... and a bird on the butt. I found one of Ramey's oxen over at Willow Farm in town. What with the Ramey pastures wrecked and the fences torn out, I guess the stock just wandered; it was pretty slim pickens as it is here. This guy looks pretty gaunt and the crow keeps pecking away and won't leave him alone. Not a lot of nutrients in a snow-white pasture. This appears to be one of those yellowish-colored oxen of the Lexan breed and is therefore questionable as a draft animal. And I was not the culprit who poked the ox-en the eye so it is non-mea culpa. Not me!

 

I grabbed more winter shots down at Willow Farm. I hauled my D700 back down even though the sky was fairly blank. I therefore had no choice but to point the camera downward for captures and keep the sky from the shots. I have walked by this fellow before but the snow really popped it out and forced me to notice him! I fiddled until I got this all in white space and included some shadow. I got several NORMAL shots of the ditch area (they call it Willow Brook) but I call it a ditch. It's not much of one either. It's more than enough to water lexan oxen. I suppose that a bareback ride on this critter could be pretty painful. I can't figure why anyone would cut a ditch this darn squirrely. When I first saw it, It was nearly impossible to follow the reasoning for this ditch but it does seem that the floods scoured this ditch only slightly. I think I noticed the colors of the reflections and contrasts and decided to take advantage. They seemed to oversaturate in this case but that's about everything posted on Flickr. I hauled the saturations back on this shot and I think that I may have struck reality. The water course was a bit torn up but there must have been no serious flooding here.

 

We hit February and the chills came through. I've got a lot of captures in the temp directory but it's time for the new. I decided to try out my butchered pinhole Nikkor on the D700 to see if I could expand my experience.

 

I found Willow Farm on Google maps when searching for a barn I glimpsed and made some trips down there and added some more weird captures to temp stash. This is a pinhole view of Willow Creek, another ditch, IMHO.

 

Here is a fairly slow tripod exposure but I will have to calculate the actual f:/stop (posted below). I already posted other shots that were "action" shots and they were the better shots. I burned up the Christmas lights this season but i secured a variable ND filter. I can in NO WAY endorse one of them. I grabbed a couple of slices in Lightroom and dropped them into Photoshop to see what might appear.

  

Rear view of this ex London solo. Note the led lights on the rear which normally indicate the vehicle is the MAN engined variation. Not had a look behind the engine door but I'm sure this is a Mercedes engine inside this batch. My reasoning for this is the sound and.......the classic merc shudder when in gear!

I kicked you out of my life seven years ago

 

I kicked you out and you’re coming back NO MORE

 

I kicked you out because there was no reasoning with you

 

You thought you could just walk into my life

 

And do what ever the heck you wanted to

 

You thought that when you scared me

 

I’d be too paralyzed by fear to react

 

You thought that I would cower in a corner

 

But you thought wrong and that’s a fact

 

You thought your nasty stinking ways would always intimidate me

 

You thought that you could rule my life with fear indefinitely

 

You really thought you were “the man” cancer

 

You thought Good Health could never replace you

 

But you were very wrong… I showed you a thing or two

 

You had this personality that was bigger than life

 

You used tactics and aggression to create so much strife

 

You used your influence and your power to aggressively pursue me

 

You did every thing you could to try to immobilize me

 

You tried to captivate my mind; you wanted control of me

 

Whispering horrible lies in my ears trying to persuade me

 

That I could not escape you- that there was nothing I could do

 

But remain your prisoner and always be a part of you

 

But again you were wrong cancer

 

You were also not too bright

 

When my back is up against the wall

 

Fool, I throw my fist up and fight

 

Might and size…they no longer mattered

 

We had a hell of a fight that left me bruised and battered

 

But for you there was no rejoicing because I kicked your ass

 

You tried to spread your terror but it didn’t last

 

You didn’t get too far with your bulldozer agenda

 

I really messed you up some, didn’t I cancer

 

You threw a tantrum and I threw a fit

 

Because the truth is breast cancer-

 

I wasn’t about to put up with your shit

 

I am Sista Wizdom …

 

Sista with an “A” and Wizdom with a “Z”

 

And don’t you ever forget my name

 

I kicked your ass breast cancer

 

And my life will never be the same

 

Now, I’m a Warrior… a Soldier… a Fighter

 

A breast cancer Survivor

 

And cancer I want you to always remember

 

The whooping you got from this sista

 

Yes, cancer always remember -

 

The kick-ass you got from this Trini- Sista ~ Pamela Deleon Lewis

Rapid strata formation in soft sand (field evidence).

Photo of strata formation in soft sand on a beach, created by tidal action of the sea.

Formed in a single, high tidal event. Stunning evidence which displays multiple strata/layers.

 

Why this is so important ....

It has long been assumed, ever since the 17th century, that layers/strata observed in sedimentary rocks were built up gradually, layer upon layer, over many years. It certainly seemed logical at the time, from just looking at rocks, that lower layers would always be older than the layers above them, i.e. that lower layers were always laid down first followed, in time, by successive layers on top.

This was assumed to be true and became known as the superposition principle.

It was also assumed that a layer comprising a different material from a previous layer, represented a change in environmental conditions/factors.

These changes in composition of layers or strata were considered to represent different, geological eras on a global scale, spanning millions of years. This formed the basis for the Geologic Column, which is used to date rocks and also fossils. The evolutionary, 'fossil record' was based on the vast ages and assumed geological eras of the Geologic Column.

There was also circular reasoning applied with the assumed age of 'index' fossils (based on evolutionary beliefs & preconceptions) used to date strata in the Geologic Column. Dating strata from the assumed age of (index) fossils is known as Biostratigraphy.

We now know that, although these assumptions seemed logical, they are not supported by the evidence.

At the time, the mechanics of stratification were not properly known or studied.

 

An additional factor was that this assumed superposition and uniformitarian model became essential, with the wide acceptance of Darwinism, for the long ages required for progressive microbes-to-human evolution. There was no incentive to question or challenge the superposition, uniformitarian model, because the presumed, fossil 'record' had become dependant on it, and any change in the accepted model would present devastating implications for Darwinism.

This had the unfortunate effect of linking the study of geology so closely to Darwinism, that any study independent of Darwinian considerations was effectively stymied. This link of geology with Darwinian preconceptions is known as biostratigraphy.

 

Some other field evidence, in various situations, can be observed here: www.flickr.com/photos/101536517@N06/sets/72157635944904973/

and also in the links to stunning, experimental evidence, carried out by sedimentologists, given later.

_______________________________________________

GEOLOGIC PRINCIPLES (established by Nicholas Steno in the 17th Century):

What Nicolas Steno believed about strata formation is the basis of the principle of Superposition and the principle of Original Horizontality.

dictionary.sensagent.com/Law_of_superposition/en-en/

“Assuming that all rocks and minerals had once been fluid, Nicolas Steno reasoned that rock strata were formed when particles in a fluid such as water fell to the bottom. This process would leave horizontal layers. Thus Steno's principle of original horizontality states that rock layers form in the horizontal position, and any deviations from this horizontal position are due to the rocks being disturbed later.”)

BEDDING PLANES.

'Bedding plane' describes the surface in between each stratum which are formed during sediment deposition.

science.jrank.org/pages/6533/Strata.html

“Strata form during sediment deposition, that is, the laying down of sediment. Meanwhile, if a change in current speed or sediment grain size occurs or perhaps the sediment supply is cut off, a bedding plane forms. Bedding planes are surfaces that separate one stratum from another. Bedding planes can also form when the upper part of a sediment layer is eroded away before the next episode of deposition. Strata separated by a bedding plane may have different grain sizes, grain compositions, or colours. Sometimes these other traits are better indicators of stratification as bedding planes may be very subtle.”

______________________________________________

  

Several catastrophic events, flash floods, volcanic eruptions etc. have forced Darwinian, influenced geologists to admit to rapid stratification in some instances. However they claim it is a rare phenomenon, which they have known about for many years, and which does nothing to invalidate the Geologic Column, the fossil record, evolutionary timescale, or any of the old assumptions regarding strata formation, sedimentation and the superposition principle. They fail to face up to the fact that rapid stratification is not an extraordinary phenonemon, but rather the prevailing and normal mechanism of sedimentary deposition whenever and wherever there is moving, sediment-laden water. The experimental evidence demonstrates the mechanism and a mass of field evidence in normal (non-catastrophic) conditions shows it is a normal everyday occurrence.

It is clear from the experimental evidence that the usual process of stratification is - that strata are not formed by horizontal layers being laid on top of each other in succession, as was assumed. But by sediment being sorted in the flowing water and laid down diagonally in the direction of flow. See diagram:

www.flickr.com/photos/truth-in-science/39821536092/in/dat...

 

The field evidence (in the image) presented here - of rapid, simultaneous stratification refutes the Superposition Principle and the Principle of Lateral Continuity.

 

We now know, the Superposition Principle only applies on a rare occasion where sedimentary deposits are laid down in still water.

Superposition is required for the long evolutionary timescale, but the evidence shows it is not the general rule, as was once believed. Most sediment is laid down in moving water, where particle segregation is the general rule, resulting in the simultaneous deposition of strata/layers as shown in the photo.

 

See many other examples of rapid stratification (with geological features): www.flickr.com/photos/101536517@N06/sets/72157635944904973/

 

Rapid, simultaneous formation of layers/strata, through particle segregation in moving water, is so easily created it has even been described by sedimentologists (working on flume experiments) as a law ...

"Upon filling the tank with water and pouring in sediments, we immediately saw what was to become the rule: The sediments sorted themselves out in very clear layers. This became so common that by the end of two weeks, we jokingly referred to Andrew's law as "It's difficult not to make layers," and Clark's law as "It's easy to make layers." Later on, I proposed the "law" that liquefaction destroys layers, as much to my surprise as that was." Ian Juby, www.ianjuby.org/sedimentation/

 

The example in the photo is the result of normal, everyday tidal action formed in a single incident, and subsequently eroded by water flow revealing the strata/layers.

Where the water current or movement is more turbulent, violent, or catastrophic, great depths (many metres) of stratified sediment can be laid down in a short time. Certainly not the many millions of years assumed by evolutionists.

 

The composition of strata formed in any deposition event. is related to whatever materials are in the sediment mix, not to any particular timescale. Whatever is in the mix will be automatically sorted into strata/layers. It could be sand, or other material added from mud slides, erosion of chalk deposits, coastal erosion, volcanic ash etc. Any organic material (potential fossils), alive or dead, engulfed by, or swept into, a turbulent sediment mix, will also be sorted and buried within the rapidly, forming layers.

 

See many other examples of rapid stratification with geological features: www.flickr.com/photos/101536517@N06/sets/72157635944904973/

 

Stratified, soft sand deposit. demonstrates the rapid, stratification principle.

Important, field evidence which supports the work of the eminent, sedimentologist Dr Guy Berthault MIAS - Member of the International Association of Sedimentologists.

(Dr Berthault's experiments (www.sedimentology.fr/)

And also the experimental work of Dr M.E. Clark (Professor Emeritus, U of Illinois @ Urbana), Andrew Rodenbeck and Dr. Henry Voss, (www.ianjuby.org/sedimentation/)

 

Location: Yaverland, Isle of Wight. Photographed 17/11/2018 This field evidence demonstrates that multiple strata in sedimentary deposits do not need millions of years to form and can be formed rapidly. This natural example confirms the principle demonstrated by the sedimentation experiments carried out by Dr Guy Berthault and other sedimentologists. It calls into question the standard, multi-million year dating of sedimentary rocks, and the dating of fossils by depth of burial or position in the strata.

Mulltiple strata/layers are evident in this example.

 

Dr Berthault's experiments (www.sedimentology.fr/) and other experiments (www.ianjuby.org/sedimentation/) and field studies of floods and volcanic action show that, rather than being formed by gradual, slow deposition of sucessive layers superimposed upon previous layers, with the strata or layers representing a particular timescale, particle segregation in moving water or airborne particles can form strata or layers very quickly, frequently, in a single event.

youtu.be/wFST2C32hMQ

youtu.be/SE8NtWvNBKI

And, most importantly, lower strata are not older than upper strata, they are the same age, having been created in the same sedimentary episode.

Such field studies confirm experiments which have shown that there is no longer any reason to conclude that strata/layers in sedimentary rocks relate to different geological eras and/or a multi-million year timescale. www.youtube.com/watch?v=5PVnBaqqQw8&feature=share&amp.... they also show that the relative position of fossils in rocks is not indicative of an order of evolutionary succession. Obviously, the uniformitarian principle, on which the geologic column is based, can no longer be considered valid. And the multi-million, year dating of sedimentary rocks and fossils needs to be reassessed. Rapid deposition of stratified sediments also explains the enigma of polystrate fossils, i.e. large fossils that intersect several strata. In some cases, tree trunk fossils are found which intersect the strata of sedimentary rock up to forty feet in depth. upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/08/Lycopsi... They must have been buried in stratified sediment in a short time (certainly not millions, thousands, or even hundreds of years), or they would have rotted away. youtu.be/vnzHU9VsliQ

 

In fact, the vast majority of fossils are found in good, intact condition, which is testament to their rapid burial. You don't get good fossils from gradual burial, because they would be damaged or destroyed by decay, predation or erosion. The existence of so many fossils in sedimentary rock on a global scale is stunning evidence for the rapid depostion of sedimentary rock as the general rule. It is obvious that all rock containing good intact fossils was formed from sediment laid down in a very short time, not millions, or even thousands of years.

 

See set of photos of other examples of rapid stratification: www.flickr.com/photos/101536517@N06/sets/72157635944904973/

 

Carbon dating of coal should not be possible if it is millions of years old, yet significant amounts of Carbon 14 have been detected in coal and other fossil material, which indicates that it is less than 50,000 years old. www.ldolphin.org/sewell/c14dating.html

 

www.grisda.org/origins/51006.htm

 

Evolutionists confidently cite multi-million year ages for rocks and fossils, but what most people don't realise is that no one actually knows the age of sedimentary rocks or the fossils found within them. So how are evolutionists so sure of the ages they so confidently quote? The astonishing thing is they aren't. Sedimentary rocks cannot be dated by radiometric methods*, and fossils can only be dated to less than 50,000 years with Carbon 14 dating. The method evolutionists use is based entirely on assumptions. Unbelievably, fossils are dated by the assumed age of rocks, and rocks are dated by the assumed age of fossils, that's right ... it is known as circular reasoning.

 

* Regarding the radiometric dating of igneous rocks, which is claimed to be relevant to the dating of sedimentary rocks, in an occasional instance there is an igneous intrusion associated with a sedimentary deposit -

Prof. Aubouin says in his Précis de Géologie: "Each radioactive element disintegrates in a characteristic and constant manner, which depends neither on the physical state (no variation with pressure or temperature or any other external constraint) nor on the chemical state (identical for an oxide or a phosphate)."

"Rocks form when magma crystallizes. Crystallisation depends on pressure and temperature, from which radioactivity is independent. So, there is no relationship between radioactivity and crystallisation.

Consequently, radioactivity doesn't date the formation of rocks. Moreover, daughter elements contained in rocks result mainly from radioactivity in magma where gravity separates the heavier parent element, from the lighter daughter element. Thus radiometric dating has no chronological signification." Dr. Guy Berthault www.sciencevsevolution.org/Berthault.htm

 

Rapid strata formation and rapid erosion at Mount St Helens.

slideplayer.com/slide/5703217/18/images/28/Rapid+Strata+F...

 

Visit the fossil museum:

www.flickr.com/photos/101536517@N06/sets/72157641367196613/

 

Just how good are peer reviews of scientific papers?

www.sciencemag.org/content/342/6154/60.full

www.examiner.com/article/want-to-publish-science-paper-ju...

 

The neo-Darwinian idea that the human genome consists entirely of an accumulation of billions of mutations is, quite obviously, completely bonkers. Nevertheless, it is compulsorily taught in schools and universities as 'science'.

www.flickr.com/photos/truth-in-science/35505679183

Rapid strata formation in soft sand (field evidence).

Photo of strata formation in soft sand on a beach, created by tidal action of the sea.

Formed in a single, high tidal event. Stunning evidence which displays multiple strata/layers.

 

Why this is so important ....

It has long been assumed, ever since the 17th century, that layers/strata observed in sedimentary rocks were built up gradually, layer upon layer, over many years. It certainly seemed logical at the time, from just looking at rocks, that lower layers would always be older than the layers above them, i.e. that lower layers were always laid down first followed, in time, by successive layers on top.

This was assumed to be true and became known as the superposition principle.

It was also assumed that a layer comprising a different material from a previous layer, represented a change in environmental conditions/factors.

These changes in composition of layers or strata were considered to represent different, geological eras on a global scale, spanning millions of years. This formed the basis for the Geologic Column, which is used to date rocks and also fossils. The evolutionary, 'fossil record' was based on the vast ages and assumed geological eras of the Geologic Column.

There was also circular reasoning applied with the assumed age of 'index' fossils (based on evolutionary preconceptions) used to date strata in the Geologic Column.

We now know that, although these assumptions seemed logical, they are not supported by the evidence.

At the time, the mechanics of stratification were not properly known or studied.

 

An additional factor was that this assumed superposition and uniformitarian model became essential, with the wide acceptance of Darwinism, for the long ages required for progressive microbes-to-human evolution. There was no incentive to question or challenge the superposition, uniformitarian model, because the presumed, fossil 'record' had become dependant on it, and any change in the accepted model would present devastating implications for Darwinism.

This had the unfortunate effect of linking the study of geology so closely to Darwinism, that any study independent of Darwinian considerations was effectively stymied. This link of geology with Darwinian preconceptions is known as biostratigraphy.

 

Some of the wealth of evidence can be observed here: www.flickr.com/photos/101536517@N06/sets/72157635944904973/

and also in the links to stunning, experimental evidence, carried out by sedimentologists, given later.

_______________________________________________

GEOLOGIC PRINCIPLES (established by Nicholas Steno in the 17th Century):

What Nicolas Steno believed about strata formation is the basis of the principle of Superposition and the principle of Original Horizontality.

dictionary.sensagent.com/Law_of_superposition/en-en/

“Assuming that all rocks and minerals had once been fluid, Nicolas Steno reasoned that rock strata were formed when particles in a fluid such as water fell to the bottom. This process would leave horizontal layers. Thus Steno's principle of original horizontality states that rock layers form in the horizontal position, and any deviations from this horizontal position are due to the rocks being disturbed later.”)

BEDDING PLANES.

'Bedding plane' describes the surface in between each stratum which are formed during sediment deposition.

science.jrank.org/pages/6533/Strata.html

“Strata form during sediment deposition, that is, the laying down of sediment. Meanwhile, if a change in current speed or sediment grain size occurs or perhaps the sediment supply is cut off, a bedding plane forms. Bedding planes are surfaces that separate one stratum from another. Bedding planes can also form when the upper part of a sediment layer is eroded away before the next episode of deposition. Strata separated by a bedding plane may have different grain sizes, grain compositions, or colours. Sometimes these other traits are better indicators of stratification as bedding planes may be very subtle.”

______________________________________________

 

Several catastrophic events, flash floods, volcanic eruptions etc. have forced Darwinian influenced geologists to admit to rapid stratification in some instances. However they claim it is a rare phenomenon, which they known about for many years, and which does nothing to invalidate the Geologic Column, the fossil record, evotuionary timescale, or any of the old assumptions regarding strata formation, sedimentation and the superposition principle. They fail to face up to the fact that rapid stratification is not an extraordinary phenonemon, but rather the prevailing and normal mechanism of sedimantary deposition whenever and wherever there is moving, sediment-laden water. The experimental evidence demonstrates the mechanism and a mass of field evidence in normal (non-catastrophic) conditions shows it is a normal everyday occurrence.

It is clear from the experimental evidence that the usual process of stratification is - that strata are not formed by horizontal layers being laid on top of each other in succession, as was assumed. But by sediment being sorted in the flowing water and laid down diagonally in the direction of flow.

 

Several catastrophic events, flash floods, volcanic eruptions etc. have forced Darwinian, influenced geologists to admit to rapid stratification in some instances. However they claim it is a rare phenomenon, which they have known about for many years, and which does nothing to invalidate the Geologic Column, the fossil record, evotuionary timescale, or any of the old assumptions regarding strata formation, sedimentation and the superposition principle. They fail to face up to the fact that rapid stratification is not an extraordinary phenonemon, but rather the prevailing and normal mechanism of sedimentary deposition whenever and wherever there is moving, sediment-laden water. The experimental evidence demonstrates the mechanism and a mass of field evidence in normal (non-catastrophic) conditions shows it is a normal everyday occurrence.

It is clear from the experimental evidence that the usual process of stratification is - that strata are not formed by horizontal layers being laid on top of each other in succession, as was assumed. But by sediment being sorted in the flowing water and laid down diagonally in the direction of flow. See diagram:

www.flickr.com/photos/truth-in-science/39821536092/in/dat...

 

The field evidence (in the image) presented here - of rapid, simultaneous stratification refutes the Superposition Principle, the Principle of Original Horizontality and the Principle of Lateral Continuity.

 

We now know, the Superposition Principle only applies on a rare occasion of sedimentary deposits in perfectly, still water. Superposition is required for the long evolutionary timescale, but the evidence shows it is not the general rule, as was once believed. Most sediment is laid down in moving water, where particle segregation is the general rule, resulting in the simultaneous deposition of strata/layers as shown in the photo.

 

See many other examples of rapid stratification with geological features: www.flickr.com/photos/101536517@N06/sets/72157635944904973/

 

Rapid, simultaneous formation of layers/strata, through particle segregation in moving water, is so easily created it has even been described by sedimentologists (working on flume experiments) as a law ...

"Upon filling the tank with water and pouring in sediments, we immediately saw what was to become the rule: The sediments sorted themselves out in very clear layers. This became so common that by the end of two weeks, we jokingly referred to Andrew's law as "It's difficult not to make layers," and Clark's law as "It's easy to make layers." Later on, I proposed the "law" that liquefaction destroys layers, as much to my surprise as that was." Ian Juby, www.ianjuby.org/sedimentation/

 

The example in the photo is the result of normal, everyday tidal action in a single incident. Where the water current or movement is more turbulent, violent, or catastrophic, great depths (many metres) of stratified sediment can be laid down in a short time. Certainly not the many millions of years assumed by evolutionists.

 

The composition of strata formed in any deposition event. is related to whatever materials are in the sediment mix, not to any particular timescale. Whatever is in the mix will be automatically sorted into strata/layers. It could be sand, or other material added from mud slides, erosion of chalk deposits, coastal erosion, volcanic ash etc. Any organic material (potential fossils), alive or dead, engulfed by, or swept into, a turbulent sediment mix, will also be sorted and buried within the rapidly, forming layers.

 

See many other examples of rapid stratification with geological features: www.flickr.com/photos/101536517@N06/sets/72157635944904973/

 

Stratified, soft sand deposit. demonstrates the rapid, stratification principle.

Important, field evidence which supports the work of the eminent, sedimentologist Dr Guy Berthault MIAS - Member of the International Association of Sedimentologists.

(Dr Berthault's experiments (www.sedimentology.fr/)

And also the experimental work of Dr M.E. Clark (Professor Emeritus, U of Illinois @ Urbana), Andrew Rodenbeck and Dr. Henry Voss, (www.ianjuby.org/sedimentation/)

 

Location: Sandown, Isle of Wight. Formed 19/01/2018, This field evidence demonstrates that multiple strata in sedimentary deposits do not need millions of years to form and can be formed rapidly. This natural example confirms the principle demonstrated by the sedimentation experiments carried out by Dr Guy Berthault and other sedimentologists. It calls into question the standard, multi-million year dating of sedimentary rocks, and the dating of fossils by depth of burial or position in the strata.

 

Mulltiple strata/layers are evident in this example.

 

Dr Berthault's experiments (www.sedimentology.fr/) and other experiments (www.ianjuby.org/sedimentation/) and field studies of floods and volcanic action show that, rather than being formed by gradual, slow deposition of sucessive layers superimposed upon previous layers, with the strata or layers representing a particular timescale, particle segregation in moving water or airborne particles can form strata or layers very quickly, frequently, in a single event.

And, most importantly, lower strata are not older than upper strata, they are the same age, having been created in the same sedimentary episode.

Such field studies confirm experiments which have shown that there is no longer any reason to conclude that strata/layers in sedimentary rocks relate to different geological eras and/or a multi-million year timescale. www.youtube.com/watch?v=5PVnBaqqQw8&feature=share&amp.... they also show that the relative position of fossils in rocks is not indicative of an order of evolutionary succession. Obviously, the uniformitarian principle, on which the geologic column is based, can no longer be considered valid. And the multi-million, year dating of sedimentary rocks and fossils needs to be reassessed. Rapid deposition of stratified sediments also explains the enigma of polystrate fossils, i.e. large fossils that intersect several strata. In some cases, tree trunk fossils are found which intersect the strata of sedimentary rock up to forty feet in depth. upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/08/Lycopsi... They must have been buried in stratified sediment in a short time (certainly not millions, thousands, or even hundreds of years), or they would have rotted away. youtu.be/vnzHU9VsliQ

 

In fact, the vast majority of fossils are found in good, intact condition, which is testament to their rapid burial. You don't get good fossils from gradual burial, because they would be damaged or destroyed by decay, predation or erosion. The existence of so many fossils in sedimentary rock on a global scale is stunning evidence for the rapid depostion of sedimentary rock as the general rule. It is obvious that all rock containing good intact fossils was formed from sediment laid down in a very short time, not millions, or even thousands of years.

 

See set of photos of other examples of rapid stratification: www.flickr.com/photos/101536517@N06/sets/72157635944904973/

 

Carbon dating of coal should not be possible if it is millions of years old, yet significant amounts of Carbon 14 have been detected in coal and other fossil material, which indicates that it is less than 50,000 years old. www.ldolphin.org/sewell/c14dating.html

 

www.grisda.org/origins/51006.htm

 

Evolutionists confidently cite multi-million year ages for rocks and fossils, but what most people don't realise is that no one actually knows the age of sedimentary rocks or the fossils found within them. So how are evolutionists so sure of the ages they so confidently quote? The astonishing thing is they aren't. Sedimentary rocks cannot be dated by radiometric methods*, and fossils can only be dated to less than 50,000 years with Carbon 14 dating. The method evolutionists use is based entirely on assumptions. Unbelievably, fossils are dated by the assumed age of rocks, and rocks are dated by the assumed age of fossils, that's right ... it is known as circular reasoning.

 

* Regarding the radiometric dating of igneous rocks, which is claimed to be relevant to the dating of sedimentary rocks, in an occasional instance there is an igneous intrusion associated with a sedimentary deposit -

Prof. Aubouin says in his Précis de Géologie: "Each radioactive element disintegrates in a characteristic and constant manner, which depends neither on the physical state (no variation with pressure or temperature or any other external constraint) nor on the chemical state (identical for an oxide or a phosphate)."

"Rocks form when magma crystallizes. Crystallisation depends on pressure and temperature, from which radioactivity is independent. So, there is no relationship between radioactivity and crystallisation.

Consequently, radioactivity doesn't date the formation of rocks. Moreover, daughter elements contained in rocks result mainly from radioactivity in magma where gravity separates the heavier parent element, from the lighter daughter element. Thus radiometric dating has no chronological signification." Dr. Guy Berthault www.sciencevsevolution.org/Berthault.htm

 

Visit the fossil museum:

www.flickr.com/photos/101536517@N06/sets/72157641367196613/

 

Just how good are peer reviews of scientific papers?

www.sciencemag.org/content/342/6154/60.full

www.examiner.com/article/want-to-publish-science-paper-ju...

 

The neo-Darwinian idea that the human genome consists entirely of an accumulation of billions of mutations is, quite obviously, completely bonkers. Nevertheless, it is compulsorily taught in schools and universities as 'science'.

www.flickr.com/photos/truth-in-science/35505679183

The Eiffel Tower is a wrought-iron lattice tower on the Champ de Mars in Paris, France. It is named after the engineer Gustave Eiffel, whose company designed and built the tower.

 

Locally nicknamed "La dame de fer" (French for "Iron Lady"), it was constructed from 1887 to 1889 as the centerpiece of the 1889 World's Fair and was initially criticised by some of France's leading artists and intellectuals for its design, but it has become a global cultural icon of France and one of the most recognisable structures in the world. The Eiffel Tower is the most visited monument with an entrance fee in the world; 6.91 million people ascended it in 2015. It was designated a monument historique in 1964, and was named part of a UNESCO World Heritage Site ("Paris, Banks of the Seine") in 1991.

 

The tower is 330 metres (1,083 ft) tall, about the same height as an 81-storey building, and the tallest structure in Paris. Its base is square, measuring 125 metres (410 ft) on each side. During its construction, the Eiffel Tower surpassed the Washington Monument to become the tallest man-made structure in the world, a title it held for 41 years until the Chrysler Building in New York City was finished in 1930. It was the first structure in the world to surpass both the 200-metre and 300-metre mark in height. Due to the addition of a broadcasting aerial at the top of the tower in 1957, it is now taller than the Chrysler Building by 5.2 metres (17 ft). Excluding transmitters, the Eiffel Tower is the second tallest free-standing structure in France after the Millau Viaduct.

 

The tower has three levels for visitors, with restaurants on the first and second levels. The top level's upper platform is 276 m (906 ft) above the ground – the highest observation deck accessible to the public in the European Union. Tickets can be purchased to ascend by stairs or lift to the first and second levels. The climb from ground level to the first level is over 300 steps, as is the climb from the first level to the second, making the entire ascent a 600 step climb. Although there is a staircase to the top level, it is usually accessible only by lift.

 

The design of the Eiffel Tower is attributed to Maurice Koechlin and Émile Nouguier, two senior engineers working for the Compagnie des Établissements Eiffel. It was envisioned after discussion about a suitable centerpiece for the proposed 1889 Exposition Universelle, a world's fair to celebrate the centennial of the French Revolution. Eiffel openly acknowledged that inspiration for a tower came from the Latting Observatory built in New York City in 1853. In May 1884, working at home, Koechlin made a sketch of their idea, described by him as "a great pylon, consisting of four lattice girders standing apart at the base and coming together at the top, joined together by metal trusses at regular intervals". Eiffel initially showed little enthusiasm, but he did approve further study, and the two engineers then asked Stephen Sauvestre, the head of the company's architectural department, to contribute to the design. Sauvestre added decorative arches to the base of the tower, a glass pavilion to the first level, and other embellishments.

 

The new version gained Eiffel's support: he bought the rights to the patent on the design which Koechlin, Nougier, and Sauvestre had taken out, and the design was put on display at the Exhibition of Decorative Arts in the autumn of 1884 under the company name. On 30 March 1885, Eiffel presented his plans to the Société des Ingénieurs Civils; after discussing the technical problems and emphasising the practical uses of the tower, he finished his talk by saying the tower would symbolise

[n]ot only the art of the modern engineer, but also the century of Industry and Science in which we are living, and for which the way was prepared by the great scientific movement of the eighteenth century and by the Revolution of 1789, to which this monument will be built as an expression of France's gratitude.

 

Little progress was made until 1886, when Jules Grévy was re-elected as president of France and Édouard Lockroy was appointed as minister for trade. A budget for the exposition was passed and, on 1 May, Lockroy announced an alteration to the terms of the open competition being held for a centrepiece to the exposition, which effectively made the selection of Eiffel's design a foregone conclusion, as entries had to include a study for a 300 m (980 ft) four-sided metal tower on the Champ de Mars. (A 300-metre tower was then considered a herculean engineering effort). On 12 May, a commission was set up to examine Eiffel's scheme and its rivals, which, a month later, decided that all the proposals except Eiffel's were either impractical or lacking in details.

 

After some debate about the exact location of the tower, a contract was signed on 8 January 1887. Eiffel signed it acting in his own capacity rather than as the representative of his company, the contract granting him 1.5 million francs toward the construction costs: less than a quarter of the estimated 6.5 million francs. Eiffel was to receive all income from the commercial exploitation of the tower during the exhibition and for the next 20 years. He later established a separate company to manage the tower, putting up half the necessary capital himself.

 

The Crédit Industriel et Commercial (C.I.C.) helped finance the construction of the Eiffel Tower. According to a New York Times investigation into France's colonial legacy in Haiti, at the time of the tower's construction, the bank was acquiring funds from predatory loans related to the Haiti indemnity controversy – a debt forced upon Haiti by France to pay for slaves lost following the Haitian Revolution – and transferring Haiti's wealth into France. The Times reported that the C.I.C. benefited from a loan that required the Haitian Government to pay the bank and its partner nearly half of all taxes the Haitian government collected on exports, writing that by "effectively choking off the nation’s primary source of income", the C.I.C. "left a crippling legacy of financial extraction and dashed hopes — even by the standards of a nation with a long history of both."

 

Work on the foundations started on 28 January 1887. Those for the east and south legs were straightforward, with each leg resting on four 2 m (6.6 ft) concrete slabs, one for each of the principal girders of each leg. The west and north legs, being closer to the river Seine, were more complicated: each slab needed two piles installed by using compressed-air caissons 15 m (49 ft) long and 6 m (20 ft) in diameter driven to a depth of 22 m (72 ft) to support the concrete slabs, which were 6 m (20 ft) thick. Each of these slabs supported a block of limestone with an inclined top to bear a supporting shoe for the ironwork.

 

Each shoe was anchored to the stonework by a pair of bolts 10 cm (4 in) in diameter and 7.5 m (25 ft) long. The foundations were completed on 30 June, and the erection of the ironwork began. The visible work on-site was complemented by the enormous amount of exacting preparatory work that took place behind the scenes: the drawing office produced 1,700 general drawings and 3,629 detailed drawings of the 18,038 different parts needed. The task of drawing the components was complicated by the complex angles involved in the design and the degree of precision required: the position of rivet holes was specified to within 1 mm (0.04 in) and angles worked out to one second of arc. The finished components, some already riveted together into sub-assemblies, arrived on horse-drawn carts from a factory in the nearby Parisian suburb of Levallois-Perret and were first bolted together, with the bolts being replaced with rivets as construction progressed. No drilling or shaping was done on site: if any part did not fit, it was sent back to the factory for alteration. In all, 18,038 pieces were joined together using 2.5 million rivets.

 

At first, the legs were constructed as cantilevers, but about halfway to the first level construction was paused to create a substantial timber scaffold. This renewed concerns about the structural integrity of the tower, and sensational headlines such as "Eiffel Suicide!" and "Gustave Eiffel Has Gone Mad: He Has Been Confined in an Asylum" appeared in the tabloid press. At this stage, a small "creeper" crane designed to move up the tower was installed in each leg. They made use of the guides for the lifts which were to be fitted in the four legs. The critical stage of joining the legs at the first level was completed by the end of March 1888. Although the metalwork had been prepared with the utmost attention to detail, provision had been made to carry out small adjustments to precisely align the legs; hydraulic jacks were fitted to the shoes at the base of each leg, capable of exerting a force of 800 tonnes, and the legs were intentionally constructed at a slightly steeper angle than necessary, being supported by sandboxes on the scaffold. Although construction involved 300 on-site employees, due to Eiffel's safety precautions and the use of movable gangways, guardrails and screens, only one person died.

 

The main structural work was completed at the end of March 1889 and, on 31 March, Eiffel celebrated by leading a group of government officials, accompanied by representatives of the press, to the top of the tower. Because the lifts were not yet in operation, the ascent was made by foot, and took over an hour, with Eiffel stopping frequently to explain various features. Most of the party chose to stop at the lower levels, but a few, including the structural engineer, Émile Nouguier, the head of construction, Jean Compagnon, the President of the City Council, and reporters from Le Figaro and Le Monde Illustré, completed the ascent. At 2:35 pm, Eiffel hoisted a large Tricolour to the accompaniment of a 25-gun salute fired at the first level.

 

There was still work to be done, particularly on the lifts and facilities, and the tower was not opened to the public until nine days after the opening of the exposition on 6 May; even then, the lifts had not been completed. The tower was an instant success with the public, and nearly 30,000 visitors made the 1,710-step climb to the top before the lifts entered service on 26 May. Tickets cost 2 francs for the first level, 3 for the second, and 5 for the top, with half-price admission on Sundays, and by the end of the exhibition there had been 1,896,987 visitors.

 

After dark, the tower was lit by hundreds of gas lamps, and a beacon sent out three beams of red, white and blue light. Two searchlights mounted on a circular rail were used to illuminate various buildings of the exposition. The daily opening and closing of the exposition were announced by a cannon at the top.

 

On the second level, the French newspaper Le Figaro had an office and a printing press, where a special souvenir edition, Le Figaro de la Tour, was made. There was also a pâtisserie.

 

At the top, there was a post office where visitors could send letters and postcards as a memento of their visit. Graffitists were also catered for: sheets of paper were mounted on the walls each day for visitors to record their impressions of the tower. Gustave Eiffel described some of the responses as vraiment curieuse ("truly curious").

 

Famous visitors to the tower included the Prince of Wales, Sarah Bernhardt, "Buffalo Bill" Cody (his Wild West show was an attraction at the exposition) and Thomas Edison. Eiffel invited Edison to his private apartment at the top of the tower, where Edison presented him with one of his phonographs, a new invention and one of the many highlights of the exposition. Edison signed the guestbook with this message:

To M Eiffel the Engineer the brave builder of so gigantic and original specimen of modern Engineering from one who has the greatest respect and admiration for all Engineers including the Great Engineer the Bon Dieu, Thomas Edison.

 

Eiffel had a permit for the tower to stand for 20 years. It was to be dismantled in 1909, when its ownership would revert to the City of Paris. The City had planned to tear it down (part of the original contest rules for designing a tower was that it should be easy to dismantle) but as the tower proved to be valuable for radio telegraphy, it was allowed to remain after the expiry of the permit, and from 1910 it also became part of the International Time Service.

 

Eiffel made use of his apartment at the top of the tower to carry out meteorological observations, and also used the tower to perform experiments on the action of air resistance on falling bodies.

 

Subsequent events

Eiffel had a permit for the tower to stand for 20 years. It was to be dismantled in 1909, when its ownership would revert to the City of Paris. The city had planned to tear it down (part of the original contest rules for designing a tower was that it should be easy to dismantle) but as the tower proved to be valuable for many innovations in the early 20th century, particularly radio telegraphy, it was allowed to remain after the expiry of the permit, and from 1910 it also became part of the International Time Service.

 

For the 1900 Exposition Universelle, the lifts in the east and west legs were replaced by lifts running as far as the second level constructed by the French firm Fives-Lille. These had a compensating mechanism to keep the floor level as the angle of ascent changed at the first level, and were driven by a similar hydraulic mechanism as the Otis lifts, although this was situated at the base of the tower. Hydraulic pressure was provided by pressurised accumulators located near this mechanism. At the same time the lift in the north pillar was removed and replaced by a staircase to the first level. The layout of both first and second levels was modified, with the space available for visitors on the second level. The original lift in the south pillar was removed 13 years later.

 

On 19 October 1901, Alberto Santos-Dumont, flying his No.6 airship, won a 100,000-franc prize offered by Henri Deutsch de la Meurthe for the first person to make a flight from St. Cloud to the Eiffel Tower and back in less than half an hour.

 

In 1910, Father Theodor Wulf measured radiant energy at the top and bottom of the tower. He found more at the top than expected, incidentally discovering what are known today as cosmic rays. Two years later, on 4 February 1912, Austrian tailor Franz Reichelt died after jumping from the first level of the tower (a height of 57 m) to demonstrate his parachute design. In 1914, at the outbreak of World War I, a radio transmitter located in the tower jammed German radio communications, seriously hindering their advance on Paris and contributing to the Allied victory at the First Battle of the Marne. From 1925 to 1934, illuminated signs for Citroën adorned three of the tower's sides, making it the tallest advertising space in the world at the time. In April 1935, the tower was used to make experimental low-resolution television transmissions, using a shortwave transmitter of 200 watts power. On 17 November, an improved 180-line transmitter was installed.

 

On two separate but related occasions in 1925, the con artist Victor Lustig "sold" the tower for scrap metal. A year later, in February 1926, pilot Leon Collet was killed trying to fly under the tower. His aircraft became entangled in an aerial belonging to a wireless station. A bust of Gustave Eiffel by Antoine Bourdelle was unveiled at the base of the north leg on 2 May 1929. In 1930, the tower lost the title of the world's tallest structure when the Chrysler Building in New York City was completed. In 1938, the decorative arcade around the first level was removed.

 

Upon the German occupation of Paris in 1940, the lift cables were cut by the French. The tower was closed to the public during the occupation and the lifts were not repaired until 1946. In 1940, German soldiers had to climb the tower to hoist a swastika-centered Reichskriegsflagge, but the flag was so large it blew away just a few hours later, and was replaced by a smaller one. When visiting Paris, Hitler chose to stay on the ground. When the Allies were nearing Paris in August 1944, Hitler ordered General Dietrich von Choltitz, the military governor of Paris, to demolish the tower along with the rest of the city. Von Choltitz disobeyed the order. On 25 August, before the Germans had been driven out of Paris, the German flag was replaced with a Tricolour by two men from the French Naval Museum, who narrowly beat three men led by Lucien Sarniguet, who had lowered the Tricolour on 13 June 1940 when Paris fell to the Germans.

 

A fire started in the television transmitter on 3 January 1956, damaging the top of the tower. Repairs took a year, and in 1957, the present radio aerial was added to the top. In 1964, the Eiffel Tower was officially declared to be a historical monument by the Minister of Cultural Affairs, André Malraux. A year later, an additional lift system was installed in the north pillar.

 

According to interviews, in 1967, Montreal Mayor Jean Drapeau negotiated a secret agreement with Charles de Gaulle for the tower to be dismantled and temporarily relocated to Montreal to serve as a landmark and tourist attraction during Expo 67. The plan was allegedly vetoed by the company operating the tower out of fear that the French government could refuse permission for the tower to be restored in its original location.

 

In 1982, the original lifts between the second and third levels were replaced after 97 years in service. These had been closed to the public between November and March because the water in the hydraulic drive tended to freeze. The new cars operate in pairs, with one counterbalancing the other, and perform the journey in one stage, reducing the journey time from eight minutes to less than two minutes. At the same time, two new emergency staircases were installed, replacing the original spiral staircases. In 1983, the south pillar was fitted with an electrically driven Otis lift to serve the Jules Verne restaurant.[citation needed] The Fives-Lille lifts in the east and west legs, fitted in 1899, were extensively refurbished in 1986. The cars were replaced, and a computer system was installed to completely automate the lifts. The motive power was moved from the water hydraulic system to a new electrically driven oil-filled hydraulic system, and the original water hydraulics were retained solely as a counterbalance system. A service lift was added to the south pillar for moving small loads and maintenance personnel three years later.

 

Robert Moriarty flew a Beechcraft Bonanza under the tower on 31 March 1984. In 1987, A. J. Hackett made one of his first bungee jumps from the top of the Eiffel Tower, using a special cord he had helped develop. Hackett was arrested by the police. On 27 October 1991, Thierry Devaux, along with mountain guide Hervé Calvayrac, performed a series of acrobatic figures while bungee jumping from the second floor of the tower. Facing the Champ de Mars, Devaux used an electric winch between figures to go back up to the second floor. When firemen arrived, he stopped after the sixth jump.

 

For its "Countdown to the Year 2000" celebration on 31 December 1999, flashing lights and high-powered searchlights were installed on the tower. During the last three minutes of the year, the lights were turned on starting from the base of the tower and continuing to the top to welcome 2000 with a huge fireworks show. An exhibition above a cafeteria on the first floor commemorates this event. The searchlights on top of the tower made it a beacon in Paris's night sky, and 20,000 flashing bulbs gave the tower a sparkly appearance for five minutes every hour on the hour.

 

The lights sparkled blue for several nights to herald the new millennium on 31 December 2000. The sparkly lighting continued for 18 months until July 2001. The sparkling lights were turned on again on 21 June 2003, and the display was planned to last for 10 years before they needed replacing.

 

The tower received its 200,000,000th guest on 28 November 2002.The tower has operated at its maximum capacity of about 7 million visitors per year since 2003. In 2004, the Eiffel Tower began hosting a seasonal ice rink on the first level. A glass floor was installed on the first level during the 2014 refurbishment.

 

Design

The puddle iron (wrought iron) of the Eiffel Tower weighs 7,300 tonnes, and the addition of lifts, shops and antennae have brought the total weight to approximately 10,100 tonnes. As a demonstration of the economy of design, if the 7,300 tonnes of metal in the structure were melted down, it would fill the square base, 125 metres (410 ft) on each side, to a depth of only 6.25 cm (2.46 in) assuming the density of the metal to be 7.8 tonnes per cubic metre. Additionally, a cubic box surrounding the tower (324 m × 125 m × 125 m) would contain 6,200 tonnes of air, weighing almost as much as the iron itself. Depending on the ambient temperature, the top of the tower may shift away from the sun by up to 18 cm (7 in) due to thermal expansion of the metal on the side facing the sun.

 

Wind and weather considerations

When it was built, many were shocked by the tower's daring form. Eiffel was accused of trying to create something artistic with no regard to the principles of engineering. However, Eiffel and his team – experienced bridge builders – understood the importance of wind forces, and knew that if they were going to build the tallest structure in the world, they had to be sure it could withstand them. In an interview with the newspaper Le Temps published on 14 February 1887, Eiffel said:

 

Is it not true that the very conditions which give strength also conform to the hidden rules of harmony? ... Now to what phenomenon did I have to give primary concern in designing the Tower? It was wind resistance. Well then! I hold that the curvature of the monument's four outer edges, which is as mathematical calculation dictated it should be ... will give a great impression of strength and beauty, for it will reveal to the eyes of the observer the boldness of the design as a whole.

 

He used graphical methods to determine the strength of the tower and empirical evidence to account for the effects of wind, rather than a mathematical formula. Close examination of the tower reveals a basically exponential shape.[69] All parts of the tower were overdesigned to ensure maximum resistance to wind forces. The top half was even assumed to have no gaps in the latticework. In the years since it was completed, engineers have put forward various mathematical hypotheses in an attempt to explain the success of the design. The most recent, devised in 2004 after letters sent by Eiffel to the French Society of Civil Engineers in 1885 were translated into English, is described as a non-linear integral equation based on counteracting the wind pressure on any point of the tower with the tension between the construction elements at that point.

 

The Eiffel Tower sways by up to 9 cm (3.5 in) in the wind.

 

Ground floor

The four columns of the tower each house access stairs and elevators to the first two floors, while at the south column only the elevator to the second floor restaurant is publicly accessible.

 

1st floor

The first floor is publicly accessible by elevator or stairs. When originally built, the first level contained three restaurants – one French, one Russian and one Flemish — and an "Anglo-American Bar". After the exposition closed, the Flemish restaurant was converted to a 250-seat theatre. Today there is the Le 58 Tour Eiffel restaurant and other facilities.

 

2nd floor

The second floor is publicly accessible by elevator or stairs and has a restaurant called Le Jules Verne, a gourmet restaurant with its own lift going up from the south column to the second level. This restaurant has one star in the Michelin Red Guide. It was run by the multi-Michelin star chef Alain Ducasse from 2007 to 2017. As of May 2019, it is managed by three-star chef Frédéric Anton. It owes its name to the famous science-fiction writer Jules Verne.

 

3rd floor

Originally there were laboratories for various experiments, and a small apartment reserved for Gustave Eiffel to entertain guests, which is now open to the public, complete with period decorations and lifelike mannequins of Eiffel and some of his notable guests.

 

From 1937 until 1981, there was a restaurant near the top of the tower. It was removed due to structural considerations; engineers had determined it was too heavy and was causing the tower to sag. This restaurant was sold to an American restaurateur and transported to New York and then New Orleans. It was rebuilt on the edge of New Orleans' Garden District as a restaurant and later event hall. Today there is a champagne bar.

 

Lifts

The arrangement of the lifts has been changed several times during the tower's history. Given the elasticity of the cables and the time taken to align the cars with the landings, each lift, in normal service, takes an average of 8 minutes and 50 seconds to do the round trip, spending an average of 1 minute and 15 seconds at each level. The average journey time between levels is 1 minute. The original hydraulic mechanism is on public display in a small museum at the base of the east and west legs. Because the mechanism requires frequent lubrication and maintenance, public access is often restricted. The rope mechanism of the north tower can be seen as visitors exit the lift.

 

Equipping the tower with adequate and safe passenger lifts was a major concern of the government commission overseeing the Exposition. Although some visitors could be expected to climb to the first level, or even the second, lifts clearly had to be the main means of ascent.

 

Constructing lifts to reach the first level was relatively straightforward: the legs were wide enough at the bottom and so nearly straight that they could contain a straight track, and a contract was given to the French company Roux, Combaluzier & Lepape for two lifts to be fitted in the east and west legs. Roux, Combaluzier & Lepape used a pair of endless chains with rigid, articulated links to which the car was attached. Lead weights on some links of the upper or return sections of the chains counterbalanced most of the car's weight. The car was pushed up from below, not pulled up from above: to prevent the chain buckling, it was enclosed in a conduit. At the bottom of the run, the chains passed around 3.9 m (12 ft 10 in) diameter sprockets. Smaller sprockets at the top guided the chains.

  

The Otis lifts originally fitted in the north and south legs

Installing lifts to the second level was more of a challenge because a straight track was impossible. No French company wanted to undertake the work. The European branch of Otis Brothers & Company submitted a proposal but this was rejected: the fair's charter ruled out the use of any foreign material in the construction of the tower. The deadline for bids was extended but still no French companies put themselves forward, and eventually the contract was given to Otis in July 1887. Otis were confident they would eventually be given the contract and had already started creating designs.

 

The car was divided into two superimposed compartments, each holding 25 passengers, with the lift operator occupying an exterior platform on the first level. Motive power was provided by an inclined hydraulic ram 12.67 m (41 ft 7 in) long and 96.5 cm (38.0 in) in diameter in the tower leg with a stroke of 10.83 m (35 ft 6 in): this moved a carriage carrying six sheaves. Five fixed sheaves were mounted higher up the leg, producing an arrangement similar to a block and tackle but acting in reverse, multiplying the stroke of the piston rather than the force generated. The hydraulic pressure in the driving cylinder was produced by a large open reservoir on the second level. After being exhausted from the cylinder, the water was pumped back up to the reservoir by two pumps in the machinery room at the base of the south leg. This reservoir also provided power to the lifts to the first level.

 

The original lifts for the journey between the second and third levels were supplied by Léon Edoux. A pair of 81 m (266 ft) hydraulic rams were mounted on the second level, reaching nearly halfway up to the third level. One lift car was mounted on top of these rams: cables ran from the top of this car up to sheaves on the third level and back down to a second car. Each car travelled only half the distance between the second and third levels and passengers were required to change lifts halfway by means of a short gangway. The 10-ton cars each held 65 passengers.

 

Engraved names

Gustave Eiffel engraved on the tower the names of 72 French scientists, engineers and mathematicians in recognition of their contributions to the building of the tower. Eiffel chose this "invocation of science" because of his concern over the artists' protest. At the beginning of the 20th century, the engravings were painted over, but they were restored in 1986–87 by the Société Nouvelle d'exploitation de la Tour Eiffel, a company operating the tower.

 

Aesthetics

The tower is painted in three shades: lighter at the top, getting progressively darker towards the bottom to complement the Parisian sky. It was originally reddish brown; this changed in 1968 to a bronze colour known as "Eiffel Tower Brown". In what is expected to be a temporary change, the tower is being painted gold in commemoration of the upcoming 2024 Summer Olympics in Paris.

 

The only non-structural elements are the four decorative grill-work arches, added in Sauvestre's sketches, which served to make the tower look more substantial and to make a more impressive entrance to the exposition.

 

A pop-culture movie cliché is that the view from a Parisian window always includes the tower. In reality, since zoning restrictions limit the height of most buildings in Paris to seven storeys, only a small number of tall buildings have a clear view of the tower.

 

Maintenance

Maintenance of the tower includes applying 60 tons of paint every seven years to prevent it from rusting. The tower has been completely repainted at least 19 times since it was built. Lead paint was still being used as recently as 2001 when the practice was stopped out of concern for the environment.

