![[nihil.fr]](/assets/img/nihilique/btn-rouage.jpg)
Alors bon, comme je suis jamais en manque d’idées débiles pour remuer le bourbier instable dans lequel on s’englue en permanence, je vais me permettre de faire quelques propositions honnêtes pour changer un peu les choses sur la Zone et, une fois n’est pas coutume (ça c’est une expression bien placée ou je m’y connais pas bordel de merde), aller de l’avant. Attention propositions bourrées de private-jokes et d’agressions gratuites compréhensibles seulement par une poignée d’initiés. J’adore ce genre littéraire.
- empêcher le morcellement de la communauté par la mise en pièces de la communauté. Ca c’est une solution à la zonarde. Pour cela, il faut créer deux-mille sous-sites ayant le même esprit, le même concept, les mêmes membres, le même design et avec un peu de chance les mêmes textes que la Zone regroupant chacun un à quatre zonards. D’ailleurs c’est ce qu’on entrepris Tulia, Hashman, Bouc et Morg avec un site actuellement en construction / déconstruction tenu entièrement secret. Tellement secret d’ailleurs, que tout le monde a déjà l’adresse. Après le site de Djinny, après le site de Clax et avant celui d’Arka, voilà qui devrait sensiblement améliorer la solidarité et la cohésion de la communauté. J’envisage d’ailleurs, moi aussi, de créer un site personnel regroupant des textes décalés et humoristiques et un forum, un site qui s’appellerait le Lieu, ou l’Endroit. Ou la Zone, tiens. J’hésite encore. Je vous donnerai l’adresse en temps voulu, c’est M. Yo qui va être content ! Merde, on me fait signe dans mon oreillette que Daria a déjà l’adresse avant même la création du site en question. Ca craint.
- publier un article de Cepu où elle raconte pas sa vie miteuse… Merde, déjà tenté sans succès.
- reconvertir le site en communauté de fanatiques kamikazes du tuning, on a le potentiel pour ça, et imposer que tout nouveau texte concerne exclusivement les jantes alliage disponibles sur les Renault 5 TDI-TGWS-SFHHD, une bagnole d’enculé de sa race qui fait fait du 0-100 km/h en une infinité de temps puisque qu’elle monte même pas à 100 Km/h, mais putain qu’est-ce que c’est trop bien de transformer ce tas de boue en Enterprise de Star Trek ! Et ensuite pousser ces avortements sur pattes à se faire exploser sur le salon de l’Auto. Et ensuite rigoler.
- boire un litre cinquante de bière en trois minutes. Ah non merde, c’est pas un projet de site ça, c’est un objectif de vie.
- trouver un boulot et refiler la Zone à Lapinchien. A moi la vie normale et rêvée du bon citoyen modèle qui paye ses factures.
- compiler les meilleurs textes de la Zone et les proposer à l’édition pour envahir le monde de notre prose décadente et… Ah non merde chuis con, on a déjà essayé, ça, et on a pas réussi à dépasser le stade du choix de textes avant de s’auto-détruire en plein vol. Aaaaah c’est beau une secte, quand même. J’adore quand tout le monde est d’accord comme ça. Postuler à l’académie française tout en se cirant le pingouin en se disant qu’on est les plus forts.
- épouser Kirunaa.
- orienter le site vers un esprit légèrement plus généraliste, plus grand-public. Faire de la pub. Autoriser les blagues à la Jean Roucas. Parler sérieusement de sujets sérieux et parler sérieusement de sujets imbéciles. Mettre de la couleur dans le design (le gris n’est pas considéré comme une couleur, merci de votre aide constructive), genre du vert et du violet (avec un t à la fin, vous énervez pas). Prôner la suprématie du smiley sur l’expression verbale. Changer de pseudonyme en « pitit-lapinou » ou encore « susucre-d’orge ». Souhaiter la bienvenue aux nouveaux. Mettre en signature automatique sur le forum un truc du genre « tendresses » ou « bisoux à tous ». Ouaiiiiis c’est bien ça, je sens que je vais recouvrir mon clavier de sperme avarié rien qu’à cette idée.
- bouffer du mouton.
- supprimer le compte « Zone » chez l’Apinc et n’en rouvrir nulle part. Se barrer en ricanant comme un mongolien.
- commencer à sélectionner les textes. Refuser directement tous les textes contenant le mot « Lapinchien », même dans la case auteur. Chipoter sur les textes déconnants en les trouvant trop vulgaires ou pas assez intelligents. Grincer des dents sur les textes littéraires en critiquant leur manque d’originalité ou leur style plus que moyen. Se lécher le trou-du-cul en se félicitant de son immense pouvoir de jugement et de son objectivité. Virer sans sommation tous les auteurs produisant moins d’un texte par demi-heure tout en refusant systématiquement tout article de moins de six pages. Et finir en supprimant frénétiquement tout article ayant le malheur d’apparaître dans la liste des article en attente.
- supprimer le compte « Zone » chez… Merde, déjà dit.
- confier à Taliesin la responsabilité d’un dossier sur les régions de France et sur le communautarisme. Un dossier sur la joie de vivre et les fleurs à Tulia. Un dossier sur la philosophie incompréhensible et inutile à Strange. Un dossier sur l’inspiration littéraire à Ocus. Un dossier sur la cohérence à Keyz. Et aucun dossier à Lapinchien.
- retrouver M. Goret et le pousser à réintervenir sur la Zone. Lui confier la rédaction-chef.
Bon bah finalement on va s’abstenir.
![[imprimer]](/images/print.png)
= chemin =
= résumé =
[ Edito déconnant et inutile dans la grande tradition. ]
![[illustration]](/data/img/images/wireart.jpg)
Quel ennui, un site où tout tourne rond, finalement. Je comprends les déserteurs en fait, tout se passe trop bien, et vas-y que je te balance ton petit article par jour, et vas-y que je te chope un ou deux nouveaux auteurs à droite à gauche, et vas-y que je te récolte ta tripotée de boulets interactifs habituelle. Rien de neuf dans ce monde merdique hanté par du surconsommateur virtuel maniaco-dépressif en masse et du résidu de matière grise polluée par les mass-medias. Nan nan ça va, je suis très calme. = ajouter un commentaire =
Les commentaires sont réservés aux utilisateurs connectés.
= commentaires =
Un dossier sur l’inspiration littéraire à Ocus
va falloir que je bosse ? c'est ca que ca veut dire ???
Ce n'est qu'une proposition, rassurez-vous cher adhérent
...
Oui bonjour, parlez bien fort dans le micro vous prie
"ki me parle ????"
TUDUDU
Le numéro que vous avez demandé n'est pas attribué, merci de bien vouloir vous rectifier la tronche en vous frappant bien fort avec le combiné du téléphone !
"Se barrer en ricanant comme un mongolien".
Alors, mon petit Nihil, comme ça on fait de l'auto-stop ?
C'est bon Emile, tu peux l'embarquer, la manivelle est prête !
Ah bon parce que tu t'en prend aux mecs aussi toi maintenant ?
Euh...
*nihil vérifie un truc
Euh... Bah non non c'est bon, j'arrive
Ah merde, Nihil serait donc un homme ! Je croyais que c'était juste un concept, moi...
Pas grave. Monte quand même dans la camionnette. Je te dépose où ?
Tulia, tu poses cette manivelle et tu laisses le mong... monsieur tranquille. C'est juste un auto-stoppeur.
Et si tu es gentille, je t'emmènerai voir les postières...
Ah ouaiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiis, en plus y en a plein des mongoliennes là-bas, ça va être super !!!! Je pourrais emmener la manivelle dis ????
"D’ailleurs c’est ce qu’on entrepris Tulia, Hashman, Bouc et Morg avec un site actuellement en construction / déconstruction tenu entièrement secret."
