Posted on 10/01/2002 8:32:43 AM PDT by SteveH
Prove the age---composition of the earth---no possible ties!
How and why mountains were formed---THE PROOF/prediction!
Geologic column---dating??From the evolution textbook...
Why does it look like it does(grand canyon)?
So I guess no low angle subduction causing isostatic uplift of the Colorado Plateau?
What if the sedimentary layers are thicker than the potential maximum height of the adjacent source area?Wouldn't that be called a butte!
WHAT? The point is, if you have a sedimentary basin with more sediments than the potential maximum height of the source land the the source land HAD to have underwent uplift.
but that doesn't mean below ground layering on plates---
and canyon cracks expansion/layering didn't happen either!
Few more minutes on the 'BIG' question/challenge---TEST!
Hope I don't disappoint you!
can prove/disprove the age of mountains and the Earth...
or at least my theory about them!
Below the ground...there is a plate---DETECTABLE
that matches the perimeter of every mountain---range...
proving the mountain/hills(appalachia types/large openings)...
were formed from beneath---via the plate openings...
and resulted in triangular pointing up extruded masses with plate parts/residue on top.
The tops of the mountain/plateaus/buttes would match the original opening/crack in the plates!
The bottoms of the mountain would match where the plates stopped...
probably still touching!
Raised valleys stuck between mountains would have natural filling and resevoirs below them holding/trapping---water/gas/oil...ect.
A valley would be a central plate floor caught/floating/lifted from the mountains rising...
much higher than submerged plates around the mountains perimeter!
and canyons(small openings)...inverted mountains---the same way!
I am not talking about Himalaya/rocky type mountains whose origins are different...
but this whole evolution idea of erosion---sedimentary levels is bogus!
Post cambrian levels can also be explained by volcanic and flood layering that doesn't take billions of years to complete!
There is a plate---
that matches the perimeter
that is detectable that matches the slopes of all these mountain/hills!
There are always exceptions to the overall theory but basically earth topography is pretty much redundant/same!
Valleys plate tops...mountains/hills/canyons plate openings!
when mountains/hills stop forming but---
the plates continue to settle-crash!
Those quotes all came after the discoveries of the Ediacaran fauna, long after. Therefore the effects of it on the theory of evolution had had plenty of time for researching if those discoveries solved the problem (for evolution) of the Cambrian explosion. They did not. Also the long passage at the start is quite recent, only a few years old and it shows again that the problems have not been solved.
As I stated a in my post, the problem of the Cambrian is insoluble for evolutionists. They cannot possibly show the descent of all those vastly different phyla from what came before. Worse of all, the Cambrian fauna appear fully formed. There is nothing like an intermediate to be found to anything that came before it. This is very strong proof against evolution. If that were not enough, there has not been a single new animal phyla that arose since the Cambrian. If evolution were to be true one would expect that in so many millions of years at least a few would have arisen.
Now it's time for the evolutionists here to show how this vast diversity arose from so little that preceded it, how the few predecessor species gradually transformed themselves into the vast multiplicity we see in the Cambrian. Evolutionists have been trying to do so for 150 years without success.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.