 

Communications

The tower has been used for making radio transmissions since the beginning of the 20th century. Until the 1950s, sets of aerial wires ran from the cupola to anchors on the Avenue de Suffren and Champ de Mars. These were connected to longwave transmitters in small bunkers. In 1909, a permanent underground radio centre was built near the south pillar, which still exists today. On 20 November 1913, the Paris Observatory, using the Eiffel Tower as an aerial, exchanged wireless signals with the United States Naval Observatory, which used an aerial in Arlington County, Virginia. The object of the transmissions was to measure the difference in longitude between Paris and Washington, D.C. Today, radio and digital television signals are transmitted from the Eiffel Tower.

 

Digital television

A television antenna was first installed on the tower in 1957, increasing its height by 18.7 m (61 ft). Work carried out in 2000 added a further 5.3 m (17 ft), giving the current height of 324 m (1,063 ft).[59] Analogue television signals from the Eiffel Tower ceased on 8 March 2011.

 

Taller structures

The Eiffel Tower was the world's tallest structure when completed in 1889, a distinction it retained until 1929 when the Chrysler Building in New York City was topped out. The tower also lost its standing as the world's tallest tower to the Tokyo Tower in 1958 but retains its status as the tallest freestanding (non-guyed) structure in France.

 

Transport

The nearest Paris Métro station is Bir-Hakeim and the nearest RER station is Champ de Mars-Tour Eiffel. The tower itself is located at the intersection of the quai Branly and the Pont d'Iéna.

 

Popularity

Number of visitors per year between 1889 and 2004

More than 300 million people have visited the tower since it was completed in 1889. In 2015, there were 6.91 million visitors. The tower is the most-visited paid monument in the world. An average of 25,000 people ascend the tower every day (which can result in long queues).

 

Illumination copyright

The tower and its image have been in the public domain since 1993, 70 years after Eiffel's death. In June 1990 a French court ruled that a special lighting display on the tower in 1989 to mark the tower's 100th anniversary was an "original visual creation" protected by copyright. The Court of Cassation, France's judicial court of last resort, upheld the ruling in March 1992. The Société d'Exploitation de la Tour Eiffel (SETE) now considers any illumination of the tower to be a separate work of art that falls under copyright. As a result, the SNTE alleges that it is illegal to publish contemporary photographs of the lit tower at night without permission in France and some other countries for commercial use. For this reason, it is often rare to find images or videos of the lit tower at night on stock image sites, and media outlets rarely broadcast images or videos of it.

 

The imposition of copyright has been controversial. The Director of Documentation for what was then called the Société Nouvelle d'exploitation de la Tour Eiffel (SNTE), Stéphane Dieu, commented in 2005: "It is really just a way to manage commercial use of the image, so that it isn't used in ways [of which] we don't approve". SNTE made over €1 million from copyright fees in 2002. However, it could also be used to restrict the publication of tourist photographs of the tower at night, as well as hindering non-profit and semi-commercial publication of images of the illuminated tower.

 

The copyright claim itself has never been tested in courts to date, according to a 2014 article in the Art Law Journal, and there has never been an attempt to track down millions of people who have posted and shared their images of the illuminated tower on the Internet worldwide. It added, however, that permissive situation may arise on commercial use of such images, like in a magazine, on a film poster, or on product packaging.

 

French doctrine and jurisprudence allows pictures incorporating a copyrighted work as long as their presence is incidental or accessory to the subject being represented, a reasoning akin to the de minimis rule. Therefore, SETE may be unable to claim copyright on photographs of Paris which happen to include the lit tower.

 

Replicas

As one of the most famous landmarks in the world, the Eiffel Tower has been the inspiration for the creation of many replicas and similar towers. An early example is Blackpool Tower in England. The mayor of Blackpool, Sir John Bickerstaffe, was so impressed on seeing the Eiffel Tower at the 1889 exposition that he commissioned a similar tower to be built in his town. It opened in 1894 and is 158.1 m (519 ft) tall. Tokyo Tower in Japan, built as a communications tower in 1958, was also inspired by the Eiffel Tower.[111]

 

There are various scale models of the tower in the United States, including a half-scale version at the Paris Las Vegas, Nevada, one in Paris, Texas built in 1993, and two 1:3 scale models at Kings Island, located in Mason, Ohio, and Kings Dominion, Virginia, amusement parks opened in 1972 and 1975 respectively. Two 1:3 scale models can be found in China, one in Durango, Mexico that was donated by the local French community, and several across Europe.

 

In 2011, the TV show Pricing the Priceless on the National Geographic Channel speculated that a full-size replica of the tower would cost approximately US$480 million to build. This would be more than ten times the cost of the original (nearly 8 million in 1890 Francs; ~US$40 million in 2018 dollars).

Rapid strata formation in soft sand (field evidence).

Photo of strata formation in soft sand on a beach, created by tidal action of the sea.

Formed in a single, high tidal event. Stunning evidence which displays multiple strata/layers.

 

Why this is so important ....

It has long been assumed, ever since the 17th century, that layers/strata observed in sedimentary rocks were built up gradually, layer upon layer, over many years. It certainly seemed logical at the time, from just looking at rocks, that lower layers would always be older than the layers above them, i.e. that lower layers were always laid down first followed, in time, by successive layers on top.

This was assumed to be true and became known as the superposition principle.

It was also assumed that a layer comprising a different material from a previous layer, represented a change in environmental conditions/factors.

These changes in composition of layers or strata were considered to represent different, geological eras on a global scale, spanning millions of years. This formed the basis for the Geologic Column, which is used to date rocks and also fossils. The evolutionary, 'fossil record' was based on the vast ages and assumed geological eras of the Geologic Column.

There was also circular reasoning applied with the assumed age of 'index' fossils (based on evolutionary beliefs & preconceptions) used to date strata in the Geologic Column. Dating strata from the assumed age of (index) fossils is known as Biostratigraphy.

We now know that, although these assumptions seemed logical, they are not supported by the evidence.

At the time, the mechanics of stratification were not properly known or studied.

 

An additional factor was that this assumed superposition and uniformitarian model became essential, with the wide acceptance of Darwinism, for the long ages required for progressive microbes-to-human evolution. There was no incentive to question or challenge the superposition, uniformitarian model, because the presumed, fossil 'record' had become dependant on it, and any change in the accepted model would present devastating implications for Darwinism.

This had the unfortunate effect of linking the study of geology so closely to Darwinism, that any study independent of Darwinian considerations was effectively stymied. This link of geology with Darwinian preconceptions is known as biostratigraphy.

 

Some other field evidence can be observed here: www.flickr.com/photos/101536517@N06/sets/72157635944904973/

and also in the links to stunning, experimental evidence, carried out by sedimentologists, given later.

_______________________________________________

GEOLOGIC PRINCIPLES (established by Nicholas Steno in the 17th Century):

What Nicolas Steno believed about strata formation is the basis of the principle of Superposition and the principle of Original Horizontality.

dictionary.sensagent.com/Law_of_superposition/en-en/

“Assuming that all rocks and minerals had once been fluid, Nicolas Steno reasoned that rock strata were formed when particles in a fluid such as water fell to the bottom. This process would leave horizontal layers. Thus Steno's principle of original horizontality states that rock layers form in the horizontal position, and any deviations from this horizontal position are due to the rocks being disturbed later.”)

BEDDING PLANES.

'Bedding plane' describes the surface in between each stratum which are formed during sediment deposition.

science.jrank.org/pages/6533/Strata.html

“Strata form during sediment deposition, that is, the laying down of sediment. Meanwhile, if a change in current speed or sediment grain size occurs or perhaps the sediment supply is cut off, a bedding plane forms. Bedding planes are surfaces that separate one stratum from another. Bedding planes can also form when the upper part of a sediment layer is eroded away before the next episode of deposition. Strata separated by a bedding plane may have different grain sizes, grain compositions, or colours. Sometimes these other traits are better indicators of stratification as bedding planes may be very subtle.”

______________________________________________

 

Several catastrophic events, flash floods, volcanic eruptions etc. have forced Darwinian, influenced geologists to admit to rapid stratification in some instances. However they claim it is a rare phenomenon, which they have known about for many years, and which does nothing to invalidate the Geologic Column, the fossil record, evolutionary timescale, or any of the old assumptions regarding strata formation, sedimentation and the superposition principle. They fail to face up to the fact that rapid stratification is not an extraordinary phenonemon, but rather the prevailing and normal mechanism of sedimentary deposition whenever and wherever there is moving, sediment-laden water. The experimental evidence demonstrates the mechanism and a mass of field evidence in normal (non-catastrophic) conditions shows it is a normal everyday occurrence.

It is clear from the experimental evidence that the usual process of stratification is - that strata are not formed by horizontal layers being laid on top of each other in succession, as was assumed. But by sediment being sorted in the flowing water and laid down diagonally in the direction of flow. See diagram:

www.flickr.com/photos/truth-in-science/39821536092/in/dat...

 

The field evidence (in the image) presented here - of rapid, simultaneous stratification refutes the Superposition Principle, the Principle of Original Horizontality and the Principle of Lateral Continuity.

 

We now know, the Superposition Principle only applies on a rare occasion where sedimentary deposits are laid down in still water.

Superposition is required for the long evolutionary timescale, but the evidence shows it is not the general rule, as was once believed. Most sediment is laid down in moving water, where particle segregation is the general rule, resulting in the simultaneous deposition of strata/layers as shown in the photo.

 

See many other examples of rapid stratification (with geological features): www.flickr.com/photos/101536517@N06/sets/72157635944904973/

 

Rapid, simultaneous formation of layers/strata, through particle segregation in moving water, is so easily created it has even been described by sedimentologists (working on flume experiments) as a law ...

"Upon filling the tank with water and pouring in sediments, we immediately saw what was to become the rule: The sediments sorted themselves out in very clear layers. This became so common that by the end of two weeks, we jokingly referred to Andrew's law as "It's difficult not to make layers," and Clark's law as "It's easy to make layers." Later on, I proposed the "law" that liquefaction destroys layers, as much to my surprise as that was." Ian Juby, www.ianjuby.org/sedimentation/

 

The example in the photo is the result of normal, everyday tidal action in a single incident. Where the water current or movement is more turbulent, violent, or catastrophic, great depths (many metres) of stratified sediment can be laid down in a short time. Certainly not the many millions of years assumed by evolutionists.

 

The composition of strata formed in any deposition event. is related to whatever materials are in the sediment mix, not to any particular timescale. Whatever is in the mix will be automatically sorted into strata/layers. It could be sand, or other material added from mud slides, erosion of chalk deposits, coastal erosion, volcanic ash etc. Any organic material (potential fossils), alive or dead, engulfed by, or swept into, a turbulent sediment mix, will also be sorted and buried within the rapidly, forming layers.

 

See many other examples of rapid stratification with geological features: www.flickr.com/photos/101536517@N06/sets/72157635944904973/

 

Stratified, soft sand deposit. demonstrates the rapid, stratification principle.

Important, field evidence which supports the work of the eminent, sedimentologist Dr Guy Berthault MIAS - Member of the International Association of Sedimentologists.

(Dr Berthault's experiments (www.sedimentology.fr/)

And also the experimental work of Dr M.E. Clark (Professor Emeritus, U of Illinois @ Urbana), Andrew Rodenbeck and Dr. Henry Voss, (www.ianjuby.org/sedimentation/)

 

Location: Sandown, Isle of Wight. Formed 20/11/2016, This field evidence demonstrates that multiple strata in sedimentary deposits do not need millions of years to form and can be formed rapidly. This natural example confirms the principle demonstrated by the sedimentation experiments carried out by Dr Guy Berthault and other sedimentologists. It calls into question the standard, multi-million year dating of sedimentary rocks, and the dating of fossils by depth of burial or position in the strata.

Mulltiple strata/layers are evident in this example.

 

Dr Berthault's experiments (www.sedimentology.fr/) and other experiments (www.ianjuby.org/sedimentation/) and field studies of floods and volcanic action show that, rather than being formed by gradual, slow deposition of sucessive layers superimposed upon previous layers, with the strata or layers representing a particular timescale, particle segregation in moving water or airborne particles can form strata or layers very quickly, frequently, in a single event.

youtu.be/wFST2C32hMQ

youtu.be/SE8NtWvNBKI

And, most importantly, lower strata are not older than upper strata, they are the same age, having been created in the same sedimentary episode.

Such field studies confirm experiments which have shown that there is no longer any reason to conclude that strata/layers in sedimentary rocks relate to different geological eras and/or a multi-million year timescale. www.youtube.com/watch?v=5PVnBaqqQw8&feature=share&amp.... they also show that the relative position of fossils in rocks is not indicative of an order of evolutionary succession. Obviously, the uniformitarian principle, on which the geologic column is based, can no longer be considered valid. And the multi-million, year dating of sedimentary rocks and fossils needs to be reassessed. Rapid deposition of stratified sediments also explains the enigma of polystrate fossils, i.e. large fossils that intersect several strata. In some cases, tree trunk fossils are found which intersect the strata of sedimentary rock up to forty feet in depth. upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/08/Lycopsi... They must have been buried in stratified sediment in a short time (certainly not millions, thousands, or even hundreds of years), or they would have rotted away. youtu.be/vnzHU9VsliQ

 

In fact, the vast majority of fossils are found in good, intact condition, which is testament to their rapid burial. You don't get good fossils from gradual burial, because they would be damaged or destroyed by decay, predation or erosion. The existence of so many fossils in sedimentary rock on a global scale is stunning evidence for the rapid depostion of sedimentary rock as the general rule. It is obvious that all rock containing good intact fossils was formed from sediment laid down in a very short time, not millions, or even thousands of years.

 

See set of photos of other examples of rapid stratification: www.flickr.com/photos/101536517@N06/sets/72157635944904973/

 

Carbon dating of coal should not be possible if it is millions of years old, yet significant amounts of Carbon 14 have been detected in coal and other fossil material, which indicates that it is less than 50,000 years old. www.ldolphin.org/sewell/c14dating.html

 

www.grisda.org/origins/51006.htm

 

Evolutionists confidently cite multi-million year ages for rocks and fossils, but what most people don't realise is that no one actually knows the age of sedimentary rocks or the fossils found within them. So how are evolutionists so sure of the ages they so confidently quote? The astonishing thing is they aren't. Sedimentary rocks cannot be dated by radiometric methods*, and fossils can only be dated to less than 50,000 years with Carbon 14 dating. The method evolutionists use is based entirely on assumptions. Unbelievably, fossils are dated by the assumed age of rocks, and rocks are dated by the assumed age of fossils, that's right ... it is known as circular reasoning.

 

* Regarding the radiometric dating of igneous rocks, which is claimed to be relevant to the dating of sedimentary rocks, in an occasional instance there is an igneous intrusion associated with a sedimentary deposit -

Prof. Aubouin says in his Précis de Géologie: "Each radioactive element disintegrates in a characteristic and constant manner, which depends neither on the physical state (no variation with pressure or temperature or any other external constraint) nor on the chemical state (identical for an oxide or a phosphate)."

"Rocks form when magma crystallizes. Crystallisation depends on pressure and temperature, from which radioactivity is independent. So, there is no relationship between radioactivity and crystallisation.

Consequently, radioactivity doesn't date the formation of rocks. Moreover, daughter elements contained in rocks result mainly from radioactivity in magma where gravity separates the heavier parent element, from the lighter daughter element. Thus radiometric dating has no chronological signification." Dr. Guy Berthault www.sciencevsevolution.org/Berthault.htm

 

Visit the fossil museum:

www.flickr.com/photos/101536517@N06/sets/72157641367196613/

 

Just how good are peer reviews of scientific papers?

www.sciencemag.org/content/342/6154/60.full

www.examiner.com/article/want-to-publish-science-paper-ju...

 

The neo-Darwinian idea that the human genome consists entirely of an accumulation of billions of mutations is, quite obviously, completely bonkers. Nevertheless, it is compulsorily taught in schools and universities as 'science'.

www.flickr.com/photos/truth-in-science/35505679183

U.S. dollar bill in a 20cc syringe (18ga needle), shot against black and remapped. Sidelit with flash diffused through white plexiglas. ©2010 David C. Pearson, M.D.

Tabitha Mathiang spent ten years in the bush, fighting for justice and freedom for South Sudan alongside her husband, a general in the liberation movement. When the peace agreement was signed in 2005, she was hand-selected to lead the disarmament, demobilization, and reintegration of more than 3,000 women and child soldiers. But, she says, even after the armed groups handed over their guns, “There was still a culture of war.” When renewed conflict broke out in December 2013, 10 of Tabitha’s relatives were killed. With her friend Apuk, she provided support to the peace talks, reasoning that “Maybe when they see us together, a Dinka and a Nuer, these men will think differently.” The warring parties signed a peace agreement in 2015.

We were told we could dress casually for an all day meeting, so, of course, I wear a short pleather skirt, high-heeled hiking boots, and fur-embellished sweater instead of the suggested jeans. My reasoning was this: I wanted to wear something that would have normally been inappropriate for work (the miniskirt) with something too fancy for a casual day off (the sweater). Because that’s not a combination I get to wear often.

 

Sweater, vintage. Shirt, INC (thrifted). Skirt, Mossimo. Tights, We Love Colors. Boots, Lauren Ralph Lauren. Sunglasses, Target. Cape, Mossimo (thrifted). Bag, Nicole Lee.

German forces along the Polish prepare to defend themselves. Armored units and heavy Paks are moved to the border.

I am so mad about my NEW laptop! I have had it fixed 4 times in a row for the same problem that I have had since the first day! My advice is to never buy an ACER product, because if you get stuck with a lemon like I have they will not replace it, instead they will ship it away for a month and send it back to you without anything being repaired! Their service is horrible and there is no reasoning with them! I have called them repetitively demanding a replacement computer but they tell me that all they can do is send it back for a repair. ACER is incompetent in diagnosing and repairing their products!!!! What company would send you through this much trouble!!

