Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Surtsey still surprises (land features thought to take millions of years form in less than a decade)
Journal of Creation ^ | David Catchpoole, P.hD.

Posted on 02/16/2009 9:40:48 AM PST by GodGunsGuts

Surtsey still surprises

by David Catchpoole

After the island of Surtsey was born of a huge undersea volcanic eruption off Iceland in 1963,1 geologists were astonished at what they found.

As one wrote: ‘On Surtsey, only a few months sufficed for a landscape to be created which was so varied and mature that it was almost beyond belief.’2

There were wide sandy beaches, gravel banks, impressive cliffs, soft undulating land, faultscarps, gullies and channels and ‘boulders worn by the surf (see picture left), some of which were almost round, on an abrasion platform cut into the cliff.’2 And all of this despite the ‘extreme youth’3 of the island!

The geologists’ surprise is understandable, given the modern thinking that young Surtsey’s ‘varied and mature’ features ought to have needed long periods of time—millions of years—to form....

(Excerpt) Read more at creationontheweb.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; News/Current Events; Philosophy
KEYWORDS: creation; evolution; intelligentdesign; surtsey
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140 ... 261-272 next last
To: tpanther

What “ilk” would that be?


101 posted on 02/16/2009 4:54:24 PM PST by Buck W. (BHO: Selling hope, keeping the change.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 98 | View Replies]

To: Titus Quinctius Cincinnatus
As one wrote: ‘On Surtsey, only a few months sufficed for a landscape to be created which was so varied and mature that it was almost beyond belief.

From the article:

"As one wrote: ‘On Surtsey, only a few months sufficed for a landscape to be created which was so varied and mature that it was almost beyond belief."


102 posted on 02/16/2009 4:57:07 PM PST by ColdWater
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts
Uniformitarian buster ping!

Now all we need is for people to realize that one anecdotal example of a prediction not following a theory makes every assumption the theory was base on wrong, and everything else the thoery predicts equally wrong.

103 posted on 02/16/2009 5:34:44 PM PST by tacticalogic ("Oh bother!" said Pooh, as he chambered his last round.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Secret Agent Man
Evidence that Noah's ark was also a car ferry. From Mt. St. Helens.


104 posted on 02/16/2009 5:36:13 PM PST by ColdWater
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: tpanther

I’ve noticed that.


105 posted on 02/16/2009 5:58:15 PM PST by count-your-change (You don't have be brilliant, not being stupid is enough.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 85 | View Replies]

To: ColdWater

Wow are you a total idiot. You deny what happened right in front of scientists’ eyes because it messes up your millions of years theory.


106 posted on 02/16/2009 6:09:20 PM PST by Secret Agent Man (I'd like to tell you, but then I'd have to kill you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 104 | View Replies]

To: Buck W.

Dude- there is no ‘althernative explanation’ to what I psoted- they are verifiable facts


107 posted on 02/16/2009 6:21:08 PM PST by CottShop (Scientific belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 96 | View Replies]

To: CottShop

You’re ignoring the operative part of my post (which includes your excerpt):

“Unfortunately, all of those cases are one-offs. They do not represent or support a consistent position or process. They are individually selected by YECs to throw stones at more rigorous science.

Together, they’re just a group of curious natural occurrences, many of which have alternative explanations. There is no cohesive story that they tell collectively.”

Okay, um, Dude?


108 posted on 02/16/2009 6:31:43 PM PST by Buck W. (BHO: Selling hope, keeping the change.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 107 | View Replies]

To: Secret Agent Man
Wow are you a total idiot.

I see that your hormones got the better of you thus ending any possibility of future reasonable conversation.

109 posted on 02/16/2009 6:32:07 PM PST by ColdWater
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 106 | View Replies]

To: Buck W.

There’s no ‘special’ case here. Its exactly the same conditions in microcosm of the Genesis judgement, and is a solid proof of basic ‘flood’ geology. - I know that you don’t like it, but it fits like a glove.


110 posted on 02/16/2009 6:34:41 PM PST by editor-surveyor (The beginning of the O'Bummer administration looks a lot like the end of the Nixon administration)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies]

To: Secret Agent Man
Mutation shows link between Cats and Birds. /s


111 posted on 02/16/2009 6:38:56 PM PST by ColdWater
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 106 | View Replies]

To: editor-surveyor
and is a solid proof of basic ‘flood’ geology. - I know that you don’t like it, but it fits like a glove.

O.J.'s glove?

112 posted on 02/16/2009 6:39:42 PM PST by ColdWater
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 110 | View Replies]

To: editor-surveyor

No meteor, just the Genesis judgement that severed Pangea into the present continents.


It moved the continents in about a year if I remember right. Can you explain how the oceans didn’t boil away from the released energy of moving that much tectonic plate that far in such a short time or the colossal vulcanism that would accompany such an event or how the birds managed to survive in such an environment, let alone Noah and his ship.

Any creationists done any research on this or did they just fall back on the old supernatural, ‘God did it’ routine?


113 posted on 02/16/2009 6:39:46 PM PST by Natufian (The mesolithic wasn't so bad, was it?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: editor-surveyor

Please keep posting—you’re making my point for me. Surtsey IS a special case in itself. One cannot generalize Surtsey’s conditions and origin to the entire earth/universe. There are far too many differences in the geologies of Surtsey and Alberta or India.


114 posted on 02/16/2009 6:45:00 PM PST by Buck W. (BHO: Selling hope, keeping the change.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 110 | View Replies]

To: Natufian
Can you explain how the oceans didn’t boil away from the released energy of moving that much tectonic plate that far in such a short time or the colossal vulcanism that would accompany such an event or how the birds managed to survive in such an environment, let alone Noah and his ship.

Not to mention what it would do to earth's rotation and orbits of the earth and moon.

115 posted on 02/16/2009 6:45:15 PM PST by ColdWater
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 113 | View Replies]

To: editor-surveyor
I know that you don’t like it, but it fits like a glove.

New phrase for a YEC'er. Which site did you get that one from?

116 posted on 02/16/2009 6:46:32 PM PST by ColdWater
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 110 | View Replies]

To: Buck W.

Dude- there is no ‘althernative explanation’ to what I psoted- they are verifiable facts- Facts are facts- AND they DO represent a consistent position or process- you just refuse to accept it and wave it away- many of your preferred ‘old earth’ evidneces have ‘other explanations’ as well- does that mean they are wrong? Does that invalidate them? Does it mean the old earth position is ‘inconsistent’?

Think what ya want- but don;’t pretend to be objective when you clearly are not.


117 posted on 02/16/2009 6:47:05 PM PST by CottShop (Scientific belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 108 | View Replies]

To: CottShop

“Dude- there is no ‘althernative explanation’ to what I psoted- they are verifiable facts- Facts are facts...Think what ya want- but don;’t pretend to be objective when you clearly are not.”

I’m not the one citing creationism sites, Dude!


118 posted on 02/16/2009 6:49:44 PM PST by Buck W. (BHO: Selling hope, keeping the change.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 117 | View Replies]

To: CottShop

Think what ya want- but don;’t pretend to be objective when you clearly are not.


119 posted on 02/16/2009 6:50:31 PM PST by ColdWater
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 117 | View Replies]

To: Buck W.

Dude! UI’m not ‘citing creationist sites’ I’m citing FACTS from creationist sites which you conveniently dismiss- Again- beleive what you want, but don’t pretend to be objective when you dismiss FACTS in such a manner


120 posted on 02/16/2009 6:51:22 PM PST by CottShop (Scientific belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 118 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140 ... 261-272 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson