Great Explanation of Global Flood Model
- Thread starter IceAgeCivilizations
- Start date
- Status
Just going for a little color, but the "aliens" who supposedly tell people of another way to eternal joy are liars.
What does an alien race have to do with the notion of the earth being millions of years old? What is the connection?
Aliens, by definition, are not from the earth, so how would their existence in any way reflect upon the earth's age?
I guess he's talking about sub-speed-of-light travel for them.
Have you actually read the thread? Particularly post No: 241.
The question is hypothetical anyway, I'm in no way suggesting that aliens actually exist.
However, what I had in mind was an extaterrestrial race that had actually taken the time to study the development of the Earth. By whatever means you deem necessary: Warp-drive, worm holes, or perhaps they just age physically slower than us, with individuals reaching many millions of our Earth years in age. Who knows? After all... it's only pretend!
This statement is technically incorrect IAC. The word sedimentary is derived from the word sediment, and sediment is defined on dictionary.com [from the American Heritage Science Dictionary] as:
"Geology: Solid fragmented material, such as silt, sand, gravel, chemical precipitates, and fossil fragments, that is transported and deposited by water, ice, or wind or that accumulates through chemical precipitation or secretion by organisms, and that forms layers on the Earth's surface. Sedimentary rocks consist of consolidated sediment."
For clarity I have placed the really crucial words; as pertaining to your statement, in bold.
Wind or ice deposited sediments are geomorphological features, surface, the geologic column is all water deposited sediments and volcanics.
That's a surface feature.
The Ice Age, when those were formed, came after the Deluge, where have you been?
Dreikanter are surface features, as you agreed.
Yes, so they appear IN your "water deposited" geologic column; quite regularly I might add, because they were "surface features". Surface features implies land. The presence of land implies that the genesis account is incorrect. The logic is inescapable.
Oh brother.
And volcanics.
Actually, only wind and ice caused features are on the surface, not in the geologic column, is that what you mean by "actually negative?"
Perhaps you had better elucidate as to exactly what you mean when you use the word "surface" IAC, and the phrase "geologic column" because I think there may be some confusion on your part regarding this.
"Wind and ice caused features" on the contrary definately do appear, quite prolifically in what I refer to as the geologic column.
"Wind and ice caused features" on the contrary definately do appear, quite prolifically in what I refer to as the geologic column.
- Status