 

I bought my ACER laptop from my local STAPLES store. The people here are just as incompetent as those working for ACER! The first time I brought in my computer, they tried to fix my computer by reinstaling the sound software, but it did not work. So a week later I went back and had them ship it to ACER for repairs. Two weeks later I stopped by STAPLES to see why my computer had been gone for so long. I went to customer service and asked about my computer and someone found it in a box in the storage room. I had a fealing it had never been sent. It had no paperwork from ACER, and when I called ACER later they said my computer had not been sent to them. HENCE STAPLES never sent my computer away but had it sitting in their storage for two weeks!!!

 

What is even more outrageous is that I sent my computer away again, this time it got to ACER, but it took 3 WEEKS to get it back. I actually got documentation from ACER on their repairs this time and all they did was reinstall the sound software. The problem with my speakers still persisted, so outraged I went to STAPLES to demand an answer to all the incompetence I had been experiencing. The manager took me into a room seperate from the main part of the store and tried to convince me that I had damaged my speakers on my laptop by turning the volume too high for too long and that ACER's warranty would not cover this. I protested and said that I never used my volume very loud and that you should be able to listen to your speakers at any volume. Even more outraged I left the store and went home and called ACER. I asked one of their customer service employees, "If I turn the volume too high on my laptop for too long could I possibly damage my speakers?" They sounded confused as if they had never been asked that question and replied "Of course not!" So I asked "If my speakers were damaged by being blown would the warranty not cover that?" The repressentative replied "Of course we would cover that" So I asked " If I send back my computer this time you will replace the speakers and the sound should be fine?" The representative replied that the technicians should be able to diagnose and fix the problem.

 

So I sent my computer away for the third time (second official time since STAPLES never sent it away to ACER the first time) convinced that they would fix the problem this time. I sent the computer to ACER myself instead of letting STAPLES do it for me. I included with my computer a letter of my own diagnosis and that I felt that the speakers should be replaced. This time I had to wait nearly a whole monthe before the computer came back. To my surprise the computer still had the same sound issue!!!! I immediately called ACER and asked them "WHY AM I STILL EXPERIENCING THE SAME SOUND ISSUES!!!!!" they replied that both times they had the computer they did not detect a problem. Outraged I demanded a replacement computer, the customer service representative asked a higher-level technician concerning my demand and replied "Your only option is to send the computer back to us for a re-repair!" I was even more outraged and nearly began shouting "I HAVE NOT BEEN ABLE TO USE MY COMPUTER FOR OVER 2 MONTHS, I AM A UNIVERSITY STUDENT WITH A NEED FOR A COMPUTER TO DO MY ASSIGNMENTS, I CANNOT AFFORD TO KEEP SENDING THIS COMPUTER AWAY WHEN YOU ARE TOO INCOMPETENT TO FIX IT!!!!!!" The representative confirmed to me that this time my speakers had been replaced and that all the software had been checked. He tried to convince me that some of the songs I had been playing were corrupted, but I said to him that the sound problems I am experiencing occurs with any sound that the speakers produce and that the problem is not exclusive to any particular song. Confused and outraged I hung up the phone and now I have no idea what to do about my computer!

 

UPDATE I was really angry when I typed this, I am sorry that I placed so much enpthasis on not buying from my local Staples store or from Acer. What I experienced might just have been random occurance and it should not neccessarily stop anyone from purchasing an Acer product or buying from my local Staples store.

  

About the Photo

*Camera: Canon EOS Digital Rebel XS *Lens: EF-S 18-55mm F/3.5-5.6 IS *Shutter Speed: 1/10Sec. *Aperture Value: F5.6 *ISO: 100 Focal Length: 24.0mm

I shot this on a tripod using mirror lockup and a 2Sec. selftimer.

Devin gazes out over the San Andreas.

Reasoning for Orange Hair and Dirty Looking Body And Face Is Because of the amount of time I left my snake lying in the dirt when I when I left my ps4 on so yeah.... Verhy Dirteh

I enjoy watching the textures, veins, patterns of leaves as much as those colourful vibrant flowers. Leaves are simple, and structural in details that enlighten me in reasoning while flowers always keeps my passion alive.

…and the reason I’m here, …… Simples! I’m posing.

No excuses and even though this is a ‘one off’ hand made dress, by a local seamstress, with no designer label in existence from some up-market store, sewn in China, Pakistan or Bangladesh and passed off as ‘designer’ that women flock to, to purchase, it is still just a frock and I feel fabulous. That’s my excuse and the reasoning is .... because I can.

 

Rapid strata formation in soft sand (field evidence).

Photo of strata formation in soft sand on a beach, created by tidal action of the sea.

Formed in a single, high tidal event. Stunning evidence which displays multiple strata/layers.

 

Why this is so important ....

It has long been assumed, ever since the 17th century, that layers/strata observed in sedimentary rocks were built up gradually, layer upon layer, over many years. It certainly seemed logical at the time, from just looking at rocks, that lower layers would always be older than the layers above them, i.e. that lower layers were always laid down first followed, in time, by successive layers on top.

This was assumed to be true and became known as the superposition principle.

It was also assumed that a layer comprising a different material from a previous layer, represented a change in environmental conditions/factors.

These changes in composition of layers or strata were considered to represent different, geological eras on a global scale, spanning millions of years. This formed the basis for the Geologic Column, which is used to date rocks and also fossils. The evolutionary, 'fossil record' was based on the vast ages and assumed geological eras of the Geologic Column.

There was also circular reasoning applied with the assumed age of 'index' fossils (based on evolutionary beliefs & preconceptions) used to date strata in the Geologic Column. Dating strata from the assumed age of (index) fossils is known as Biostratigraphy.

We now know that, although these assumptions seemed logical, they are not supported by the evidence.

At the time, the mechanics of stratification were not properly known or studied.

 

An additional factor was that this assumed superposition and uniformitarian model became essential, with the wide acceptance of Darwinism, for the long ages required for progressive microbes-to-human evolution. There was no incentive to question or challenge the superposition, uniformitarian model, because the presumed, fossil 'record' had become dependant on it, and any change in the accepted model would present devastating implications for Darwinism.

This had the unfortunate effect of linking the study of geology so closely to Darwinism, that any study independent of Darwinian considerations was effectively stymied. This link of geology with Darwinian preconceptions is known as biostratigraphy.

 

Some other field evidence, in various situations, can be observed here: www.flickr.com/photos/101536517@N06/sets/72157635944904973/

and also in the links to stunning, experimental evidence, carried out by sedimentologists, given later.

_______________________________________________

GEOLOGIC PRINCIPLES (established by Nicholas Steno in the 17th Century):

What Nicolas Steno believed about strata formation is the basis of the principle of Superposition and the principle of Original Horizontality.

dictionary.sensagent.com/Law_of_superposition/en-en/

“Assuming that all rocks and minerals had once been fluid, Nicolas Steno reasoned that rock strata were formed when particles in a fluid such as water fell to the bottom. This process would leave horizontal layers. Thus Steno's principle of original horizontality states that rock layers form in the horizontal position, and any deviations from this horizontal position are due to the rocks being disturbed later.”)

BEDDING PLANES.

'Bedding plane' describes the surface in between each stratum which are formed during sediment deposition.

science.jrank.org/pages/6533/Strata.html

“Strata form during sediment deposition, that is, the laying down of sediment. Meanwhile, if a change in current speed or sediment grain size occurs or perhaps the sediment supply is cut off, a bedding plane forms. Bedding planes are surfaces that separate one stratum from another. Bedding planes can also form when the upper part of a sediment layer is eroded away before the next episode of deposition. Strata separated by a bedding plane may have different grain sizes, grain compositions, or colours. Sometimes these other traits are better indicators of stratification as bedding planes may be very subtle.”

______________________________________________

 

Several catastrophic events, flash floods, volcanic eruptions etc. have forced Darwinian, influenced geologists to admit to rapid stratification in some instances. However they claim it is a rare phenomenon, which they have known about for many years, and which does nothing to invalidate the Geologic Column, the fossil record, evolutionary timescale, or any of the old assumptions regarding strata formation, sedimentation and the superposition principle. They fail to face up to the fact that rapid stratification is not an extraordinary phenonemon, but rather the prevailing and normal mechanism of sedimentary deposition whenever and wherever there is moving, sediment-laden water. The experimental evidence demonstrates the mechanism and a mass of field evidence in normal (non-catastrophic) conditions shows it is a normal everyday occurrence.

It is clear from the experimental evidence that the usual process of stratification is - that strata are not formed by horizontal layers being laid on top of each other in succession, as was assumed. But by sediment being sorted in the flowing water and laid down diagonally in the direction of flow. See diagram:

www.flickr.com/photos/truth-in-science/39821536092/in/dat...

 

The field evidence (in the image) presented here - of rapid, simultaneous stratification refutes the Superposition Principle and the Principle of Lateral Continuity.

 

We now know, the Superposition Principle only applies on a rare occasion where sedimentary deposits are laid down in still water.

Superposition is required for the long evolutionary timescale, but the evidence shows it is not the general rule, as was once believed. Most sediment is laid down in moving water, where particle segregation is the general rule, resulting in the simultaneous deposition of strata/layers as shown in the photo.

 

See many other examples of rapid stratification (with geological features): www.flickr.com/photos/101536517@N06/sets/72157635944904973/

 

Rapid, simultaneous formation of layers/strata, through particle segregation in moving water, is so easily created it has even been described by sedimentologists (working on flume experiments) as a law ...

"Upon filling the tank with water and pouring in sediments, we immediately saw what was to become the rule: The sediments sorted themselves out in very clear layers. This became so common that by the end of two weeks, we jokingly referred to Andrew's law as "It's difficult not to make layers," and Clark's law as "It's easy to make layers." Later on, I proposed the "law" that liquefaction destroys layers, as much to my surprise as that was." Ian Juby, www.ianjuby.org/sedimentation/

 

The example in the photo is the result of normal, everyday tidal action formed in a single incident. Where the water current or movement is more turbulent, violent, or catastrophic, great depths (many metres) of stratified sediment can be laid down in a short time. Certainly not the many millions of years assumed by evolutionists.

 

The composition of strata formed in any deposition event. is related to whatever materials are in the sediment mix, not to any particular timescale. Whatever is in the mix will be automatically sorted into strata/layers. It could be sand, or other material added from mud slides, erosion of chalk deposits, coastal erosion, volcanic ash etc. Any organic material (potential fossils), alive or dead, engulfed by, or swept into, a turbulent sediment mix, will also be sorted and buried within the rapidly, forming layers.

 

See many other examples of rapid stratification with geological features: www.flickr.com/photos/101536517@N06/sets/72157635944904973/

 

Stratified, soft sand deposit. demonstrates the rapid, stratification principle.

Important, field evidence which supports the work of the eminent, sedimentologist Dr Guy Berthault MIAS - Member of the International Association of Sedimentologists.

(Dr Berthault's experiments (www.sedimentology.fr/)

And also the experimental work of Dr M.E. Clark (Professor Emeritus, U of Illinois @ Urbana), Andrew Rodenbeck and Dr. Henry Voss, (www.ianjuby.org/sedimentation/)

 

Location: Yaverland, Isle of Wight. Photographed: 14/03/2019

This field evidence demonstrates that multiple strata in sedimentary deposits do not need millions of years to form and can be formed rapidly. This natural example confirms the principle demonstrated by the sedimentation experiments carried out by Dr Guy Berthault and other sedimentologists. It calls into question the standard, multi-million year dating of sedimentary rocks, and the dating of fossils by depth of burial or position in the strata.

Mulltiple strata/layers are evident in this example.

 

Dr Berthault's experiments (www.sedimentology.fr/) and other experiments (www.ianjuby.org/sedimentation/) and field studies of floods and volcanic action show that, rather than being formed by gradual, slow deposition of sucessive layers superimposed upon previous layers, with the strata or layers representing a particular timescale, particle segregation in moving water or airborne particles can form strata or layers very quickly, frequently, in a single event.

youtu.be/wFST2C32hMQ

youtu.be/SE8NtWvNBKI

And, most importantly, lower strata are not older than upper strata, they are the same age, having been created in the same sedimentary episode.

Such field studies confirm experiments which have shown that there is no longer any reason to conclude that strata/layers in sedimentary rocks relate to different geological eras and/or a multi-million year timescale. www.youtube.com/watch?v=5PVnBaqqQw8&feature=share&amp.... they also show that the relative position of fossils in rocks is not indicative of an order of evolutionary succession. Obviously, the uniformitarian principle, on which the geologic column is based, can no longer be considered valid. And the multi-million, year dating of sedimentary rocks and fossils needs to be reassessed. Rapid deposition of stratified sediments also explains the enigma of polystrate fossils, i.e. large fossils that intersect several strata. In some cases, tree trunk fossils are found which intersect the strata of sedimentary rock up to forty feet in depth. upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/08/Lycopsi... They must have been buried in stratified sediment in a short time (certainly not millions, thousands, or even hundreds of years), or they would have rotted away. youtu.be/vnzHU9VsliQ

 

In fact, the vast majority of fossils are found in good, intact condition, which is testament to their rapid burial. You don't get good fossils from gradual burial, because they would be damaged or destroyed by decay, predation or erosion. The existence of so many fossils in sedimentary rock on a global scale is stunning evidence for the rapid depostion of sedimentary rock as the general rule. It is obvious that all rock containing good intact fossils was formed from sediment laid down in a very short time, not millions, or even thousands of years.

 

See set of photos of other examples of rapid stratification: www.flickr.com/photos/101536517@N06/sets/72157635944904973/

 

Carbon dating of coal should not be possible if it is millions of years old, yet significant amounts of Carbon 14 have been detected in coal and other fossil material, which indicates that it is less than 50,000 years old. www.ldolphin.org/sewell/c14dating.html

 

www.grisda.org/origins/51006.htm

 

Evolutionists confidently cite multi-million year ages for rocks and fossils, but what most people don't realise is that no one actually knows the age of sedimentary rocks or the fossils found within them. So how are evolutionists so sure of the ages they so confidently quote? The astonishing thing is they aren't. Sedimentary rocks cannot be dated by radiometric methods*, and fossils can only be dated to less than 50,000 years with Carbon 14 dating. The method evolutionists use is based entirely on assumptions. Unbelievably, fossils are dated by the assumed age of rocks, and rocks are dated by the assumed age of fossils, that's right ... it is known as circular reasoning.

 

* Regarding the radiometric dating of igneous rocks, which is claimed to be relevant to the dating of sedimentary rocks, in an occasional instance there is an igneous intrusion associated with a sedimentary deposit -

Prof. Aubouin says in his Précis de Géologie: "Each radioactive element disintegrates in a characteristic and constant manner, which depends neither on the physical state (no variation with pressure or temperature or any other external constraint) nor on the chemical state (identical for an oxide or a phosphate)."

"Rocks form when magma crystallizes. Crystallisation depends on pressure and temperature, from which radioactivity is independent. So, there is no relationship between radioactivity and crystallisation.

Consequently, radioactivity doesn't date the formation of rocks. Moreover, daughter elements contained in rocks result mainly from radioactivity in magma where gravity separates the heavier parent element, from the lighter daughter element. Thus radiometric dating has no chronological signification." Dr. Guy Berthault www.sciencevsevolution.org/Berthault.htm

 

Rapid strata formation and rapid erosion at Mount St Helens.

slideplayer.com/slide/5703217/18/images/28/Rapid+Strata+F...

 

Visit the fossil museum:

www.flickr.com/photos/101536517@N06/sets/72157641367196613/

 

Just how good are peer reviews of scientific papers?

www.sciencemag.org/content/342/6154/60.full

www.examiner.com/article/want-to-publish-science-paper-ju...

 

The neo-Darwinian idea that the human genome consists entirely of an accumulation of billions of mutations is, quite obviously, completely bonkers. Nevertheless, it is compulsorily taught in schools and universities as 'science'.

www.flickr.com/photos/truth-in-science/35505679183

 

Dr James Tour - 'The Origin of Life' - Abiogenesis decisively refuted.

youtu.be/B1E4QMn2mxk

Australia.

Bolwell produced sports cars in Australia from 1962-79.

The first production vehicle was the 1962-64 Mk.IV. Campbell Bolwell’s reasoning was that no-one would want to buy the first guinea pig model from any manufacturer. So the Mk.IV was the first.

1964-66 Mk V had an E type Jag look, Holdens 6 cyl, 75 made.

1968 Mk VI, (SR6) one off mid-engined racing car.

1967-72 Mk VII; fastback, four fender vents, Holden 6 cyl. 400 made

1970-74 Mk VIII Bolwell Nagari, the first with a name; 'Nagari' and was a fully built production car and favoured Ford parts, including their V8 engines. Previous models were kit cars and used Holden parts. The Nagari had a one piece fibreglass body, six fender vents. A convertible available from 1972. Early cars were Ford Windsor V8 powered with Cortina parkers, later cars Ford Cleveland V8 powered and MG parkers. 100 coupes and 18 convertibles produced

So far it seems to drive 1:15

 

Suzuki Reupholsters The World's Fastest, Best-Handling Sofa And Keeps It Cheap. Hey, Where's The Remote?

 

Narcissus T. Boomer writes in from his early retirement community just outside Sun City to: a) excoriate us media types for encouraging the development of lightweight rocketships like the CBR929RR and YZF-R1, and b) bemoan the demise of rolling couches like the old Suzuki GS1000S. In customary, have-it-all style, Boomer wants 130 or so horses in a 440-pound package with cutting-edge suspension and handling-and he wants it to be comfortable too, for him and the (second) wife. Naturally it's entirely our fault..."the media," that such a bike doesn't already exist.

 

There's no reasoning with Boomer, really, no matter how often we point out that bikes like what he wants have always been around in the slightly heavier form of the Honda CBR1100XX, et al. (An R1, you see, sort of needs more rider weight over its front wheel to keep it from flipping over backward every few miles; physics dictate its ergonomics.)

 

And though he says he's willing to pay a premium for his dream bike, what Boomer really means is he's willing to haggle until his dealer's ears bleed: $11K for Honda's XX puts too big a ding in the portfolio and might require that the gardener take a cut in pay.

 

Well, Boomer's real dream bike has been around in the form of the Bandit 1200 since 1997, and with this 2001 remake it's even closer. Let us just say this about the old Bandit: Three former motojournalists and one current automotive journalist we personally know own one, and owing to the rigors of the "profession" none of them own much else.

 

Ah yes, I thought as the Bandit's speedo slid past 140 on a long, desolate stretch of California 58 while I assumed the classic slipped-disc slouch behind the new half-fairing with my flaccid 40-year-old butt smooshed deep into its comfy seat, this is the one Mr. Boomer needs. Just like Suzuki's market research says, the typical Bandit 1200 buyer is between 35 and 44 years old, and 63 percent have 16 or more years riding experience. Lies, damn lies and statistics-what it all means is that when you grow up and get over it and realize you're not likely to be the next Nick Hayden or Ben Bostrom and that you are, in fact, older than their combined ages (and your life savings will never equal their year-end bonuses), well...you've got Bandit 1200 stamped across your wrinkly forehead.

 

On the other hand, old age and treachery will eclipse youth and talent (or however that saying goes) at least several times out of 10. And as our Bandit test bike carved through bands of colorful leathery youths on R1s and like implements on swervy Highway 58 on the way back from the U.S. round of the World Superbike Championship, that old saying made perfect sense. Does the new, better-suspended Bandit possess 80 percent of a 929RR Honda's handling? Seventy percent? I'd say 77.3 percent, but on the road-with its blind corners and hills and random cowchips-it barely matters a whit, since you can only use 72.47 percent of the CBR's performance anyway.

 

Sixty-four-point-five percent of riders with more than 16 years of experience (again according to my 40.5-year-old butt) should be able to access about 89.62 percent of the Bandit's goodies-its chassis, anyway, and 99.9 percent of riders will love its retuned motor, not that there was anything wrong with the last one.

 

It verges on racism, really. Jap bike, rice rocket, no character, no soul. People who spout that stuff, as they load their bevel-drive Ducatis on the trailer for the tow home, haven't ridden a 1200 Suzuki lately, if ever. Because if they had they'd know that Suzuki's old oil-cooled beast has more soul in one cooling fin than Ray Charles' upper denture-a distinct clicky, raspy-smooth whir no other four makes. And when it comes time to compare the big Suzuki's performance with your more "soulful" European brands, well, wait a minute, there are none to compare. In short, the thing makes hogsheads of power, it feels good doing it, it doesn't break and maintenance is really optional.

 

In fact the only thing we could find to complain about with the previous Bandit engine was that it was a bit stumbly down low and in the midrange, with a small dip in its torque curve following the 4000 rpm torque peak. The new bike does away with that. Suzuki stuck on a throttle-position sensor, gave the bike new ignition maps (different ones for cylinders one and four, two and three), outfitted it with new 36mm Mikuni BSR carbs with bat-wing-shaped slides, and slightly reduced exhaust valve duration and lift for less overlap.

 

The old four's still rasty, but those updates go a long way toward civilizing it: think Ray Charles with the Orange County Symphony. If it revs a bit less eagerly approaching redline, on this bike the fattened midrange more than makes up for it. This one whistles along just fine without the tach needle ever needing to extend itself past 6000 rpm. The torque peak is more a plateau-extending all the way from 4000 to 8000-with a nice, 100-horse hump at the top.

 

Not that you needed to go to the gearbox much on the old bike, but now you can throw it in fifth and leave it there most of the day if you so choose, using the throttle to smoothly modulate speed between 20- and 150-some mph as you overtake the occasional hunchbacked form of some frantically shifting youth on a GSX-R750. When you do need the clutch, it's even easier to operate, thanks to the miracle of the greater hydraulic leverage provided by a larger-diameter slave cylinder-in spite of new and considerably stiffer clutch springs.

 

That trusty old motor sits in the same type double-cradle round-tube steel frame as before. Although the tank rails have a different bend than before, Suzuki doesn't make any sort of "increased stiffness" claims. What is stiffer, though, is the bike's suspension. In fact, there are two new Bandits: the Bandit 1200S tested here gets the half-fairing and slightly softer springs than the naked Bandit 1200, which will be imported to the United States later in the year (Suzuki's rationale being that the $400-cheaper nonfaired bike is the one Gary Rothwell wannabes will buy, and the faired "S" is for us more mature, full-figured types).

 

Both new bikes, though, are stiffer than the old one. Both use progressive fork springs. The soft portion of the S's springs are 7 percent stiffer than before, with the sterner part of the spring 16 percent stiffer. Out back, the S's shock uses a spring that's a whopping 68 percent stiffer, working through a revised linkage. (The naked 1200 will use similar fork springs, but its rear spring will be 76 percent stiffer than the old Bandit's.)

 

All those numbers add up to a sharper-edged Bandit, though as far as we can tell, a no less comfortable one. Keeping the price low means you're not getting quite the bump-smotheringly sophisticated suspension of Honda's XX, for example, but for the money it's close enough. You feel sharper bumps more on the Bandit, but the seat's so nice they don't bother rider or bike enough to complain. The handlebar rides a bit lower than before while offering the same sit-up leverage, and the new no-bluster fairing directs air cleanly around most of your torso. Bugs on my face shield, none on my shoulders, see?

 

What you get instead of an XX's high-tech ride is the vaguely nostalgic feeling of riding a perfectly restored retro-bike-though no old GS ever worked as well as the Bandit. It's like the difference between a new Lexus and the older car of your dreams: The Lexus will get you there quicker, but maybe you enjoy spending more time in the old car. At least there's more to look at on the Bandit when you stop for a root beer, and for the money it's hard to see how Suzuki can give it such nice paint and fittings and make any money. (What do you mean their profit margins are huge?)

 

On fast, smooth pavement, watch out. The motor's happy to sit at 6000 rpm and 100 mph as long as the lay of the land allows, and those stiffer legs keep the bike on an even keel as you roll in and out of the power.

 

Firmer springs, 'natch, give back better road feel, and if the old Bandit felt a tad vague and wallowy at flanking speed, the new one feels much less so. Herding it along between the lines is now a far more precise exercise. In those rare occasions where you need the brakes on California 58, the Tokico six-piston jobbies are plenty strong, but it's the firmer suspension that really helps, as the bike shifts its weight forward much less unceremoniously when you chop the throttle.

 

Carving corners is therefore easier as well, with, again, the upright ergos and wide bar giving the distinct impression you could work your way out of whatever unexpected jam might pop up round the next blind bend. Steering is light and quick enough, and the bike feels perfectly solid heeled way over in 100-mph bends. Forgive us for being so juvenile, but it's fun to drag the occasional footpeg on the street. Reminds us of our youth, before everything had footpegs at armpit height. Gives you the impression you're working it. We didn't deck any hard parts.

 

You could downshift if you felt like it, but after the first hundred miles of curves it feels like a waste of energy, given that the bike seems to pull just about as hard at 5000 rpm in fifth gear as it does at 6000 in fourth. That sort of power encourages you to concentrate on the road and keep up cornering speed, and at that the Bandit is surprisingly adept. (So was the old one.)

 

When the road tightens, well, we're forever spoiled by bikes like the Honda CBR929 that weigh 100 pounds less than the Bandit and make a bunch more peak power, but the Suzuki will not be far behind. If you can only get the Bandit pointed in the right direction out of a tight corner, its off-the-bottom grunt will give anything on the street a run for its money.

 

Oh well, if you're old, er, experienced enough to be looking at a Bandit then you already know. It's not the meat but the motion that unwinds tangled back roads, and in general a good rider on a Bandit has even less holding him back than before when it comes to giving the crotch-rocket crowd its comeuppance.

 

But it's really a sport-tourer, isn't it, and in that role no R1 or GSX-R can hold even a cheap little birthday-cake candle to Bandito Grande. It truly is a flying couch, just less overstuffed than before. Some complained of excessive vibration in the previous model, and while you still feel a little buzz through the bars, you'd have to be truly thin-skinned to be annoyed at the new bike's vibes (all the new lightweight liter-bikes buzz worse). At a nice sedate 80 mph and 4800 rpm, our test unit is smooth as rayon, though its wide-set mirrors are slightly blurry. (Or maybe it's our vision?)

 

Now and then when cruising the superslab a sixth cog would be nice, but should one so desire, the solution to that's a simple sprocket swap away. The gas tank holds about a third of a gallon more than before, which gives right around 200 miles of range, and the seat and the rest of the bike are up for that if you are. In fact, on the Bandit that's nothing. Time to give the kids a lesson in longevity...

 

Speaking of gas, we've never truly trusted low-fuel lights. (How do you know the bulb isn't burned out?) The Bandit gives you a nice LCD gauge and a petcock. Also a clock. You'll need to carry some stuff on those overnight trips, and there are plenty of places to bungee it aboard. Mildred (OK, maybe Manfred) may want to come along. No problem, the seat's covered in some sort of new no-skid fabric (not so good for sliding around when riding solo), and there's a solid passenger grabrail as well.

 

So maybe we magazine people are responsible for the race-replica explosion that began with the original GSX-R750, but I don't think so. All we are, really, are a bunch of motorcycle nuts, and those bikes were the ones that got us-along with everybody else with a pulse-really enthused lo those many years ago. They still do. (And if we wield that much influence, how do you explain Harley-Davidson's market share?)

 

Nope, R1s and GSX-Rs and 996 Ducatis continue to sell because, apart from their performance, they gain their buyers entry into that colorful fantasy world populated by daring young men with interesting facial hair and sweet umbrella girls-the international moto jet-set. Hey, if I'm riding this thing, I must be daring and ruggedly good-looking too, right? A nonconformist, laughing at danger and convention. Hah!

 

Right, Marvin. And after, say, oh, 16 years of that, you'll be ready to appreciate this new Bandit 1200S. If motorcycles can be wise, this one is. It should cost more than $7399.

 

Fl. 18.699 for this 1200S version in 1997.

Please read my December update on my 'About' page for my reasoning.

 

It's been fun, but I wish to end this chapter gracefully.

 

A big thank you to everyone that has supported me in some way; all of the lovely comments & emails. I love you all xx

 

Wishing peace and goodwill for everyone this festive season xx

Rapid strata formation in soft sand (field evidence).

Photo of strata formation in soft sand on a beach, created by tidal action of the sea.

Formed in a single, high tidal event. Stunning evidence which displays multiple strata/layers.

 

Why this is so important ....

It has long been assumed, ever since the 17th century, that layers/strata observed in sedimentary rocks were built up gradually, layer upon layer, over many years. It certainly seemed logical at the time, from just looking at rocks, that lower layers would always be older than the layers above them, i.e. that lower layers were always laid down first followed, in time, by successive layers on top.

This was assumed to be true and became known as the superposition principle.

It was also assumed that a layer comprising a different material from a previous layer, represented a change in environmental conditions/factors.

These changes in composition of layers or strata were considered to represent different, geological eras on a global scale, spanning millions of years. This formed the basis for the Geologic Column, which is used to date rocks and also fossils. The evolutionary, 'fossil record' was based on the vast ages and assumed geological eras of the Geologic Column.

There was also circular reasoning applied with the assumed age of 'index' fossils (based on evolutionary preconceptions) used to date strata in the Geologic Column.

We now know that, although these assumptions seemed logical, they are not supported by the evidence.

At the time, the mechanics of stratification were not properly known or studied.

 

An additional factor was that this assumed superposition and uniformitarian model became essential, with the wide acceptance of Darwinism, for the long ages required for progressive microbes-to-human evolution. There was no incentive to question or challenge the superposition, uniformitarian model, because the presumed, fossil 'record' had become dependant on it, and any change in the accepted model would present devastating implications for Darwinism.

This had the unfortunate effect of linking the study of geology so closely to Darwinism, that any study independent of Darwinian considerations was effectively stymied.

Some of the wealth of field evidence can be observed here: www.flickr.com/photos/101536517@N06/sets/72157635944904973/

and also in the links to stunning, experimental evidence, carried out by sedimentologists, given later.

Several catastrophic events, flash floods, volcanic eruptions etc. have forced Darwinian influenced geologists to admit to rapid stratification in some instances. However they claim it is a rare phenomenon, which they known about for many years, and which does nothing to invalidate the Geologic Column, the fossil record, evotuionary timescale, or any of the old assumptions regarding strata formation, sedimentation and the superposition principle. They fail to face up to the fact that rapid stratification is not an extraordinary phenonemon, but rather the prevailing and normal mechanism of sedimantary deposition whenever and wherever there is moving, sediment-laden water. The experimental evidence demonstrates the mechanism and a mass of field evidence in normal (non-catastrophic) conditions shows it is a normal everyday occurrence.

It is clear from the experimental evidence that the usual process of stratification is - that strata are not formed by horizontal layers being laid on top of each other in succession, as was assumed. But by sediment being sorted in the flowing water and laid down diagonally in the direction of flow.

_______________________________________________

GEOLOGIC PRINCIPLES (established by Nicholas Steno in the 17th Century):

What Nicolas Steno believed about strata formation is the basis of the principle of Superposition and the principle of Original Horizontality.

dictionary.sensagent.com/Law_of_superposition/en-en/

“Assuming that all rocks and minerals had once been fluid, Nicolas Steno reasoned that rock strata were formed when particles in a fluid such as water fell to the bottom. This process would leave horizontal layers. Thus Steno's principle of original horizontality states that rock layers form in the horizontal position, and any deviations from this horizontal position are due to the rocks being disturbed later.”)

BEDDING PLANES.

'Bedding plane' describes the surface in between each stratum which are formed during sediment deposition.

science.jrank.org/pages/6533/Strata.html

“Strata form during sediment deposition, that is, the laying down of sediment. Meanwhile, if a change in current speed or sediment grain size occurs or perhaps the sediment supply is cut off, a bedding plane forms. Bedding planes are surfaces that separate one stratum from another. Bedding planes can also form when the upper part of a sediment layer is eroded away before the next episode of deposition. Strata separated by a bedding plane may have different grain sizes, grain compositions, or colours. Sometimes these other traits are better indicators of stratification as bedding planes may be very subtle.”

______________________________________________

 

Several catastrophic events, flash floods, volcanic eruptions etc. have forced Darwinian, influenced geologists to admit to rapid stratification in some instances. However they claim it is a rare phenomenon, which they have known about for many years, and which does nothing to invalidate the Geologic Column, the fossil record, evotuionary timescale, or any of the old assumptions regarding strata formation, sedimentation and the superposition principle. They fail to face up to the fact that rapid stratification is not an extraordinary phenonemon, but rather the prevailing and normal mechanism of sedimentary deposition whenever and wherever there is moving, sediment-laden water. The experimental evidence demonstrates the mechanism and a mass of field evidence in normal (non-catastrophic) conditions shows it is a normal everyday occurrence.

It is clear from the experimental evidence that the usual process of stratification is - that strata are not formed by horizontal layers being laid on top of each other in succession, as was assumed. But by sediment being sorted in the flowing water and laid down diagonally in the direction of flow. See diagram:

www.flickr.com/photos/truth-in-science/39821536092/in/dat...

 

The field evidence (in the image) presented here - of rapid, simultaneous stratification refutes the Superposition Principle, and the Principle of Lateral Continuity.

 

We now know, the Superposition Principle only applies on a rare occasion of sedimentary deposits in perfectly, still water. Superposition is required for the long evolutionary timescale, but the evidence shows it is not the general rule, as was once believed. Most sediment is laid down in moving water, where particle segregation is the general rule, resulting in the simultaneous deposition of strata/layers as shown in the photo.

 

See many other examples of rapid stratification with geological features: www.flickr.com/photos/101536517@N06/sets/72157635944904973/

 

Rapid, simultaneous formation of layers/strata, through particle segregation in moving water, is so easily created it has even been described by sedimentologists (working on flume experiments) as a law ...

"Upon filling the tank with water and pouring in sediments, we immediately saw what was to become the rule: The sediments sorted themselves out in very clear layers. This became so common that by the end of two weeks, we jokingly referred to Andrew's law as "It's difficult not to make layers," and Clark's law as "It's easy to make layers." Later on, I proposed the "law" that liquefaction destroys layers, as much to my surprise as that was." Ian Juby, www.ianjuby.org/sedimentation/

 

The example in the photo is the result of normal, everyday tidal action in a single incident. Where the water current or movement is more turbulent, violent, or catastrophic, great depths (many metres) of stratified sediment can be laid down in a short time. Certainly not the many millions of years assumed by evolutionists.

 

The composition of strata formed in any deposition event. is related to whatever materials are in the sediment mix, not to any particular timescale. Whatever is in the mix will be automatically sorted into strata/layers. It could be sand, or other material added from mud slides, erosion of chalk deposits, coastal erosion, volcanic ash etc. Any organic material (potential fossils), alive or dead, engulfed by, or swept into, a turbulent sediment mix, will also be sorted and buried within the rapidly, forming layers.

 

See many other examples of rapid stratification with geological features: www.flickr.com/photos/101536517@N06/sets/72157635944904973/

 

Stratified, soft sand deposit. demonstrates the rapid, stratification principle.

Important, field evidence which supports the work of the eminent, sedimentologist Dr Guy Berthault MIAS - Member of the International Association of Sedimentologists.

(Dr Berthault's experiments (www.sedimentology.fr/)

And also the experimental work of Dr M.E. Clark (Professor Emeritus, U of Illinois @ Urbana), Andrew Rodenbeck and Dr. Henry Voss, (www.ianjuby.org/sedimentation/)

 

Location: Sandown beach, Isle of Wight. Formed 15/01/2018, This field evidence demonstrates that multiple strata in sedimentary deposits do not need millions of years to form and can be formed rapidly. This natural example confirms the principle demonstrated by the sedimentation experiments carried out by Dr Guy Berthault and other sedimentologists. It calls into question the standard, multi-million year dating of sedimentary rocks, and the dating of fossils by depth of burial or position in the strata.

 

Mulltiple strata/layers are evident in this example.

 

Dr Berthault's experiments (www.sedimentology.fr/) and other experiments (www.ianjuby.org/sedimentation/) and field studies of floods and volcanic action show that, rather than being formed by gradual, slow deposition of sucessive layers superimposed upon previous layers, with the strata or layers representing a particular timescale, particle segregation in moving water or airborne particles can form strata or layers very quickly, frequently, in a single event.

And, most importantly, lower strata are not older than upper strata, they are the same age, having been created in the same sedimentary episode.

Such field studies confirm experiments which have shown that there is no longer any reason to conclude that strata/layers in sedimentary rocks relate to different geological eras and/or a multi-million year timescale. www.youtube.com/watch?v=5PVnBaqqQw8&feature=share&amp.... they also show that the relative position of fossils in rocks is not indicative of an order of evolutionary succession. Obviously, the uniformitarian principle, on which the geologic column is based, can no longer be considered valid. And the multi-million, year dating of sedimentary rocks and fossils needs to be reassessed. Rapid deposition of stratified sediments also explains the enigma of polystrate fossils, i.e. large fossils that intersect several strata. In some cases, tree trunk fossils are found which intersect the strata of sedimentary rock up to forty feet in depth. upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/08/Lycopsi... They must have been buried in stratified sediment in a short time (certainly not millions, thousands, or even hundreds of years), or they would have rotted away. youtu.be/vnzHU9VsliQ

 

In fact, the vast majority of fossils are found in good, intact condition, which is testament to their rapid burial. You don't get good fossils from gradual burial, because they would be damaged or destroyed by decay, predation or erosion. The existence of so many fossils in sedimentary rock on a global scale is stunning evidence for the rapid depostion of sedimentary rock as the general rule. It is obvious that all rock containing good intact fossils was formed from sediment laid down in a very short time, not millions, or even thousands of years.

 

See set of photos of other examples of rapid stratification: www.flickr.com/photos/101536517@N06/sets/72157635944904973/

 

Carbon dating of coal should not be possible if it is millions of years old, yet significant amounts of Carbon 14 have been detected in coal and other fossil material, which indicates that it is less than 50,000 years old. www.ldolphin.org/sewell/c14dating.html

 

www.grisda.org/origins/51006.htm

 

Evolutionists confidently cite multi-million year ages for rocks and fossils, but what most people don't realise is that no one actually knows the age of sedimentary rocks or the fossils found within them. So how are evolutionists so sure of the ages they so confidently quote? The astonishing thing is they aren't. Sedimentary rocks cannot be dated by radiometric methods*, and fossils can only be dated to less than 50,000 years with Carbon 14 dating. The method evolutionists use is based entirely on assumptions. Unbelievably, fossils are dated by the assumed age of rocks, and rocks are dated by the assumed age of fossils, that's right ... it is known as circular reasoning.

 

* Regarding the radiometric dating of igneous rocks, which is claimed to be relevant to the dating of sedimentary rocks, in an occasional instance there is an igneous intrusion associated with a sedimentary deposit -

Prof. Aubouin says in his Précis de Géologie: "Each radioactive element disintegrates in a characteristic and constant manner, which depends neither on the physical state (no variation with pressure or temperature or any other external constraint) nor on the chemical state (identical for an oxide or a phosphate)."

"Rocks form when magma crystallizes. Crystallisation depends on pressure and temperature, from which radioactivity is independent. So, there is no relationship between radioactivity and crystallisation.

Consequently, radioactivity doesn't date the formation of rocks. Moreover, daughter elements contained in rocks result mainly from radioactivity in magma where gravity separates the heavier parent element, from the lighter daughter element. Thus radiometric dating has no chronological signification." Dr. Guy Berthault www.sciencevsevolution.org/Berthault.htm

 

Visit the fossil museum:

www.flickr.com/photos/101536517@N06/sets/72157641367196613/

 

Just how good are peer reviews of scientific papers?

www.sciencemag.org/content/342/6154/60.full

www.examiner.com/article/want-to-publish-science-paper-ju...

 

The neo-Darwinian idea that the human genome consists entirely of an accumulation of billions of mutations is, quite obviously, completely bonkers. Nevertheless, it is compulsorily taught in schools and universities as 'science'.

www.flickr.com/photos/truth-in-science/35505679183

This "Barn" is nicer than many people's homes. As fitting for billionaires, this amazing three level building is a mini museum. Many carriages, beautiful old cars, a vintage gas pump, amazing mill work and trim, and large glass lighting fixtures. Our ten minutes wasn't nearly long enough. The no indoor photo policy is a bummer, but their reasoning is many flashes from cameras over time will damage the materials. If people only knew how to turn off their flashes. Of course my fellow flickrites know what I'm saying. Photographers who take the craft seriously, are punished by the casual throw away snap shot taker. Sorry for the speach. I feel better now.

By my reasoning, this is probably the best manta of the trip. Having said that, my previous favourite isn't as popular as some of the others, so I could be wrong.

Another of my very few Deltic shots.

After some serious detective work, I've deduced that this was taken on the 1st March 1979. My reasoning is thus: it's taken on my late father's 120 roll Agfa Isolette: I was only allowed to use that camera on very few occasions: this was the day that KGV did a 125th Anniversary run from Paddington to Didcot (failed and had a 47 on the return).

As luck would have it, the fantastic www.napierchronicles.co.uk has 55019 working the 1S28 13:00 Kings Cross - Edinburgh.

Possibly my connections are tenuous, but with no other information to hand I'm going to accept my own assumptions!

 

Fortunately, 55019 is still with us today courtesy of the Deltic Preservation Society.

Came home found the trashcan tipped over, and the trash bag inside were gone. It's not a trash day, and I was working on the driveway about 50 meters away the whole time. Reasoning tells me it's got to be a bear since foxes and cats wouldn't take the whole bag. Security camera footage confirms the saying: one man's trash is a bear's treasure, or something like that.

Where's Noah's Arc (poem)

 

Where's some of the reasoning?

Where's the higher lever of ethics?

Where's the cloud and pouring rain?

Where's Noah's Arc to witness sunrays?

Will there ever be sufficient answers?

Will there be an intent that makes sense?

  

by ScarletFace @ 2014-04-30 – 17:55:30

forums.delphiforums.com/amour_destin/messages/?msg=2095.1

No specific reasoning, no special occasion nor excuse ............... I am just you average, basic TGirl poser.

Rapid strata formation in soft sand (field evidence).

Photo of strata formation in soft sand on a beach, created by tidal action of the sea.

Formed in a single, high tidal event. Stunning evidence which displays multiple strata/layers.

 

Why this is so important ....

It has long been assumed, ever since the 17th century, that layers/strata observed in sedimentary rocks were built up gradually, layer upon layer, over many years. It certainly seemed logical at the time, from just looking at rocks, that lower layers would always be older than the layers above them, i.e. that lower layers were always laid down first followed, in time, by successive layers on top.

This was assumed to be true and became known as the superposition principle.

It was also assumed that a layer comprising a different material from a previous layer, represented a change in environmental conditions/factors.

These changes in composition of layers or strata were considered to represent different, geological eras on a global scale, spanning millions of years. This formed the basis for the Geologic Column, which is used to date rocks and also fossils. The evolutionary, 'fossil record' was based on the vast ages and assumed geological eras of the Geologic Column.

There was also circular reasoning applied with the assumed age of 'index' fossils (based on evolutionary beliefs & preconceptions) used to date strata in the Geologic Column. Dating strata from the assumed age of fossils is known as Biostratigraphy.

We now know that, although these assumptions seemed logical, they are not supported by the evidence.

At the time, the mechanics of stratification were not properly known or studied.

 

An additional factor was that this assumed superposition and uniformitarian model became essential, with the wide acceptance of Darwinism, for the long ages required for progressive microbes-to-human evolution. There was no incentive to question or challenge the superposition, uniformitarian model, because the presumed, fossil 'record' had become dependant on it, and any change in the accepted model would present devastating implications for Darwinism.

This had the unfortunate effect of linking the study of geology so closely to Darwinism, that any study independent of Darwinian considerations was effectively stymied. This link of geology with Darwinian preconceptions is known as biostratigraphy.

 

Some of the wealth of evidence can be observed here: www.flickr.com/photos/101536517@N06/sets/72157635944904973/

and also in the links to stunning, experimental evidence, carried out by sedimentologists, given later.

_______________________________________________

GEOLOGIC PRINCIPLES (established by Nicholas Steno in the 17th Century):

What Nicolas Steno believed about strata formation is the basis of the principle of Superposition and the principle of Original Horizontality.

dictionary.sensagent.com/Law_of_superposition/en-en/

“Assuming that all rocks and minerals had once been fluid, Nicolas Steno reasoned that rock strata were formed when particles in a fluid such as water fell to the bottom. This process would leave horizontal layers. Thus Steno's principle of original horizontality states that rock layers form in the horizontal position, and any deviations from this horizontal position are due to the rocks being disturbed later.”)

BEDDING PLANES.

'Bedding plane' describes the surface in between each stratum which are formed during sediment deposition.

science.jrank.org/pages/6533/Strata.html

“Strata form during sediment deposition, that is, the laying down of sediment. Meanwhile, if a change in current speed or sediment grain size occurs or perhaps the sediment supply is cut off, a bedding plane forms. Bedding planes are surfaces that separate one stratum from another. Bedding planes can also form when the upper part of a sediment layer is eroded away before the next episode of deposition. Strata separated by a bedding plane may have different grain sizes, grain compositions, or colours. Sometimes these other traits are better indicators of stratification as bedding planes may be very subtle.”

______________________________________________

 

Several catastrophic events, flash floods, volcanic eruptions etc. have forced Darwinian, influenced geologists to admit to rapid stratification in some instances. However they claim it is a rare phenomenon, which they have known about for many years, and which does nothing to invalidate the Geologic Column, the fossil record, evotuionary timescale, or any of the old assumptions regarding strata formation, sedimentation and the superposition principle. They fail to face up to the fact that rapid stratification is not an extraordinary phenonemon, but rather the prevailing and normal mechanism of sedimentary deposition whenever and wherever there is moving, sediment-laden water. The experimental evidence demonstrates the mechanism and a mass of field evidence in normal (non-catastrophic) conditions shows it is a normal everyday occurrence.

It is clear from the experimental evidence that the usual process of stratification is - that strata are not formed by horizontal layers being laid on top of each other in succession, as was assumed. But by sediment being sorted in the flowing water and laid down diagonally in the direction of flow. See diagram:

www.flickr.com/photos/truth-in-science/39821536092/in/dat...

 

The field evidence (in the image) presented here - of rapid, simultaneous stratification refutes the Superposition Principle, and the Principle of Lateral Continuity.

 

We now know, the Superposition Principle only applies on a rare occasion of sedimentary deposits in perfectly, still water. Superposition is required for the long evolutionary timescale, but the evidence shows it is not the general rule, as was once believed. Most sediment is laid down in moving water, where particle segregation is the general rule, resulting in the simultaneous deposition of strata/layers as shown in the photo.

 

See many other examples of rapid stratification with geological features: www.flickr.com/photos/101536517@N06/sets/72157635944904973/

 

Rapid, simultaneous formation of layers/strata, through particle segregation in moving water, is so easily created it has even been described by sedimentologists (working on flume experiments) as a law ...

"Upon filling the tank with water and pouring in sediments, we immediately saw what was to become the rule: The sediments sorted themselves out in very clear layers. This became so common that by the end of two weeks, we jokingly referred to Andrew's law as "It's difficult not to make layers," and Clark's law as "It's easy to make layers." Later on, I proposed the "law" that liquefaction destroys layers, as much to my surprise as that was." Ian Juby, www.ianjuby.org/sedimentation/

 

The example in the photo is the result of normal, everyday tidal action in a single incident. Where the water current or movement is more turbulent, violent, or catastrophic, great depths (many metres) of stratified sediment can be laid down in a short time. Certainly not the many millions of years assumed by evolutionists.

 

The composition of strata formed in any deposition event. is related to whatever materials are in the sediment mix, not to any particular timescale. Whatever is in the mix will be automatically sorted into strata/layers. It could be sand, or other material added from mud slides, erosion of chalk deposits, coastal erosion, volcanic ash etc. Any organic material (potential fossils), alive or dead, engulfed by, or swept into, a turbulent sediment mix, will also be sorted and buried within the rapidly, forming layers.

 

See many other examples of rapid stratification with geological features: www.flickr.com/photos/101536517@N06/sets/72157635944904973/

 

Stratified, soft sand deposit. demonstrates the rapid, stratification principle.

Important, field evidence which supports the work of the eminent, sedimentologist Dr Guy Berthault MIAS - Member of the International Association of Sedimentologists.

(Dr Berthault's experiments (www.sedimentology.fr/)

And also the experimental work of Dr M.E. Clark (Professor Emeritus, U of Illinois @ Urbana), Andrew Rodenbeck and Dr. Henry Voss, (www.ianjuby.org/sedimentation/)

 

Location: Sandown, Isle of Wight. Formed 23/02/2018, This field evidence demonstrates that multiple strata in sedimentary deposits do not need millions of years to form and can be formed rapidly. This natural example confirms the principle demonstrated by the sedimentation experiments carried out by Dr Guy Berthault and other sedimentologists. It calls into question the standard, multi-million year dating of sedimentary rocks, and the dating of fossils by depth of burial or position in the strata.

 

Mulltiple strata/layers are evident in this example.

 

Dr Berthault's experiments (www.sedimentology.fr/) and other experiments (www.ianjuby.org/sedimentation/) and field studies of floods and volcanic action show that, rather than being formed by gradual, slow deposition of sucessive layers superimposed upon previous layers, with the strata or layers representing a particular timescale, particle segregation in moving water or airborne particles can form strata or layers very quickly, frequently, in a single event.

And, most importantly, lower strata are not older than upper strata, they are the same age, having been created in the same sedimentary episode.

Such field studies confirm experiments which have shown that there is no longer any reason to conclude that strata/layers in sedimentary rocks relate to different geological eras and/or a multi-million year timescale. www.youtube.com/watch?v=5PVnBaqqQw8&feature=share&amp.... they also show that the relative position of fossils in rocks is not indicative of an order of evolutionary succession. Obviously, the uniformitarian principle, on which the geologic column is based, can no longer be considered valid. And the multi-million, year dating of sedimentary rocks and fossils needs to be reassessed. Rapid deposition of stratified sediments also explains the enigma of polystrate fossils, i.e. large fossils that intersect several strata. In some cases, tree trunk fossils are found which intersect the strata of sedimentary rock up to forty feet in depth. upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/08/Lycopsi... They must have been buried in stratified sediment in a short time (certainly not millions, thousands, or even hundreds of years), or they would have rotted away. youtu.be/vnzHU9VsliQ

 

In fact, the vast majority of fossils are found in good, intact condition, which is testament to their rapid burial. You don't get good fossils from gradual burial, because they would be damaged or destroyed by decay, predation or erosion. The existence of so many fossils in sedimentary rock on a global scale is stunning evidence for the rapid depostion of sedimentary rock as the general rule. It is obvious that all rock containing good intact fossils was formed from sediment laid down in a very short time, not millions, or even thousands of years.

 

See set of photos of other examples of rapid stratification: www.flickr.com/photos/101536517@N06/sets/72157635944904973/

 

Carbon dating of coal should not be possible if it is millions of years old, yet significant amounts of Carbon 14 have been detected in coal and other fossil material, which indicates that it is less than 50,000 years old. www.ldolphin.org/sewell/c14dating.html

 

www.grisda.org/origins/51006.htm

 

Evolutionists confidently cite multi-million year ages for rocks and fossils, but what most people don't realise is that no one actually knows the age of sedimentary rocks or the fossils found within them. So how are evolutionists so sure of the ages they so confidently quote? The astonishing thing is they aren't. Sedimentary rocks cannot be dated by radiometric methods*, and fossils can only be dated to less than 50,000 years with Carbon 14 dating. The method evolutionists use is based entirely on assumptions. Unbelievably, fossils are dated by the assumed age of rocks, and rocks are dated by the assumed age of fossils, that's right ... it is known as circular reasoning.

 

* Regarding the radiometric dating of igneous rocks, which is claimed to be relevant to the dating of sedimentary rocks, in an occasional instance there is an igneous intrusion associated with a sedimentary deposit -

Prof. Aubouin says in his Précis de Géologie: "Each radioactive element disintegrates in a characteristic and constant manner, which depends neither on the physical state (no variation with pressure or temperature or any other external constraint) nor on the chemical state (identical for an oxide or a phosphate)."