Hein ? MAIS PUTAIN POURQUOI JE SUIS TOUJOURS LE DERNIER AU COURANT ??? J'parie que c'est moi qui va se taper tout le boulot...
Daria, t'aurai l'adresse steuplé ?
Tout ce que tu voudras... La manivelle, le motoculteur, le lance-flamme... On tâchera d'en garder quelques unes pour le 10 avril quand même. Ce serait con de détruire tout le nid d'un coup.
Et pour l'armoire normande je fais quoi au fait ?
"J'parie que c'est moi qui va se taper tout le boulot..."
Fais gaffe, tu te transformes déjà petit à petit en hashman...
L'armoire normande ? Ben tu fais comme d'hab', dans ton cul ! La réponse semblait pourtant évidente...
Ben ouais mais justement, des fois, on lui fait un peu prendre l'air donc c'était pour savoir...
Si ça ne te déranges pas, garde-là, ça fait du lest, la camionnette accroche mieux dans les virages...
T'as pensé à l'emmener au contrôle technique au fait ?
" "J'parie que c'est moi qui va se taper tout le boulot..."
Fais gaffe, tu te transformes déjà petit à petit en hashman..."
Nan tu es dans l'erreur, je parlais de Moi, un mec qui arrete pas de me suivre depuis pas mal de temps, mais c'est pas moi, c'est Moi, tu comprends...?
Donc Moi va se taper tout le boulot
J'ai rarement vu une justification aussi minable. On dirait... ben hahsman justement.
Je crois que je vais l'emmener au contrôle technique en même temps que la camionnette...
Allez, mon petit Bouc, monte à l'arrière... et tu peux emmener Moi avec toi, si tu veux...
The Bible-Science Subcommittee of the Biblical Research Committee of the General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists met a year ago to begin the development of an adequate flood model. Such a model proposes to correlate the Biblical description of the flood with geological and paleontological evidence.
Topics presented included a reevaluation of the flood-related information found in the Bible and in the writings of Ellen G. White. Harold G. Coffin of the Geoscience Research Institute presented the available evidence and brought it to bear upon the geological and biological problems. He quoted from Ellen G. White, "Relics found in the earth do give evidence of conditions differing in many respects from the present; but the time when these conditions existed can be learned only from the Inspired Record. In the history of the Flood, inspiration has explained that which geology alone could never fathom." (White, Ellen G. 1958. The story of patriarchs and prophets. Pacific Press Publishing Association, Mountain View, California, p. 112). Dr. Coffin related that in his own experience an understanding of the Genesis flood had enhanced his ability to understand the "secrets of the past."
Ariel A. Roth, chairman of the Subcommittee, presented several possible earth models as they could be related to a worldwide flood. Included were considerations of a static-continent model, an expanding earth model and continental drift. None of these models a priori mitigated against a universal flood, and because of the current uncertainty in earth modeling, no model was considered preferable over others. The interesting model of an expanding earth caught the imagination of several present and seemed to fit well with some of the current evidence. Whichever model one chooses, the distribution of continental sediments can suggest a flood model that includes most of the geological column.
In his presentation based on extensive data, Lester Harris, then chairman of the Department of Biology, Columbia Union College, associated a large part of orogenic activity, volcanism, and glaciation with the complex interdigitated events during and following the flood. Recognition of the temporal relationships of these events plays an important part in developing an accurate flood model.
Another Geoscience Research Institute member, Harold E. James, Jr., acquainted the group with some of the sedimentology of flysch deposits, which are thick deposits consisting of sequential thin layers of fine sediment. Parts of these deposits display clear evidences of very rapid sediment accumulation during high energy conditions. The widespread distribution of these deposits in the geological record makes it important that we better understand the forces and circumstances necessary for their formation so that they can be correctly related to a flood model.
Some interesting observations from paleobotany as they relate to a flood model were presented by Arthur V. Chadwick, Assistant Professor of Biology, Loma Linda University. Important considerations were the presence of algae in the Precambrian; the sudden appearance of almost all plant types in the Devonian, with the notable exception of angiosperms; the massive coal deposits of the Carboniferous consisting mostly of extinct plant types; the sudden appearance of the angiosperms as a mature flora in the Cretaceous. These events which generally favor a catastrophic model require some additional development and refinement regarding causes. Dr. Chadwick also presented a report on some recent research being done in palynology and paleobotany in the laboratories at Loma Linda University.
Preliminary data on the distribution of trilobites was presented by Conrad D. Clausen, Assistant Professor of Biology, Loma Linda University. This distribution matches an ecological interpretation of the fossil record as well as, or better than, an evolutionary explanation.
Dr. Roth presented some preliminary results of his survey of clastic dikes and the implications of these findings on classical geochronological interpretations of earth history. He pointed out that clastic dikes, which are cases of softer sediment being intruded from below into cracks in overlying hardened sediments, pose constraints on a long chronology model, and support a short chronology.
By postulating greater atmospheric pressure, a warmer and more uniform temperature distribution, stronger magnetic field, and a smaller radiocarbon production rate, Ray Hefferlin, of the Physics Department at Southern Missionary College, introduced a flood model that accounts for a pre-flood life environment differing considerably from that of the present.
At a subsequent meeting of this Subcommittee last May, further consideration was given to details of a flood model. Matters dealing with Biblical interpretation were presented by Gerhard F. Hasel, Associate Professor of Old Testament and Biblical Theology, Andrews University. Leonard R. Brand, chairman of the Biology Department of Loma Linda University, discussed the philosophical rationale in an approach to a flood model, and Dr. Coffin presented data relating the ecological distribution of living foraminifera to their relative location in parts of the fossil record.
Much interest has been engendered by the work of this committee. It is apparent that much more work remains to be done.
The Bible-Science Subcommittee of the Biblical Research Committee of the General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists met a year ago to begin the development of an adequate flood model. Such a model proposes to correlate the Biblical description of the flood with geological and paleontological evidence.
Topics presented included a reevaluation of the flood-related information found in the Bible and in the writings of Ellen G. White. Harold G. Coffin of the Geoscience Research Institute presented the available evidence and brought it to bear upon the geological and biological problems. He quoted from Ellen G. White, "Relics found in the earth do give evidence of conditions differing in many respects from the present; but the time when these conditions existed can be learned only from the Inspired Record. In the history of the Flood, inspiration has explained that which geology alone could never fathom." (White, Ellen G. 1958. The story of patriarchs and prophets. Pacific Press Publishing Association, Mountain View, California, p. 112). Dr. Coffin related that in his own experience an understanding of the Genesis flood had enhanced his ability to understand the "secrets of the past."
Ariel A. Roth, chairman of the Subcommittee, presented several possible earth models as they could be related to a worldwide flood. Included were considerations of a static-continent model, an expanding earth model and continental drift. None of these models a priori mitigated against a universal flood, and because of the current uncertainty in earth modeling, no model was considered preferable over others. The interesting model of an expanding earth caught the imagination of several present and seemed to fit well with some of the current evidence. Whichever model one chooses, the distribution of continental sediments can suggest a flood model that includes most of the geological column.
In his presentation based on extensive data, Lester Harris, then chairman of the Department of Biology, Columbia Union College, associated a large part of orogenic activity, volcanism, and glaciation with the complex interdigitated events during and following the flood. Recognition of the temporal relationships of these events plays an important part in developing an accurate flood model.
Another Geoscience Research Institute member, Harold E. James, Jr., acquainted the group with some of the sedimentology of flysch deposits, which are thick deposits consisting of sequential thin layers of fine sediment. Parts of these deposits display clear evidences of very rapid sediment accumulation during high energy conditions. The widespread distribution of these deposits in the geological record makes it important that we better understand the forces and circumstances necessary for their formation so that they can be correctly related to a flood model.
