RE: Religion and Science are 1000% Opposite
October 19, 2017 at 12:56 pm
(This post was last modified: October 19, 2017 at 12:59 pm by Huggy Bear.)
(October 19, 2017 at 12:34 pm)Fake Messiah Wrote:*emphasis mine*(October 19, 2017 at 10:41 am)Huggy74 Wrote: How do you reconcile the above quote with this
http://www.nytimes.com/1987/03/12/us/wha...m-sea.html
And this
The Andes have been a mountain chain for much longer than previously thought, new research from the University of Bristol, UK suggests.
What? Huggy are you telling me that flood happened tens of millions years ago?
Considering your article(s) I don't see the problem. You quoted only parts of articles and I presume you try to say that sea animals died on Andes that were already high mountains, but the articles do explain themselves you should just read more:
"Among the fossils the scientists reported bringing back were the bones of whales and other marine animals found at altitudes of more than 5,000 feet. When these animals died from 15 million to 20 million years ago, their carcasses settled to the ocean floor and were embedded in submarine sediments. But since then, the violent upthrusting of the Andean chain has carried the sediments to the tops of mountains. In geological terms, the time the fossils took to rise from ocean floor to mountain top was relatively brief."
So there you go. In other article you show how some scientist said that Andes where full length 14 million years ago: so let's say they died 20 million years ago and then next 6 million years ago "the violent upthrusting of the Andean chain has carried the sediments to the tops of mountains". What's the problem? Andes are very volcanic so they did grow relatively fast, but still millions of years.
The "violent upthrusting" of the Andes in the first article was clearly posited to reconcile with whale fossils being found on these mountains.
"Hey these whale fossils on top of these mountains must mean that the mountains rose up from the sea floor really really fast..."
How is that science?
Not to mention the second article debunks the idea that the mountains rose quickly at all, never mind the fact that the article states that they were the same height 14 million years ago that they are at presently. Did they stop growing all of the sudden 14 million years ago?
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/20...131817.htm
Quote:Dr Evenstar said: "It seems highly likely that the Andes have gone up slowly over at least the last 30 million years, and are the result of gradual thickening of the crust.