"Rocks form when magma crystallizes. Crystallisation depends on pressure and temperature, from which radioactivity is independent. So, there is no relationship between radioactivity and crystallisation.

Consequently, radioactivity doesn't date the formation of rocks. Moreover, daughter elements contained in rocks result mainly from radioactivity in magma where gravity separates the heavier parent element, from the lighter daughter element. Thus radiometric dating has no chronological signification." Dr. Guy Berthault www.sciencevsevolution.org/Berthault.htm

 

Visit the fossil museum:

www.flickr.com/photos/101536517@N06/sets/72157641367196613/

 

Just how good are peer reviews of scientific papers?

www.sciencemag.org/content/342/6154/60.full

www.examiner.com/article/want-to-publish-science-paper-ju...

 

The neo-Darwinian idea that the human genome consists entirely of an accumulation of billions of mutations is, quite obviously, completely bonkers. Nevertheless, it is compulsorily taught in schools and universities as 'science'.

www.flickr.com/photos/truth-in-science/35505679183

Shot on Nikon D610 and Sigma 35mm f/1.4 DG HSM Art

YOKOSUKA, Japan - (June 7, 2016) CommanderSeventh Fleet, Vice Adm. Joseph Aucoin and Commander Naval Forces Japan, Rear Adm. Matthew Carter hold an all hands call for all khaki leaders (E-7 and above) on board Fleet Activities Yokosuka, Japan, June 7. The two admirals explained to the assembled leaders the reasoning behind a temporary liberty curtailment and alcohol restriction in Japan and challenged the khakis to take ownership in the recent spike in alcohol related incidents. Both leaders plan on conducting similar discussions throughout Japan. (U.S. Navy photo by ABH2 Vincent Arnuco/RELEASED)

I assume these are single-person boats. I never really caught them in operation. I suppose you are basically sitting on the edges, but with barely enough space for your legs it seems like a huge hassle to get in and out of. What is the reasoning behind this design? From a Google search they seem to be specific to Sri Lanka.

31528 First Glasgow

URS318X

on Union Street, Glasgow.

 

I'm not sure the reasoning this was out on the 100, but it was a very welcome addition to the Glasgow scene, and significantly different to the Enviro400H's I was hoping to see in the city!

Australia.

Bolwell Cars produced sports cars in Australia from 1962-79.

The first production vehicle was named the Mk.IV. Campbell Bolwell’s reasoning was that no-one would want to buy the first guinea pig model from any manufacturer. So Mk.IV it was.

The 1962-64 Mk.IV was designed with low height, good aerodynamics, minimal weight, and balanced front-rear weight distribution. It featured a steel tube chassis and fibreglass body. (The later Mk IVb had a back bone unitary chassis).

Components included Triumph Herald front suspension, Standard 10 brakes, clutch, radiator and differential in conjunction with an A frame and two trailing links. Ford Kent 4 cylinder engine and gearbox. Taller engines such as BMC, Peugeot, Simca, Hillman etc could be used with a bonnet bulge.

A total of 100 made including 12 gull wing GTs

 

The Trotwood Walmart closed its doors in October of 2007. The reasoning behind the closure was poor sales. This is one of the few Walmarts closed without a direct replacement.

Photo of strata formation in soft sand on a beach, created by tidal action of the sea.

 

Stratified, soft sand deposit. demonstrates the rapid stratification principle.

 

This close up photo shows the detail, see distance photo for the context here: www.flickr.com/photos/truth-in-science/31322567145

 

Rapidly deposited, sandbank with geological features of sedimentary rock, i.e. strata, folded strata and faulting. Formed in a single, tidal event of turbulent, high tide with gale force winds.

 

Rapid stratification. Field evidence.

 

Location: Sandown beach, Isle of Wight. Formed on 17/11/2016, Overall depth of deposit: approx 20 inches.

 

This field evidence demonstrates that multiple strata in sedimentary deposits do not need millions of years to form and can be formed rapidly. This natural example confirms the principle demonstrated by the sedimentation experiments carried out by Dr Guy Berthault and other sedimentologists. It calls into question the standard, multi-million year dating of sedimentary rocks, and the dating of fossils by depth of burial or position in the strata.

 

Strata lines/layers are clearly visible in this photo.

 

Dr Berthault's experiments (sedimentology.fr/) and other experiments (ianjuby.org/sedimentation/) and field studies of floods and volcanic action show that, rather than being formed by gradual, slow deposition of sediment, with the strata or layers representing a timescale or even a particular, environmental epoch, particle segregation in moving water or airborne particles can form strata or layers very quickly. Such field studies and the experiments show that there is no longer any reason to conclude that strata in sedimentary rocks relate to different geological eras and/or a multi-million year timescale. www.youtube.com/watch?v=5PVnBaqqQw8&feature=share&amp.... It also shows that the relative position of fossils in rocks is not indicative of an order of evolutionary succession. Obviously, the uniformitarian principle, on which the geologic column is based, can no longer be considered valid. And the multi-million, year dating of sedimentary rocks and fossils needs to be reassessed. Rapid deposition of stratified sediments also explains the enigma of polystrate fossils, i.e. large fossils that intersect several strata. In some cases, tree trunk fossils are found which intersect the strata of sedimentary rock up to forty feet in depth. upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/08/Lycopsi... They must have been buried in stratified sediment in a short time (certainly not millions or even thousands of years), or they would have rotted away. youtu.be/vnzHU9VsliQ

 

See set of photos of another example of rapid stratification: www.flickr.com/photos/101536517@N06/sets/72157635944904973/

 

Carbon dating of coal should not be possible if it is millions of years old, yet significant amounts of Carbon 14 have been detected in coal and other fossil material, which indicates that it is less than 50,000 years old. www.ldolphin.org/sewell/c14dating.html

 

www.grisda.org/origins/51006.htm

 

Evolutionists confidently cite multi-million year ages for rocks and fossils, but what most people don't realise is that no one actually knows the age of sedimentary rocks or the fossils found within them. So how are evolutionists so sure of the ages they so confidently quote? The astonishing thing is they aren't. Sedimentary rocks cannot be dated by radiometric methods, and fossils can only be dated to less than 50,000 years with Carbon 14 dating. The method evolutionists use is based entirely on assumptions. Unbelievably, fossils are dated by the assumed age of rocks, and rocks are dated by the assumed age of fossils, that's right ... it is known as circular reasoning.

 

www.nhm.ac.uk/nature-online/science-of-natural-history/th...

 

Visit the fossil museum:

 

www.flickr.com/photos/101536517@N06/sets/72157641367196613/

 

Just how good are peer reviews of scientific papers?

 

www.sciencemag.org/content/342/6154/60.full

 

www.examiner.com/article/want-to-publish-science-paper-ju...

 

The romantic seeks hope hopelessly. What he seeks is usually what he doesn’t possess. What he lacks is what he thinks will make him happy because what he has is always petty and mundane. Happiness appears impossible to attain without attaining the impossible; Only the impossible decrees a pursuit. Reasoning with himself thus, the romantic pursues the unreasonable and worthlessly ponders about the worth of a life without an impossible dream. In his pursuit of happiness, he realizes that fulfillment in life is an oxymoron as life would cease to exist for him if he was happy and fulfilled.

 

Unit 2 belonging to Troop D 4 (Beaver County.) This is the Beaver Barracks last CVPI and is supposedly being retired within the next few weeks. (Since retired) In this area for PSP they cap their cars out at 140,000 miles. This unit only has 110,000 miles. I am unsure the reasoning is behind its plan of retirement, best guess is age. Very clean 2011 with the Fire Suppression System like all PSP CVPI's have installed. Very friendly Troopers @ this post.

Detail of derelict Oregon Promise. The hull is made of reinforced concrete.

Location: Warsaw

 

One of the few US-spec Audis, I'm sure. This one looks actually farily good in matte-black, the red stripe is a bit much, but it fits. The reasoning behind the plate is probably "mirin" as a (common) shortening for "admiring"; although its meaning is slightly narrowed to represent a sensation of envy rather than looking-up.

 

W = Mazowieckie

Unit 2 belonging to Troop D 4 (Beaver County.) This is the Beaver Barracks last CVPI and is supposedly being retired within the next few weeks. In this area for PSP they cap their cars out at 140,000 miles. This unit only has 110,000 miles. I am unsure the reasoning is behind its plan of retirement, best guess is age. Very clean 2011 with the Fire Suppression System like all PSP CVPI's have installed. Very friendly Troopers @ this post.

Three Short Teachings

By Dilgo Khyentse Rinpoche:

 

Thoughts and the Mind

 

Like waves, all the activities of this life have rolled endlessly on, one after the other, yet they have left us feeling empty-handed. Myriads of thoughts have run through our mind, each one giving birth to many more, but what they have done is to increase our confusion and dissatisfaction.

 

When we closely examine the ordinary habits that underlie whatever we do and try to discover where they come from, we find that their very source is our failure to investigate them properly. We operate under the deluded assumption that everything has some sort of true, substantial reality. But when we look more carefully, we find that the phenomenal world is like a rainbow—vivid and colourful, but without any tangible existence.

 

When a rainbow appears in the sky we see many beautiful colours—yet a rainbow is not something we can clothe ourselves with, or wear as an ornament. There is nothing we can take hold of; it is simply something that appears to us through the conjunction of various conditions. Thoughts arise in the mind in just the same way. They have no tangible reality or intrinsic existence at all. There is therefore no logical reason why thoughts should have so much power over us, nor any reason why we should be enslaved by them.

 

Mind is what creates both samsara and nirvana. Yet there is nothing much to it—it is just thoughts. Once we recognize that thoughts are empty, the mind will no longer have the power to deceive us. But as long as we take our deluded thoughts as real, they will continue to torment us mercilessly, as they have been doing throughout countless past lives. To gain control over the mind, we need to be aware of what to do and what to avoid, and we also need to be alert and vigilant, constantly examining all our thoughts, words and actions.

 

To cut through the mind’s clinging, it is important to understand that all appearances are void, like the appearance of water in a mirage. Beautiful forms are of no benefit to the mind, nor can ugly forms harm it in any way. Sever the ties of hope and fear, attraction and repulsion, and remain in equanimity in the understanding that all phenomena are nothing more than projections of your own mind.

 

Once you have realized absolute truth, then you will see the whole, infinite display of relative phenomena that appears within it as no more than an illusion or a dream. To realize that appearance and voidness are one is what is called simplicity, or freedom from conceptual limitations.

 

Self and others

 

As you wish to be happy, so you should wish others to be happy too. As you wish to be free from suffering, so you should wish that all beings may also be free from suffering. You should think, “May all living creatures find happiness and the cause of happiness. May they be free from suffering and the cause of suffering. May they always have perfect happiness free from suffering. May they live in equanimity, without attachment or hatred but with love towards all without any discrimination.”

 

To feel overflowing love and almost unbearable compassion for all living creatures is the best way to fulfil the wishes of all the Buddhas and Bodhisattvas. Even if for the moment you cannot actually help anyone in an external way, meditate on love and compassion constantly over the months and years until compassion is knit inseparably into the very fabric of your mind.

 

As you try to practise and progress on the path, it is essential to remember that your efforts are for the sake of others. Be humble and remember that all your exertions are child’s play compared to the vast and infinite activity of the Bodhisattvas. Like parents providing for the children they love so much, never think that you have done too much for others—or even enough. Even if you finally manage to establish all living creatures in perfect Buddhahood, simply think that all your wishes have been fulfilled. There must never be so much as a trace of hope for any benefit for oneself in return.

 

The essence of the Bodhisattva practice is to go beyond self-clinging and dedicate yourself to serving others. The Bodhisattva’s activity hinges on the mind, not on how your actions might appear externally. True generosity is the absence of clinging, ultimate discipline is the absence of desire, and authentic patience is the absence of hatred. Bodhisattvas are able to give away their kingdom, their body, their dearest possessions, because they have completely overcome any inner impoverishment and are unconditionally ready to fulfil the needs of others.

 

Practice

 

The teachings we need most are those that will actually strengthen and inspire our practice. It is all very well to receive teachings as high as the sky, but the sky is not that easy to grasp. Start with practices which you can truly assimilate—developing determination to be free of ordinary concerns, nurturing love and compassion—and as you gain stability in your practice you will eventually be able to master all the higher teachings.

 

The only way to achieve liberation from samsara and attain the omniscience of enlightenment is to rely on an authentic spiritual teacher. An authentic spiritual teacher is like the sail that enables a boat to cross the ocean swiftly.

 

The sun and moon are reflected in clear, still water instantly. Similarly, the blessings of the Three Jewels are always present for those who have complete confidence in them. The sun’s rays fall everywhere uniformly, but only where they are focused through a magnifying glass can they set dry grass on fire. When the all-pervading rays of the Buddhas’ compassion are focused through the magnifying glass of your faith and devotion, the flame of blessings blazes up in your being.

 

Obstacles can arise from good as well as bad circumstances, but they should never deter or overpower you. Be like the earth, which supports all living creatures indiscriminately, without distinguishing good from bad. The earth is simply there. Your practice should be strengthened by the difficult situations you encounter, just as a bonfire in a strong wind is not blown out, but blazes even brighter.

 

When someone harms you, see him as a kind teacher who is showing you the path to liberation and merits your respect. Pray that you may be able to help him as much as you can, and whatever happens, never hope for an opportunity for vengeance. It is particularly admirable to bear patiently the harm and scorn of people who have less education, strength or skill than you.

 

Look right into it, and you will see that the person who is harmed, the person who does the harm, and the harm itself are all totally devoid of any inherent reality. Who, then, is going to get angry at mere delusions? Faced with these empty appearances, is there anything to be lost or gained? Is there anything to be liked or disliked? It is all like an empty sky. Recognize that!

 

Once you control the anger within, you will discover that there is not a single adversary left outside. But as long as you pay heed to your hatred and attempt to overcome your external opponents, even if you succeed, more will inevitably rise up in their place. Even if you managed to overpower everyone in the whole world, your anger would only grow stronger; to follow it will never make it subside. The only really intolerable enemy is hatred itself. To defeat the enemy of hatred it is necessary to meditate one-pointedly on patience and love until they truly take root in your being. Then there can be no outer adversaries.

 

Ask yourself how many of the billions of inhabitants of this planet have any idea of how rare it is to have been born as a human being. How many of those who understand the rarity of human birth ever think of using that chance to practise the Dharma? How many of those who think of starting to practise actually do so? How many of those who start continue to practise? How many of those who continue attain ultimate realization? Indeed, those who attain ultimate realization, compared to those who do not, are as few as the stars you can see at daybreak compared to the myriad stars you can see in the clear night sky.

 

As long as you, like most people, fail to recognize the true value of human existence you will just fritter your life away in futile activity and distraction. When life comes all too soon to its inevitable end, you will not have achieved anything worthwhile at all. But once you really see the unique opportunity that human life can bring, you will definitely direct all your energy into reaping its true worth by putting the Dharma into practice.

 

If you make use of your human birth in the right way, you can achieve enlightenment in this very lifetime. All the great Siddhas of the past were born as ordinary people. But by entering the Dharma, following a realized teacher and devoting their whole lives to practising the instructions they received, they were able to manifest the enlightened activities of great Bodhisattvas.

 

Translated by the Padmakara Translation Group

From Dilgo Khyentse Rinpoche

Editions Padmakara

Australia.

Bolwell produced sports cars in Australia from 1962-79.

The first production vehicle was the 1962-64 Mk.IV. Campbell Bolwell’s reasoning was that no-one would want to buy the first guinea pig model from any manufacturer. So the Mk.IV was the first.

1964-66 Mk V had an E type Jag look, Holdens 6 cyl, 75 made.

1968 Mk VI, (SR6) one off mid-engined racing car.

1967-72 Mk VII; fastback, four fender vents, Holden 6 cyl. 400 made

1970-74 Mk VIII Bolwell Nagari, the first with a name; 'Nagari' and was a fully built production car and favoured Ford parts, including their V8 engines. Previous models were kit cars and used Holden parts. The Nagari had a one piece fibreglass body, six fender vents. A convertible available from 1972. Early cars were Ford Windsor V8 powered with Cortina parkers, later cars Ford Cleveland V8 powered and MG parkers (this car). 100 coupes and 18 convertibles produced

 

Albert Dekker stars as Alexander Thorkel, a mad scientist who pursues a fantastic experiment deep in the Peruvian jungle. He uses radioactivity to miniaturize living things, including humans, reasoning that if people were one-tenth their normal size, there would be ten times as much food to go around. When fellow scientists penetrate his jungle retreat, the paranoid Dr. Thorkel shrinks them down to size to protect his secret, even killing one of them to demonstrate his power. Here is a link to the movie trailer:

 

www.youtube.com/watch?v=xlSqylxm3jo

 

Will Garth, the author of the novel based on the movie, is a house pseudonym. Authorship is often misattributed to Henry Kuttner because of his shorter magazine version from the film script published in “Thrilling Wonder Stories.” The actual author of the novel is likely Alexander Samalman.

 

YOKOSUKA, Japan - (June 7, 2016) CommanderSeventh Fleet, Vice Adm. Joseph Aucoin and Commander Naval Forces Japan, Rear Adm. Matthew Carter hold an all hands call for all khaki leaders (E-7 and above) on board Fleet Activities Yokosuka, Japan, June 7. The two admirals explained to the assembled leaders the reasoning behind a temporary liberty curtailment and alcohol restriction in Japan and challenged the khakis to take ownership in the recent spike in alcohol related incidents. Both leaders plan on conducting similar discussions throughout Japan. (U.S. Navy photo by ABH2 Vincent Arnuco/RELEASED)