Some interesting observations from paleobotany as they relate to a flood model were presented by Arthur V. Chadwick, Assistant Professor of Biology, Loma Linda University. Important considerations were the presence of algae in the Precambrian; the sudden appearance of almost all plant types in the Devonian, with the notable exception of angiosperms; the massive coal deposits of the Carboniferous consisting mostly of extinct plant types; the sudden appearance of the angiosperms as a mature flora in the Cretaceous. These events which generally favor a catastrophic model require some additional development and refinement regarding causes. Dr. Chadwick also presented a report on some recent research being done in palynology and paleobotany in the laboratories at Loma Linda University.
Preliminary data on the distribution of trilobites was presented by Conrad D. Clausen, Assistant Professor of Biology, Loma Linda University. This distribution matches an ecological interpretation of the fossil record as well as, or better than, an evolutionary explanation.
Dr. Roth presented some preliminary results of his survey of clastic dikes and the implications of these findings on classical geochronological interpretations of earth history. He pointed out that clastic dikes, which are cases of softer sediment being intruded from below into cracks in overlying hardened sediments, pose constraints on a long chronology model, and support a short chronology.
By postulating greater atmospheric pressure, a warmer and more uniform temperature distribution, stronger magnetic field, and a smaller radiocarbon production rate, Ray Hefferlin, of the Physics Department at Southern Missionary College, introduced a flood model that accounts for a pre-flood life environment differing considerably from that of the present.
At a subsequent meeting of this Subcommittee last May, further consideration was given to details of a flood model. Matters dealing with Biblical interpretation were presented by Gerhard F. Hasel, Associate Professor of Old Testament and Biblical Theology, Andrews University. Leonard R. Brand, chairman of the Biology Department of Loma Linda University, discussed the philosophical rationale in an approach to a flood model, and Dr. Coffin presented data relating the ecological distribution of living foraminifera to their relative location in parts of the fossil record.
Much interest has been engendered by the work of this committee. It is apparent that much more work remains to be done.
The Bible-Science Subcommittee of the Biblical Research Committee of the General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists met a year ago to begin the development of an adequate flood model. Such a model proposes to correlate the Biblical description of the flood with geological and paleontological evidence.
Topics presented included a reevaluation of the flood-related information found in the Bible and in the writings of Ellen G. White. Harold G. Coffin of the Geoscience Research Institute presented the available evidence and brought it to bear upon the geological and biological problems. He quoted from Ellen G. White, "Relics found in the earth do give evidence of conditions differing in many respects from the present; but the time when these conditions existed can be learned only from the Inspired Record. In the history of the Flood, inspiration has explained that which geology alone could never fathom." (White, Ellen G. 1958. The story of patriarchs and prophets. Pacific Press Publishing Association, Mountain View, California, p. 112). Dr. Coffin related that in his own experience an understanding of the Genesis flood had enhanced his ability to understand the "secrets of the past."
Ariel A. Roth, chairman of the Subcommittee, presented several possible earth models as they could be related to a worldwide flood. Included were considerations of a static-continent model, an expanding earth model and continental drift. None of these models a priori mitigated against a universal flood, and because of the current uncertainty in earth modeling, no model was considered preferable over others. The interesting model of an expanding earth caught the imagination of several present and seemed to fit well with some of the current evidence. Whichever model one chooses, the distribution of continental sediments can suggest a flood model that includes most of the geological column.
In his presentation based on extensive data, Lester Harris, then chairman of the Department of Biology, Columbia Union College, associated a large part of orogenic activity, volcanism, and glaciation with the complex interdigitated events during and following the flood. Recognition of the temporal relationships of these events plays an important part in developing an accurate flood model.
Another Geoscience Research Institute member, Harold E. James, Jr., acquainted the group with some of the sedimentology of flysch deposits, which are thick deposits consisting of sequential thin layers of fine sediment. Parts of these deposits display clear evidences of very rapid sediment accumulation during high energy conditions. The widespread distribution of these deposits in the geological record makes it important that we better understand the forces and circumstances necessary for their formation so that they can be correctly related to a flood model.
Some interesting observations from paleobotany as they relate to a flood model were presented by Arthur V. Chadwick, Assistant Professor of Biology, Loma Linda University. Important considerations were the presence of algae in the Precambrian; the sudden appearance of almost all plant types in the Devonian, with the notable exception of angiosperms; the massive coal deposits of the Carboniferous consisting mostly of extinct plant types; the sudden appearance of the angiosperms as a mature flora in the Cretaceous. These events which generally favor a catastrophic model require some additional development and refinement regarding causes. Dr. Chadwick also presented a report on some recent research being done in palynology and paleobotany in the laboratories at Loma Linda University.
Preliminary data on the distribution of trilobites was presented by Conrad D. Clausen, Assistant Professor of Biology, Loma Linda University. This distribution matches an ecological interpretation of the fossil record as well as, or better than, an evolutionary explanation.
Dr. Roth presented some preliminary results of his survey of clastic dikes and the implications of these findings on classical geochronological interpretations of earth history. He pointed out that clastic dikes, which are cases of softer sediment being intruded from below into cracks in overlying hardened sediments, pose constraints on a long chronology model, and support a short chronology.
By postulating greater atmospheric pressure, a warmer and more uniform temperature distribution, stronger magnetic field, and a smaller radiocarbon production rate, Ray Hefferlin, of the Physics Department at Southern Missionary College, introduced a flood model that accounts for a pre-flood life environment differing considerably from that of the present.
At a subsequent meeting of this Subcommittee last May, further consideration was given to details of a flood model. Matters dealing with Biblical interpretation were presented by Gerhard F. Hasel, Associate Professor of Old Testament and Biblical Theology, Andrews University. Leonard R. Brand, chairman of the Biology Department of Loma Linda University, discussed the philosophical rationale in an approach to a flood model, and Dr. Coffin presented data relating the ecological distribution of living foraminifera to their relative location in parts of the fossil record.
Much interest has been engendered by the work of this committee. It is apparent that much more work remains to be done.
The Bible-Science Subcommittee of the Biblical Research Committee of the General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists met a year ago to begin the development of an adequate flood model. Such a model proposes to correlate the Biblical description of the flood with geological and paleontological evidence.
Topics presented included a reevaluation of the flood-related information found in the Bible and in the writings of Ellen G. White. Harold G. Coffin of the Geoscience Research Institute presented the available evidence and brought it to bear upon the geological and biological problems. He quoted from Ellen G. White, "Relics found in the earth do give evidence of conditions differing in many respects from the present; but the time when these conditions existed can be learned only from the Inspired Record. In the history of the Flood, inspiration has explained that which geology alone could never fathom." (White, Ellen G. 1958. The story of patriarchs and prophets. Pacific Press Publishing Association, Mountain View, California, p. 112). Dr. Coffin related that in his own experience an understanding of the Genesis flood had enhanced his ability to understand the "secrets of the past."
Ariel A. Roth, chairman of the Subcommittee, presented several possible earth models as they could be related to a worldwide flood. Included were considerations of a static-continent model, an expanding earth model and continental drift. None of these models a priori mitigated against a universal flood, and because of the current uncertainty in earth modeling, no model was considered preferable over others. The interesting model of an expanding earth caught the imagination of several present and seemed to fit well with some of the current evidence. Whichever model one chooses, the distribution of continental sediments can suggest a flood model that includes most of the geological column.
In his presentation based on extensive data, Lester Harris, then chairman of the Department of Biology, Columbia Union College, associated a large part of orogenic activity, volcanism, and glaciation with the complex interdigitated events during and following the flood. Recognition of the temporal relationships of these events plays an important part in developing an accurate flood model.
