Or do you post images on this site that you don't agree with? It explicitly says exactly that.

[Woodruff]

Here's my theory on this phenomenon: to Lionz, admiting that his theories are wrong would steal the basis from his religious beliefs, since he associates them together in his mind. So as a self-protection mechanism he ignores anything that may threaten his worldview.

My sister is like that.

[natty dread]

Lionz, are you Woodruff's sister?

[King Doctor]

Lionz, are you Woodruff's sister?

Isn't that what people usually accuse me of being?

[InkL0sed]

Lionz, are you Woodruff's sister?

Isn't that what people usually accuse me of being?

Haha, you're funny, Woodruff.

[jonesthecurl]

Careful, you'll get him all woodruffled.

[jay_a2j]

What do you mean Jay? Freemasonry and the Bohemian Club very much exist and it's not a big secret maybe. Trusting wikipedia for info on either might not be real wise, but...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freemasonry
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bohemian_Grove

Oh just the conspiracy part. Not to many of those kinds of nuts in this forum.