From: Sarah Berel-Harrop (sec@hal-pc.org)
Date: Tue Sep 23 2003 - 13:31:10 EDT
On Tue, 23 Sep 2003 13:35:07 +0100
"Michael Roberts" <michael.andrea.r@ukonline.co.uk> wrote:
>Glenn, you forget that the Flood was a miracle and all these things
>are
>possible. This is further proof that you lost your faith!
>
>Oops, I am being flippant, but how do you deal in a reasonable way
>with
>nonsense?
>
>More seriously thew Coal Measures consist of a large number of
>cyclothems
>with alternate thick bands of sand and a band of coal from a few
>inches to
>yards.
>
>In the 70s Fred Broadhurst of Manchester tried to work out a time
>span for
>them and concluded that the coal took about 80.000 years and the sand
>could
>be deposited in a few short mini-floods each lasting a weekend.
I guess this is my question about the background argument recently
given. The "background" - meaning the earth, and changes in species
for that matter, does not appear to be static. What am I missing?
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Tue Sep 23 2003 - 13:31:21 EDT