Another Geoscience Research Institute member, Harold E. James, Jr., acquainted the group with some of the sedimentology of flysch deposits, which are thick deposits consisting of sequential thin layers of fine sediment. Parts of these deposits display clear evidences of very rapid sediment accumulation during high energy conditions. The widespread distribution of these deposits in the geological record makes it important that we better understand the forces and circumstances necessary for their formation so that they can be correctly related to a flood model.
Some interesting observations from paleobotany as they relate to a flood model were presented by Arthur V. Chadwick, Assistant Professor of Biology, Loma Linda University. Important considerations were the presence of algae in the Precambrian; the sudden appearance of almost all plant types in the Devonian, with the notable exception of angiosperms; the massive coal deposits of the Carboniferous consisting mostly of extinct plant types; the sudden appearance of the angiosperms as a mature flora in the Cretaceous. These events which generally favor a catastrophic model require some additional development and refinement regarding causes. Dr. Chadwick also presented a report on some recent research being done in palynology and paleobotany in the laboratories at Loma Linda University.
Preliminary data on the distribution of trilobites was presented by Conrad D. Clausen, Assistant Professor of Biology, Loma Linda University. This distribution matches an ecological interpretation of the fossil record as well as, or better than, an evolutionary explanation.
Dr. Roth presented some preliminary results of his survey of clastic dikes and the implications of these findings on classical geochronological interpretations of earth history. He pointed out that clastic dikes, which are cases of softer sediment being intruded from below into cracks in overlying hardened sediments, pose constraints on a long chronology model, and support a short chronology.
By postulating greater atmospheric pressure, a warmer and more uniform temperature distribution, stronger magnetic field, and a smaller radiocarbon production rate, Ray Hefferlin, of the Physics Department at Southern Missionary College, introduced a flood model that accounts for a pre-flood life environment differing considerably from that of the present.
At a subsequent meeting of this Subcommittee last May, further consideration was given to details of a flood model. Matters dealing with Biblical interpretation were presented by Gerhard F. Hasel, Associate Professor of Old Testament and Biblical Theology, Andrews University. Leonard R. Brand, chairman of the Biology Department of Loma Linda University, discussed the philosophical rationale in an approach to a flood model, and Dr. Coffin presented data relating the ecological distribution of living foraminifera to their relative location in parts of the fossil record.
Much interest has been engendered by the work of this committee. It is apparent that much more work remains to be done.
The Bible-Science Subcommittee of the Biblical Research Committee of the General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists met a year ago to begin the development of an adequate flood model. Such a model proposes to correlate the Biblical description of the flood with geological and paleontological evidence.
Topics presented included a reevaluation of the flood-related information found in the Bible and in the writings of Ellen G. White. Harold G. Coffin of the Geoscience Research Institute presented the available evidence and brought it to bear upon the geological and biological problems. He quoted from Ellen G. White, "Relics found in the earth do give evidence of conditions differing in many respects from the present; but the time when these conditions existed can be learned only from the Inspired Record. In the history of the Flood, inspiration has explained that which geology alone could never fathom." (White, Ellen G. 1958. The story of patriarchs and prophets. Pacific Press Publishing Association, Mountain View, California, p. 112). Dr. Coffin related that in his own experience an understanding of the Genesis flood had enhanced his ability to understand the "secrets of the past."
Ariel A. Roth, chairman of the Subcommittee, presented several possible earth models as they could be related to a worldwide flood. Included were considerations of a static-continent model, an expanding earth model and continental drift. None of these models a priori mitigated against a universal flood, and because of the current uncertainty in earth modeling, no model was considered preferable over others. The interesting model of an expanding earth caught the imagination of several present and seemed to fit well with some of the current evidence. Whichever model one chooses, the distribution of continental sediments can suggest a flood model that includes most of the geological column.
In his presentation based on extensive data, Lester Harris, then chairman of the Department of Biology, Columbia Union College, associated a large part of orogenic activity, volcanism, and glaciation with the complex interdigitated events during and following the flood. Recognition of the temporal relationships of these events plays an important part in developing an accurate flood model.
Another Geoscience Research Institute member, Harold E. James, Jr., acquainted the group with some of the sedimentology of flysch deposits, which are thick deposits consisting of sequential thin layers of fine sediment. Parts of these deposits display clear evidences of very rapid sediment accumulation during high energy conditions. The widespread distribution of these deposits in the geological record makes it important that we better understand the forces and circumstances necessary for their formation so that they can be correctly related to a flood model.
Some interesting observations from paleobotany as they relate to a flood model were presented by Arthur V. Chadwick, Assistant Professor of Biology, Loma Linda University. Important considerations were the presence of algae in the Precambrian; the sudden appearance of almost all plant types in the Devonian, with the notable exception of angiosperms; the massive coal deposits of the Carboniferous consisting mostly of extinct plant types; the sudden appearance of the angiosperms as a mature flora in the Cretaceous. These events which generally favor a catastrophic model require some additional development and refinement regarding causes. Dr. Chadwick also presented a report on some recent research being done in palynology and paleobotany in the laboratories at Loma Linda University.
Preliminary data on the distribution of trilobites was presented by Conrad D. Clausen, Assistant Professor of Biology, Loma Linda University. This distribution matches an ecological interpretation of the fossil record as well as, or better than, an evolutionary explanation.
Dr. Roth presented some preliminary results of his survey of clastic dikes and the implications of these findings on classical geochronological interpretations of earth history. He pointed out that clastic dikes, which are cases of softer sediment being intruded from below into cracks in overlying hardened sediments, pose constraints on a long chronology model, and support a short chronology.
By postulating greater atmospheric pressure, a warmer and more uniform temperature distribution, stronger magnetic field, and a smaller radiocarbon production rate, Ray Hefferlin, of the Physics Department at Southern Missionary College, introduced a flood model that accounts for a pre-flood life environment differing considerably from that of the present.
At a subsequent meeting of this Subcommittee last May, further consideration was given to details of a flood model. Matters dealing with Biblical interpretation were presented by Gerhard F. Hasel, Associate Professor of Old Testament and Biblical Theology, Andrews University. Leonard R. Brand, chairman of the Biology Department of Loma Linda University, discussed the philosophical rationale in an approach to a flood model, and Dr. Coffin presented data relating the ecological distribution of living foraminifera to their relative location in parts of the fossil record.
Much interest has been engendered by the work of this committee. It is apparent that much more work remains to be done.
The Bible-Science Subcommittee of the Biblical Research Committee of the General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists met a year ago to begin the development of an adequate flood model. Such a model proposes to correlate the Biblical description of the flood with geological and paleontological evidence.
Topics presented included a reevaluation of the flood-related information found in the Bible and in the writings of Ellen G. White. Harold G. Coffin of the Geoscience Research Institute presented the available evidence and brought it to bear upon the geological and biological problems. He quoted from Ellen G. White, "Relics found in the earth do give evidence of conditions differing in many respects from the present; but the time when these conditions existed can be learned only from the Inspired Record. In the history of the Flood, inspiration has explained that which geology alone could never fathom." (White, Ellen G. 1958. The story of patriarchs and prophets. Pacific Press Publishing Association, Mountain View, California, p. 112). Dr. Coffin related that in his own experience an understanding of the Genesis flood had enhanced his ability to understand the "secrets of the past."
Ariel A. Roth, chairman of the Subcommittee, presented several possible earth models as they could be related to a worldwide flood. Included were considerations of a static-continent model, an expanding earth model and continental drift. None of these models a priori mitigated against a universal flood, and because of the current uncertainty in earth modeling, no model was considered preferable over others. The interesting model of an expanding earth caught the imagination of several present and seemed to fit well with some of the current evidence. Whichever model one chooses, the distribution of continental sediments can suggest a flood model that includes most of the geological column.
In his presentation based on extensive data, Lester Harris, then chairman of the Department of Biology, Columbia Union College, associated a large part of orogenic activity, volcanism, and glaciation with the complex interdigitated events during and following the flood. Recognition of the temporal relationships of these events plays an important part in developing an accurate flood model.
Another Geoscience Research Institute member, Harold E. James, Jr., acquainted the group with some of the sedimentology of flysch deposits, which are thick deposits consisting of sequential thin layers of fine sediment. Parts of these deposits display clear evidences of very rapid sediment accumulation during high energy conditions. The widespread distribution of these deposits in the geological record makes it important that we better understand the forces and circumstances necessary for their formation so that they can be correctly related to a flood model.
Some interesting observations from paleobotany as they relate to a flood model were presented by Arthur V. Chadwick, Assistant Professor of Biology, Loma Linda University. Important considerations were the presence of algae in the Precambrian; the sudden appearance of almost all plant types in the Devonian, with the notable exception of angiosperms; the massive coal deposits of the Carboniferous consisting mostly of extinct plant types; the sudden appearance of the angiosperms as a mature flora in the Cretaceous. These events which generally favor a catastrophic model require some additional development and refinement regarding causes. Dr. Chadwick also presented a report on some recent research being done in palynology and paleobotany in the laboratories at Loma Linda University.
Preliminary data on the distribution of trilobites was presented by Conrad D. Clausen, Assistant Professor of Biology, Loma Linda University. This distribution matches an ecological interpretation of the fossil record as well as, or better than, an evolutionary explanation.
Dr. Roth presented some preliminary results of his survey of clastic dikes and the implications of these findings on classical geochronological interpretations of earth history. He pointed out that clastic dikes, which are cases of softer sediment being intruded from below into cracks in overlying hardened sediments, pose constraints on a long chronology model, and support a short chronology.
By postulating greater atmospheric pressure, a warmer and more uniform temperature distribution, stronger magnetic field, and a smaller radiocarbon production rate, Ray Hefferlin, of the Physics Department at Southern Missionary College, introduced a flood model that accounts for a pre-flood life environment differing considerably from that of the present.
At a subsequent meeting of this Subcommittee last May, further consideration was given to details of a flood model. Matters dealing with Biblical interpretation were presented by Gerhard F. Hasel, Associate Professor of Old Testament and Biblical Theology, Andrews University. Leonard R. Brand, chairman of the Biology Department of Loma Linda University, discussed the philosophical rationale in an approach to a flood model, and Dr. Coffin presented data relating the ecological distribution of living foraminifera to their relative location in parts of the fossil record.
Much interest has been engendered by the work of this committee. It is apparent that much more work remains to be done.
The Bible-Science Subcommittee of the Biblical Research Committee of the General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists met a year ago to begin the development of an adequate flood model. Such a model proposes to correlate the Biblical description of the flood with geological and paleontological evidence.
Topics presented included a reevaluation of the flood-related information found in the Bible and in the writings of Ellen G. White. Harold G. Coffin of the Geoscience Research Institute presented the available evidence and brought it to bear upon the geological and biological problems. He quoted from Ellen G. White, "Relics found in the earth do give evidence of conditions differing in many respects from the present; but the time when these conditions existed can be learned only from the Inspired Record. In the history of the Flood, inspiration has explained that which geology alone could never fathom." (White, Ellen G. 1958. The story of patriarchs and prophets. Pacific Press Publishing Association, Mountain View, California, p. 112). Dr. Coffin related that in his own experience an understanding of the Genesis flood had enhanced his ability to understand the "secrets of the past."
Ariel A. Roth, chairman of the Subcommittee, presented several possible earth models as they could be related to a worldwide flood. Included were considerations of a static-continent model, an expanding earth model and continental drift. None of these models a priori mitigated against a universal flood, and because of the current uncertainty in earth modeling, no model was considered preferable over others. The interesting model of an expanding earth caught the imagination of several present and seemed to fit well with some of the current evidence. Whichever model one chooses, the distribution of continental sediments can suggest a flood model that includes most of the geological column.
In his presentation based on extensive data, Lester Harris, then chairman of the Department of Biology, Columbia Union College, associated a large part of orogenic activity, volcanism, and glaciation with the complex interdigitated events during and following the flood. Recognition of the temporal relationships of these events plays an important part in developing an accurate flood model.
Another Geoscience Research Institute member, Harold E. James, Jr., acquainted the group with some of the sedimentology of flysch deposits, which are thick deposits consisting of sequential thin layers of fine sediment. Parts of these deposits display clear evidences of very rapid sediment accumulation during high energy conditions. The widespread distribution of these deposits in the geological record makes it important that we better understand the forces and circumstances necessary for their formation so that they can be correctly related to a flood model.
Some interesting observations from paleobotany as they relate to a flood model were presented by Arthur V. Chadwick, Assistant Professor of Biology, Loma Linda University. Important considerations were the presence of algae in the Precambrian; the sudden appearance of almost all plant types in the Devonian, with the notable exception of angiosperms; the massive coal deposits of the Carboniferous consisting mostly of extinct plant types; the sudden appearance of the angiosperms as a mature flora in the Cretaceous. These events which generally favor a catastrophic model require some additional development and refinement regarding causes. Dr. Chadwick also presented a report on some recent research being done in palynology and paleobotany in the laboratories at Loma Linda University.
Preliminary data on the distribution of trilobites was presented by Conrad D. Clausen, Assistant Professor of Biology, Loma Linda University. This distribution matches an ecological interpretation of the fossil record as well as, or better than, an evolutionary explanation.
Dr. Roth presented some preliminary results of his survey of clastic dikes and the implications of these findings on classical geochronological interpretations of earth history. He pointed out that clastic dikes, which are cases of softer sediment being intruded from below into cracks in overlying hardened sediments, pose constraints on a long chronology model, and support a short chronology.
By postulating greater atmospheric pressure, a warmer and more uniform temperature distribution, stronger magnetic field, and a smaller radiocarbon production rate, Ray Hefferlin, of the Physics Department at Southern Missionary College, introduced a flood model that accounts for a pre-flood life environment differing considerably from that of the present.
At a subsequent meeting of this Subcommittee last May, further consideration was given to details of a flood model. Matters dealing with Biblical interpretation were presented by Gerhard F. Hasel, Associate Professor of Old Testament and Biblical Theology, Andrews University. Leonard R. Brand, chairman of the Biology Department of Loma Linda University, discussed the philosophical rationale in an approach to a flood model, and Dr. Coffin presented data relating the ecological distribution of living foraminifera to their relative location in parts of the fossil record.
Much interest has been engendered by the work of this committee. It is apparent that much more work remains to be done.
The Bible-Science Subcommittee of the Biblical Research Committee of the General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists met a year ago to begin the development of an adequate flood model. Such a model proposes to correlate the Biblical description of the flood with geological and paleontological evidence.
Topics presented included a reevaluation of the flood-related information found in the Bible and in the writings of Ellen G. White. Harold G. Coffin of the Geoscience Research Institute presented the available evidence and brought it to bear upon the geological and biological problems. He quoted from Ellen G. White, "Relics found in the earth do give evidence of conditions differing in many respects from the present; but the time when these conditions existed can be learned only from the Inspired Record. In the history of the Flood, inspiration has explained that which geology alone could never fathom." (White, Ellen G. 1958. The story of patriarchs and prophets. Pacific Press Publishing Association, Mountain View, California, p. 112). Dr. Coffin related that in his own experience an understanding of the Genesis flood had enhanced his ability to understand the "secrets of the past."
Ariel A. Roth, chairman of the Subcommittee, presented several possible earth models as they could be related to a worldwide flood. Included were considerations of a static-continent model, an expanding earth model and continental drift. None of these models a priori mitigated against a universal flood, and because of the current uncertainty in earth modeling, no model was considered preferable over others. The interesting model of an expanding earth caught the imagination of several present and seemed to fit well with some of the current evidence. Whichever model one chooses, the distribution of continental sediments can suggest a flood model that includes most of the geological column.
