Difference between revisions of "Geologic Column"
m (1 revision) |
(username removed) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
=Geologic Column= | =Geologic Column= | ||
| − | {{ | + | {{5) In many places, the oceanic sediment of which mountains were composed, has nd to be inverted - ie. older sediment lying on top of younger sediment. This sort of anomaly is common in many sites around the world and is usually recorded in literature in inconspicuous places. William R. Corliss, |
| − | |||
| − | + | "Remarkable Unconformities, Unknown Earth: A handbook of Geologic Enigmas", The Sourcebook Project: Glen Arm, Maryland, 1980; & "Strange Planet: A Sourcebook of Unusual Geological Facts", Vol. E-1, The Sourcebook Project: Glen Arm, Maryland, 1975 p:177-184; Science News, Vol. 98, No. | |
| − | + | 16, October 1970 p:316; | |
| − | + | (6) "The great differences in the estimates of maximum thickness of many of the systems [geologic periods] manifestly indicate that thicknesses are unreliable measures of geologic time. As long ago as 1936 the conclusion had already been reached by Twenhofel that estimates of time based on thickness of strata 'are hardly worth the paper they are written on' ..... rocks generally give no internal evidence of the rate at which they were formed." Written by J.F. White in "Study of the Earth", Prentice-Hall: New Jersey, 1962 p:46 | |
| − | + | (7) "I wonder how many of us realize that the [geologic] time scale was frozen in essentially its present form by 1840 .....? How much world geology was known by 1840? A bit of western Europe, none too well, and a lesser fringe of North American. All of Asia, Africa, South America, and most of North America were virtually unknown. How dared the pioneers [of this theory] assume that their scale would fit the rocks in these vast areas, by far most of the world? Only in dogmatic assumption - a mere extension of the kind of reasoning developed by Werner from the facts in his little district of Saxony. | |
| − | + | And in many parts of the world, notably India and South America, it does not fit. But even there it is applied! The followers of the founding fathers [of evolution] went forth across the earth and in Procrustean fashion made it fit the sections they found, even in places where the actual evidence literally proclaimed denial. So flexible and accommodating are the 'facts' of geology." Written by the eminent evolutionist Edmund Spieker in an attempt to set the record straight that there isn't strong global evidence for the evolutionary time-scale. In his article | |
| − | + | "Mountain-Building and the Nature of Geologic Time-Scale", in the Bulletin of the American Association of Petroleum Geologists, Vol. 40, August 1956 | |
| − | + | p:1803 | |
| − | + | (8) "And this poses something of a problem: If we date the rocks by their fossils, how can we then turn around and talk about patterns of evolutionary change through time in the fossil record?" Written by evolutionist and palaeontologist Niles Eldredge (American Museum of Natural History, New York) in his book "Time Frames: The Rethinking of Darwinian Evolution and the Theory of Punctuated Equilibria", Simon & Schuster: New York, 1985 p:52. Paul S. Taylor, "The Illustrated Origins Answer Book" (4th. ed.) Eden Publications: Mesa (Arizona), 1992 p:102 | |
| − | + | (9) "The procession of life was never witnessed, it is inferred. The vertical sequences of fossils is thought to represent a process because the enclosing rocks are interpreted as a process." Written by J.E. | |
| − | + | O'Rourke in the article "Pragmatism Verses Materialism in Stratigraphy" in American Journal of Science, Vol. 276, January, 1976 p:53 | |
| − | + | (10) "If you ask, "What is the evidence for continuity?" you would have to say, "There isn't any in the fossils of animals and man. The connection between them is in the mind"." A statement by the palaeoanthropologist Dr Colin Patterson and recorded by Luther Sunderland in his book "Darwin's Enigma", Master Books: El Cajon (California), 1988 p: p:90 | |
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
[[Category:Umasking Evolution]] | [[Category:Umasking Evolution]] | ||
Revision as of 11:49, 24 May 2014
Geologic Column
{{5) In many places, the oceanic sediment of which mountains were composed, has nd to be inverted - ie. older sediment lying on top of younger sediment. This sort of anomaly is common in many sites around the world and is usually recorded in literature in inconspicuous places. William R. Corliss,
"Remarkable Unconformities, Unknown Earth: A handbook of Geologic Enigmas", The Sourcebook Project: Glen Arm, Maryland, 1980; & "Strange Planet: A Sourcebook of Unusual Geological Facts", Vol. E-1, The Sourcebook Project: Glen Arm, Maryland, 1975 p:177-184; Science News, Vol. 98, No.
16, October 1970 p:316;
(6) "The great differences in the estimates of maximum thickness of many of the systems [geologic periods] manifestly indicate that thicknesses are unreliable measures of geologic time. As long ago as 1936 the conclusion had already been reached by Twenhofel that estimates of time based on thickness of strata 'are hardly worth the paper they are written on' ..... rocks generally give no internal evidence of the rate at which they were formed." Written by J.F. White in "Study of the Earth", Prentice-Hall: New Jersey, 1962 p:46
(7) "I wonder how many of us realize that the [geologic] time scale was frozen in essentially its present form by 1840 .....? How much world geology was known by 1840? A bit of western Europe, none too well, and a lesser fringe of North American. All of Asia, Africa, South America, and most of North America were virtually unknown. How dared the pioneers [of this theory] assume that their scale would fit the rocks in these vast areas, by far most of the world? Only in dogmatic assumption - a mere extension of the kind of reasoning developed by Werner from the facts in his little district of Saxony.
And in many parts of the world, notably India and South America, it does not fit. But even there it is applied! The followers of the founding fathers [of evolution] went forth across the earth and in Procrustean fashion made it fit the sections they found, even in places where the actual evidence literally proclaimed denial. So flexible and accommodating are the 'facts' of geology." Written by the eminent evolutionist Edmund Spieker in an attempt to set the record straight that there isn't strong global evidence for the evolutionary time-scale. In his article
"Mountain-Building and the Nature of Geologic Time-Scale", in the Bulletin of the American Association of Petroleum Geologists, Vol. 40, August 1956
p:1803
(8) "And this poses something of a problem: If we date the rocks by their fossils, how can we then turn around and talk about patterns of evolutionary change through time in the fossil record?" Written by evolutionist and palaeontologist Niles Eldredge (American Museum of Natural History, New York) in his book "Time Frames: The Rethinking of Darwinian Evolution and the Theory of Punctuated Equilibria", Simon & Schuster: New York, 1985 p:52. Paul S. Taylor, "The Illustrated Origins Answer Book" (4th. ed.) Eden Publications: Mesa (Arizona), 1992 p:102
(9) "The procession of life was never witnessed, it is inferred. The vertical sequences of fossils is thought to represent a process because the enclosing rocks are interpreted as a process." Written by J.E.
O'Rourke in the article "Pragmatism Verses Materialism in Stratigraphy" in American Journal of Science, Vol. 276, January, 1976 p:53
(10) "If you ask, "What is the evidence for continuity?" you would have to say, "There isn't any in the fossils of animals and man. The connection between them is in the mind"." A statement by the palaeoanthropologist Dr Colin Patterson and recorded by Luther Sunderland in his book "Darwin's Enigma", Master Books: El Cajon (California), 1988 p: p:90