By: Marty Leipzig To: Freddie Cash Re: Creation 101 Freddie Cash, on the outs with Inner M
By: Marty Leipzig
To: Freddie Cash
Re: Creation 101
Freddie Cash, on the outs with Inner Mongolia, said to LARRY SITES,
LS>AK> Evolution cannot be proven scientifica
LS>AK> for one, it violates the First Two Laws of Science.
LS>So does an uncreated creator, preach.
LS>Nor for that matter can Creation be scientifically
LS>AK>proven. But I will show how creationism is far more believable from
LS>AK>the records we do have. Both tajke faith, but Creationsism not near
LS>What records? You have no records. You have no evidence. Evolution does.
LS>Since you have no evidence or records, you are left with faith based on the
LS>transmission of a religious superstition by a group of documented liars.
LS>Creationism is ONLY more believable because it takes less knowledge, ie
LS>more ignorance, not less faith. If you were to investigate the lying nature
LS>of your religious superstition, you would be forced to admit that it takes
LS>MORE faith to believe it in spite of the evidence against it than it does
LS>to believe the truth - your religion is bunk!
FC> Take a hard look at the Grand Canyon.
I am a petroleum geologist. I have, many times.
FC> try to explain that through
Evolution does not deal with sedimentology, stratigraphy nor
depositional environments. Immolate your strawmen elsewhere,
FC> How can a river erode sand and dirt and end up with
FC> vertical rocks,
The Paleozoic through Mesozoic section of the Grand Canyon
displays a gentle 5-6 degree southwestern dip, while striking
northwest-southeast. The Precambrian Vishnu schist, Brahma and
Zoroaster Granites are meta-igneous rocks and do not display
any sort of vertical attitude. The Precambrian Bass-Dox-Unkar
Grand Canyon Series group dip to the southeast at 30-35 degrees,
and are marked by a splendid example of an angular unconformity.
So, where's all these vertical rocks?
Or, are you referring to erosional structures as opposed to
Coherent rocks are cliff formers; fissile, easily eroded
formations form slopes.
You never have been there, have you?
FC> when rivers (water period) erodes in a V shape?
Look at a cross section of the canyon, you moron. It's a
You _never_ have been there, have you?
FC> Why is
FC> there such a large delta of sand/dirt and the end of the Grand Canyon
FC> if it was eroded over millions of years?
The Colorado River, which cut the canyon over a period of
perhaps 5 million years, has been so impacted by man (dams and
such) that the net transport mechanism of the river has been
reduced to near nil. Although the empoundments, such as Lake
Powell, are silting up rather nicely.
FC> Shouldn't there be no delta?
If you knew a single thing of geology and depositional
processes, you'd know the answer to this extremely simple
question. The answer is yes, there should be a delta as the
Colorado debouches into the Sea of Cortez (there is a
paleodelta, but it is palimpsest be the marine processes of the
SOC); but I explained the reason one does not exist immediately above.
FC> Why are there fossils that are younger near the top of the Canyon?
Gee, could it mean that the rocks at the base of the canyon are
There's an exquisite evolutionary sequence displayed in the
canyon from the Cambrian of the Toroweap to the Permian of the
Kiabab at the rim.
Just like evolution says there would be.
Ain't science grand? You should really try reading a science
text rather than that ICR crapola sometime. You'd be amazed.
FC> Why is it that they found a whale buried vertically in Australia (I
FC> think) with "millions" of years of sediment around it?
They did not, because it's all bullshit.
Cite the journal where this was reported and demonstrate my
error, if not.
FC> How does one go about FREQ'ing a file?
Click your heels together 3 times.
E-Mail Fredric L. Rice / The Skeptic Tank