In his presentation based on extensive data, Lester Harris, then chairman of the Department of Biology, Columbia Union College, associated a large part of orogenic activity, volcanism, and glaciation with the complex interdigitated events during and following the flood. Recognition of the temporal relationships of these events plays an important part in developing an accurate flood model.
Another Geoscience Research Institute member, Harold E. James, Jr., acquainted the group with some of the sedimentology of flysch deposits, which are thick deposits consisting of sequential thin layers of fine sediment. Parts of these deposits display clear evidences of very rapid sediment accumulation during high energy conditions. The widespread distribution of these deposits in the geological record makes it important that we better understand the forces and circumstances necessary for their formation so that they can be correctly related to a flood model.
Some interesting observations from paleobotany as they relate to a flood model were presented by Arthur V. Chadwick, Assistant Professor of Biology, Loma Linda University. Important considerations were the presence of algae in the Precambrian; the sudden appearance of almost all plant types in the Devonian, with the notable exception of angiosperms; the massive coal deposits of the Carboniferous consisting mostly of extinct plant types; the sudden appearance of the angiosperms as a mature flora in the Cretaceous. These events which generally favor a catastrophic model require some additional development and refinement regarding causes. Dr. Chadwick also presented a report on some recent research being done in palynology and paleobotany in the laboratories at Loma Linda University.
Preliminary data on the distribution of trilobites was presented by Conrad D. Clausen, Assistant Professor of Biology, Loma Linda University. This distribution matches an ecological interpretation of the fossil record as well as, or better than, an evolutionary explanation.
Dr. Roth presented some preliminary results of his survey of clastic dikes and the implications of these findings on classical geochronological interpretations of earth history. He pointed out that clastic dikes, which are cases of softer sediment being intruded from below into cracks in overlying hardened sediments, pose constraints on a long chronology model, and support a short chronology.
By postulating greater atmospheric pressure, a warmer and more uniform temperature distribution, stronger magnetic field, and a smaller radiocarbon production rate, Ray Hefferlin, of the Physics Department at Southern Missionary College, introduced a flood model that accounts for a pre-flood life environment differing considerably from that of the present.
At a subsequent meeting of this Subcommittee last May, further consideration was given to details of a flood model. Matters dealing with Biblical interpretation were presented by Gerhard F. Hasel, Associate Professor of Old Testament and Biblical Theology, Andrews University. Leonard R. Brand, chairman of the Biology Department of Loma Linda University, discussed the philosophical rationale in an approach to a flood model, and Dr. Coffin presented data relating the ecological distribution of living foraminifera to their relative location in parts of the fossil record.
Much interest has been engendered by the work of this committee. It is apparent that much more work remains to be done.
The Bible-Science Subcommittee of the Biblical Research Committee of the General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists met a year ago to begin the development of an adequate flood model. Such a model proposes to correlate the Biblical description of the flood with geological and paleontological evidence.
Topics presented included a reevaluation of the flood-related information found in the Bible and in the writings of Ellen G. White. Harold G. Coffin of the Geoscience Research Institute presented the available evidence and brought it to bear upon the geological and biological problems. He quoted from Ellen G. White, "Relics found in the earth do give evidence of conditions differing in many respects from the present; but the time when these conditions existed can be learned only from the Inspired Record. In the history of the Flood, inspiration has explained that which geology alone could never fathom." (White, Ellen G. 1958. The story of patriarchs and prophets. Pacific Press Publishing Association, Mountain View, California, p. 112). Dr. Coffin related that in his own experience an understanding of the Genesis flood had enhanced his ability to understand the "secrets of the past."
Ariel A. Roth, chairman of the Subcommittee, presented several possible earth models as they could be related to a worldwide flood. Included were considerations of a static-continent model, an expanding earth model and continental drift. None of these models a priori mitigated against a universal flood, and because of the current uncertainty in earth modeling, no model was considered preferable over others. The interesting model of an expanding earth caught the imagination of several present and seemed to fit well with some of the current evidence. Whichever model one chooses, the distribution of continental sediments can suggest a flood model that includes most of the geological column.
In his presentation based on extensive data, Lester Harris, then chairman of the Department of Biology, Columbia Union College, associated a large part of orogenic activity, volcanism, and glaciation with the complex interdigitated events during and following the flood. Recognition of the temporal relationships of these events plays an important part in developing an accurate flood model.
Another Geoscience Research Institute member, Harold E. James, Jr., acquainted the group with some of the sedimentology of flysch deposits, which are thick deposits consisting of sequential thin layers of fine sediment. Parts of these deposits display clear evidences of very rapid sediment accumulation during high energy conditions. The widespread distribution of these deposits in the geological record makes it important that we better understand the forces and circumstances necessary for their formation so that they can be correctly related to a flood model.
Some interesting observations from paleobotany as they relate to a flood model were presented by Arthur V. Chadwick, Assistant Professor of Biology, Loma Linda University. Important considerations were the presence of algae in the Precambrian; the sudden appearance of almost all plant types in the Devonian, with the notable exception of angiosperms; the massive coal deposits of the Carboniferous consisting mostly of extinct plant types; the sudden appearance of the angiosperms as a mature flora in the Cretaceous. These events which generally favor a catastrophic model require some additional development and refinement regarding causes. Dr. Chadwick also presented a report on some recent research being done in palynology and paleobotany in the laboratories at Loma Linda University.
Preliminary data on the distribution of trilobites was presented by Conrad D. Clausen, Assistant Professor of Biology, Loma Linda University. This distribution matches an ecological interpretation of the fossil record as well as, or better than, an evolutionary explanation.
Dr. Roth presented some preliminary results of his survey of clastic dikes and the implications of these findings on classical geochronological interpretations of earth history. He pointed out that clastic dikes, which are cases of softer sediment being intruded from below into cracks in overlying hardened sediments, pose constraints on a long chronology model, and support a short chronology.
By postulating greater atmospheric pressure, a warmer and more uniform temperature distribution, stronger magnetic field, and a smaller radiocarbon production rate, Ray Hefferlin, of the Physics Department at Southern Missionary College, introduced a flood model that accounts for a pre-flood life environment differing considerably from that of the present.
At a subsequent meeting of this Subcommittee last May, further consideration was given to details of a flood model. Matters dealing with Biblical interpretation were presented by Gerhard F. Hasel, Associate Professor of Old Testament and Biblical Theology, Andrews University. Leonard R. Brand, chairman of the Biology Department of Loma Linda University, discussed the philosophical rationale in an approach to a flood model, and Dr. Coffin presented data relating the ecological distribution of living foraminifera to their relative location in parts of the fossil record.
Much interest has been engendered by the work of this committee. It is apparent that much more work remains to be done.
The Bible-Science Subcommittee of the Biblical Research Committee of the General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists met a year ago to begin the development of an adequate flood model. Such a model proposes to correlate the Biblical description of the flood with geological and paleontological evidence.
Topics presented included a reevaluation of the flood-related information found in the Bible and in the writings of Ellen G. White. Harold G. Coffin of the Geoscience Research Institute presented the available evidence and brought it to bear upon the geological and biological problems. He quoted from Ellen G. White, "Relics found in the earth do give evidence of conditions differing in many respects from the present; but the time when these conditions existed can be learned only from the Inspired Record. In the history of the Flood, inspiration has explained that which geology alone could never fathom." (White, Ellen G. 1958. The story of patriarchs and prophets. Pacific Press Publishing Association, Mountain View, California, p. 112). Dr. Coffin related that in his own experience an understanding of the Genesis flood had enhanced his ability to understand the "secrets of the past."
