... on Presentation of my Inquest on Geological Column, with Tony Reed

1) Assorted retorts from yahoo boards and elsewhere : ... on Geological Column · 2) ... on Radiometric Dating · 3) Creation vs. Evolution : Guy Berthault's Results May Not Prove the Flood Factual, They Prove it Possible · 4) back to Assorted retorts from yahoo boards and elsewhere : ... on Radiometric Dating with Tony Reed · 5) ... on Presentation of my Inquest on Geological Column, with Tony Reed

Hans-Georg Lundahl

Geological column?

You might enjoy this:

Creation vs. Evolution : Archaeology vs Vertabrate Palaeontology in Geology
http://creavsevolu.blogspot.com/2016/06/archaeology-vs-vertabrate-palaeontology.html

Tony Reed

What was I supposed to enjoy?

Hans-Georg Lundahl

My series of a kind of inquest into the geological column.

Tony Reed

Your scholarship is lacking. Your inquest seems to ignore observed geological forces and their effects on how topography changes exposing subterranean layers.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

My inquest is about "geological column", but it is not about its GEOLOGICAL aspect (which I come seriously too only with your videos), but its PALAEONTOLOGICAL ones.

I would very much have liked to call it "palaeontological column", but the usual name is "geological column".

That doesn't mean every inquest in it has to be geological, mine is palaeontological.

Tony Reed

+Hans-Georg Lundahl
Sorry buddy.
Geology is a factor whether you like it or not.
For your model to be viable, you must allow for it.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

I am not disallowing geology.

I am just using another angle.

Perfectly licit.

Next trick from your hat?

Tony Reed

Take whatever angle you want. You are still discounting geological effects.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

I am not "discounting" them, I was in that series just not counting them.

Discounting would mean it depends on counting geological effects as not having happened, which I did not do.

Tony Reed

Yes you are.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

Nope, I referred to someone else for explaining them.