Ariel A. Roth, chairman of the Subcommittee, presented several possible earth models as they could be related to a worldwide flood. Included were considerations of a static-continent model, an expanding earth model and continental drift. None of these models a priori mitigated against a universal flood, and because of the current uncertainty in earth modeling, no model was considered preferable over others. The interesting model of an expanding earth caught the imagination of several present and seemed to fit well with some of the current evidence. Whichever model one chooses, the distribution of continental sediments can suggest a flood model that includes most of the geological column.
In his presentation based on extensive data, Lester Harris, then chairman of the Department of Biology, Columbia Union College, associated a large part of orogenic activity, volcanism, and glaciation with the complex interdigitated events during and following the flood. Recognition of the temporal relationships of these events plays an important part in developing an accurate flood model.
Another Geoscience Research Institute member, Harold E. James, Jr., acquainted the group with some of the sedimentology of flysch deposits, which are thick deposits consisting of sequential thin layers of fine sediment. Parts of these deposits display clear evidences of very rapid sediment accumulation during high energy conditions. The widespread distribution of these deposits in the geological record makes it important that we better understand the forces and circumstances necessary for their formation so that they can be correctly related to a flood model.
Some interesting observations from paleobotany as they relate to a flood model were presented by Arthur V. Chadwick, Assistant Professor of Biology, Loma Linda University. Important considerations were the presence of algae in the Precambrian; the sudden appearance of almost all plant types in the Devonian, with the notable exception of angiosperms; the massive coal deposits of the Carboniferous consisting mostly of extinct plant types; the sudden appearance of the angiosperms as a mature flora in the Cretaceous. These events which generally favor a catastrophic model require some additional development and refinement regarding causes. Dr. Chadwick also presented a report on some recent research being done in palynology and paleobotany in the laboratories at Loma Linda University.
Preliminary data on the distribution of trilobites was presented by Conrad D. Clausen, Assistant Professor of Biology, Loma Linda University. This distribution matches an ecological interpretation of the fossil record as well as, or better than, an evolutionary explanation.
Dr. Roth presented some preliminary results of his survey of clastic dikes and the implications of these findings on classical geochronological interpretations of earth history. He pointed out that clastic dikes, which are cases of softer sediment being intruded from below into cracks in overlying hardened sediments, pose constraints on a long chronology model, and support a short chronology.
By postulating greater atmospheric pressure, a warmer and more uniform temperature distribution, stronger magnetic field, and a smaller radiocarbon production rate, Ray Hefferlin, of the Physics Department at Southern Missionary College, introduced a flood model that accounts for a pre-flood life environment differing considerably from that of the present.
At a subsequent meeting of this Subcommittee last May, further consideration was given to details of a flood model. Matters dealing with Biblical interpretation were presented by Gerhard F. Hasel, Associate Professor of Old Testament and Biblical Theology, Andrews University. Leonard R. Brand, chairman of the Biology Department of Loma Linda University, discussed the philosophical rationale in an approach to a flood model, and Dr. Coffin presented data relating the ecological distribution of living foraminifera to their relative location in parts of the fossil record.
Much interest has been engendered by the work of this committee. It is apparent that much more work remains to be done.
The Bible-Science Subcommittee of the Biblical Research Committee of the General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists met a year ago to begin the development of an adequate flood model. Such a model proposes to correlate the Biblical description of the flood with geological and paleontological evidence.
Topics presented included a reevaluation of the flood-related information found in the Bible and in the writings of Ellen G. White. Harold G. Coffin of the Geoscience Research Institute presented the available evidence and brought it to bear upon the geological and biological problems. He quoted from Ellen G. White, "Relics found in the earth do give evidence of conditions differing in many respects from the present; but the time when these conditions existed can be learned only from the Inspired Record. In the history of the Flood, inspiration has explained that which geology alone could never fathom." (White, Ellen G. 1958. The story of patriarchs and prophets. Pacific Press Publishing Association, Mountain View, California, p. 112). Dr. Coffin related that in his own experience an understanding of the Genesis flood had enhanced his ability to understand the "secrets of the past."
Ariel A. Roth, chairman of the Subcommittee, presented several possible earth models as they could be related to a worldwide flood. Included were considerations of a static-continent model, an expanding earth model and continental drift. None of these models a priori mitigated against a universal flood, and because of the current uncertainty in earth modeling, no model was considered preferable over others. The interesting model of an expanding earth caught the imagination of several present and seemed to fit well with some of the current evidence. Whichever model one chooses, the distribution of continental sediments can suggest a flood model that includes most of the geological column.
In his presentation based on extensive data, Lester Harris, then chairman of the Department of Biology, Columbia Union College, associated a large part of orogenic activity, volcanism, and glaciation with the complex interdigitated events during and following the flood. Recognition of the temporal relationships of these events plays an important part in developing an accurate flood model.
Another Geoscience Research Institute member, Harold E. James, Jr., acquainted the group with some of the sedimentology of flysch deposits, which are thick deposits consisting of sequential thin layers of fine sediment. Parts of these deposits display clear evidences of very rapid sediment accumulation during high energy conditions. The widespread distribution of these deposits in the geological record makes it important that we better understand the forces and circumstances necessary for their formation so that they can be correctly related to a flood model.
Some interesting observations from paleobotany as they relate to a flood model were presented by Arthur V. Chadwick, Assistant Professor of Biology, Loma Linda University. Important considerations were the presence of algae in the Precambrian; the sudden appearance of almost all plant types in the Devonian, with the notable exception of angiosperms; the massive coal deposits of the Carboniferous consisting mostly of extinct plant types; the sudden appearance of the angiosperms as a mature flora in the Cretaceous. These events which generally favor a catastrophic model require some additional development and refinement regarding causes. Dr. Chadwick also presented a report on some recent research being done in palynology and paleobotany in the laboratories at Loma Linda University.
Preliminary data on the distribution of trilobites was presented by Conrad D. Clausen, Assistant Professor of Biology, Loma Linda University. This distribution matches an ecological interpretation of the fossil record as well as, or better than, an evolutionary explanation.
Dr. Roth presented some preliminary results of his survey of clastic dikes and the implications of these findings on classical geochronological interpretations of earth history. He pointed out that clastic dikes, which are cases of softer sediment being intruded from below into cracks in overlying hardened sediments, pose constraints on a long chronology model, and support a short chronology.
By postulating greater atmospheric pressure, a warmer and more uniform temperature distribution, stronger magnetic field, and a smaller radiocarbon production rate, Ray Hefferlin, of the Physics Department at Southern Missionary College, introduced a flood model that accounts for a pre-flood life environment differing considerably from that of the present.
At a subsequent meeting of this Subcommittee last May, further consideration was given to details of a flood model. Matters dealing with Biblical interpretation were presented by Gerhard F. Hasel, Associate Professor of Old Testament and Biblical Theology, Andrews University. Leonard R. Brand, chairman of the Biology Department of Loma Linda University, discussed the philosophical rationale in an approach to a flood model, and Dr. Coffin presented data relating the ecological distribution of living foraminifera to their relative location in parts of the fossil record.
Much interest has been engendered by the work of this committee. It is apparent that much more work remains to be done.
The Bible-Science Subcommittee of the Biblical Research Committee of the General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists met a year ago to begin the development of an adequate flood model. Such a model proposes to correlate the Biblical description of the flood with geological and paleontological evidence.
Topics presented included a reevaluation of the flood-related information found in the Bible and in the writings of Ellen G. White. Harold G. Coffin of the Geoscience Research Institute presented the available evidence and brought it to bear upon the geological and biological problems. He quoted from Ellen G. White, "Relics found in the earth do give evidence of conditions differing in many respects from the present; but the time when these conditions existed can be learned only from the Inspired Record. In the history of the Flood, inspiration has explained that which geology alone could never fathom." (White, Ellen G. 1958. The story of patriarchs and prophets. Pacific Press Publishing Association, Mountain View, California, p. 112). Dr. Coffin related that in his own experience an understanding of the Genesis flood had enhanced his ability to understand the "secrets of the past."
Ariel A. Roth, chairman of the Subcommittee, presented several possible earth models as they could be related to a worldwide flood. Included were considerations of a static-continent model, an expanding earth model and continental drift. None of these models a priori mitigated against a universal flood, and because of the current uncertainty in earth modeling, no model was considered preferable over others. The interesting model of an expanding earth caught the imagination of several present and seemed to fit well with some of the current evidence. Whichever model one chooses, the distribution of continental sediments can suggest a flood model that includes most of the geological column.
In his presentation based on extensive data, Lester Harris, then chairman of the Department of Biology, Columbia Union College, associated a large part of orogenic activity, volcanism, and glaciation with the complex interdigitated events during and following the flood. Recognition of the temporal relationships of these events plays an important part in developing an accurate flood model.
Another Geoscience Research Institute member, Harold E. James, Jr., acquainted the group with some of the sedimentology of flysch deposits, which are thick deposits consisting of sequential thin layers of fine sediment. Parts of these deposits display clear evidences of very rapid sediment accumulation during high energy conditions. The widespread distribution of these deposits in the geological record makes it important that we better understand the forces and circumstances necessary for their formation so that they can be correctly related to a flood model.
Some interesting observations from paleobotany as they relate to a flood model were presented by Arthur V. Chadwick, Assistant Professor of Biology, Loma Linda University. Important considerations were the presence of algae in the Precambrian; the sudden appearance of almost all plant types in the Devonian, with the notable exception of angiosperms; the massive coal deposits of the Carboniferous consisting mostly of extinct plant types; the sudden appearance of the angiosperms as a mature flora in the Cretaceous. These events which generally favor a catastrophic model require some additional development and refinement regarding causes. Dr. Chadwick also presented a report on some recent research being done in palynology and paleobotany in the laboratories at Loma Linda University.
Preliminary data on the distribution of trilobites was presented by Conrad D. Clausen, Assistant Professor of Biology, Loma Linda University. This distribution matches an ecological interpretation of the fossil record as well as, or better than, an evolutionary explanation.
Dr. Roth presented some preliminary results of his survey of clastic dikes and the implications of these findings on classical geochronological interpretations of earth history. He pointed out that clastic dikes, which are cases of softer sediment being intruded from below into cracks in overlying hardened sediments, pose constraints on a long chronology model, and support a short chronology.
By postulating greater atmospheric pressure, a warmer and more uniform temperature distribution, stronger magnetic field, and a smaller radiocarbon production rate, Ray Hefferlin, of the Physics Department at Southern Missionary College, introduced a flood model that accounts for a pre-flood life environment differing considerably from that of the present.
At a subsequent meeting of this Subcommittee last May, further consideration was given to details of a flood model. Matters dealing with Biblical interpretation were presented by Gerhard F. Hasel, Associate Professor of Old Testament and Biblical Theology, Andrews University. Leonard R. Brand, chairman of the Biology Department of Loma Linda University, discussed the philosophical rationale in an approach to a flood model, and Dr. Coffin presented data relating the ecological distribution of living foraminifera to their relative location in parts of the fossil record.
Much interest has been engendered by the work of this committee. It is apparent that much more work remains to be done.
The Bible-Science Subcommittee of the Biblical Research Committee of the General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists met a year ago to begin the development of an adequate flood model. Such a model proposes to correlate the Biblical description of the flood with geological and paleontological evidence.
Topics presented included a reevaluation of the flood-related information found in the Bible and in the writings of Ellen G.
J'avais dit : pas de dossier pour LC.
Bordel.
Ce texte choppé aléatoirement suite à une recherche gogole redonne tout de suite un sens et un but à la Zone, un caution biblique... au moins dans ses tentatives à flooder le monde... pour le reste je cherche encore, mais y a de l'espoir
"- épouser Kirunaa."
Désolée, j'ai piscine.
Et un dossier sur les éditos auto-plagiés pour nihil c'est possible?
http://zone.apinc.org/article.php?id=540
ouais j'avais pas vu, j'remets mes anciens commentaires...
heu.. je pensais que l'avenir de la zone c'etait de former une espèce d'élite dont le but d'etre ne serait que de survivre momentannéement au guerres nucléaires a venir juste pour pouvoir trucider les derniers connards ayant survécu et avant de s'adonner à une grande ceremonie de suicide collectif par ingurgitation massive de marshmalow jusqu'a ce que mort s'en suive par etouffement ou extase papilliere (miam marshmallow)
Sinon à part çà pas besoin de penser à l 'avenir de la zone apparement il se trace tout seul: mariages, enterrements, ruptures... nous autres sommes en train de virer personnages de Soap Opera bresilien, j'ai dejà l'accent et le string qui commencent à pousser... Bordel mais qu'est ce qui vous prend de vous reunir en vrai hein ? on est pas bien en être purement virtuels désincarnés... des entités irréelles, des sortes d'idées personnifiées derrière des pseudo débiles ? çà vous suffit pas ? Vous voyez ! La dernière soarez de la zone est la cause de tout ce qui se passe en ce moment...(heu moman ? heu maman ?)
A moins que le site ne devienne une sorte de cave géante ou tous les auteurs de la zone organisent à tour de role de mémorables tournantes sur la personne de nihil... c'est un bon debut mais tout ceci ne nous regarde pas.. en tout cas je pense déjà investir dans l'achat d'un mega tube de lubrifiant megawax... on ne sais jamais mon tour viendra peut etre...
personnellement pour conclure je pense quant même être assez controversial dans mes articles, j'essaye justement de chercher de nouveaux horizons pour y degoter des us coutumes et peuplades à dénigrer voir acabler ou même violer pour remettre sur le droit chemin sa descendance...
y a pas mal d'écueils de la controverse dans lesquels on tombe quand même assez facilement... c'est être réac pour moi... pointer du doigt ce que d'autres on deja marteler pour y foutre un coup de grace factice alors que les vautours on même deja depouillé le machin en question...
Pour relancer la zone de controverse et le fightclub fuadrait peu etre lancer des reportages sur le terrain dans le cadre de dossier, chacun se donne une mission d'infiltration echange d'emails, reparages, attitude ambigue voire hypocrite envers ses interlocuteurs pour qu'il puissent cracher leur connerie corticoïdale... (ouais la zone en fait nous on est des vaudooo désenvouteurs de merdeux de normaux)
Car en fait et c'est pas nouveau, il est totalement impossible de s'incruster sur les forums des autres sites (à part celui de la zone) parce que y a un truc qu'un connard à eu l'idée d'inventer et qui s'appelle la modération.. alors à moins d'organiser en parallèle des commando visant à kidnapper les modérateurs ou les démember (tiens faudrait que je pense à libérérer Federi de mon congelateur ua fait...) et ben çà sert à rien qu'a perdre son temps ... en plus ils effacent nos messages ces cons ! Ah bon çà veut dire çà moderer ? ah je savait pas pardon
Purée lapinchien....
t'a résumé parfaitement mes pensées!
Tout a été dit.
ps: Le nain je vais t'écrire un article sur ma vie miteuse sous peu t'inquiètes ;)
Je voudrais rendre justice à l'inspiration littéraire d'Ocus, dont le "poème merdique" vous vaut ma présence de boulet interactif (et de mouche à merde).
C'qu'il peut ramener comme déchets cet Ocus quand même !
Ocus est innocent
C'est la faute à Satan
Et tant pis pour vos gueules
C'est la faute à Google
Oscar Wilde ?