The Panda's Thumb Legacy Archive — pandasthumb.net

Save Siccar Point!

Posted 5 September 2012 by Dave Thomas

rocksdontlie.jpg I recently acquired the new book "The Rocks Don't Lie: A Geologist Investigates Noah's Flood" by David Montgomery. It's a splendid read, and very much applicable to the readership of Panda's Thumb. The book has some excellent pictures and discussions regarding Siccar Point in Scotland, "...celebrated as the place where Scottish farmer James Hutton discovered geologic time.." Siccar Point graces the cover of Montgomery's book. Just last Thursday, I cited Siccar Point in a lecture on the Flood for our new social studies class at New Mexico Tech in Socorro. (See slides 56-58). I have resolved to visit Siccar Point - it's on my bucket list. That's why I found this announcement from the Facebook group "Save Siccar Point" to be quite disturbing. They are alarmed that developers are "ruining the geological mecca of Siccar Point, the location of Hutton's unconformity." More info here:http://www.savesiccarpoint.co.uk/ From the site comes this urgent plea:
The deadline for objections has been extended to 23 September 2012 - the day before the application is considered. If you want to lodge an objection you have some time to do it. Please don't forget! ... It still not too late to object...keep them coming. You can object by email if you want. Here's how:
  1. In the Subject Line put "12/00929/FUL Objection Comment"
  2. Add your comment in the email body
  3. Send your email to prs@scotborders.gov.uk or ped@scotborders.gov.uk
If you want to CC anyone else into your email, you might want to consider:
  1. Scottish Natural Heritage: anne.brown@snh.gov.uk
  2. Scottish Environmental Protection Agency: Stephanie.Balman@sepa.org.uk
  3. Crown Estates: enquiries@thecrownestate.co.uk
  4. Dunglass Estate: info@dunglassestate.com
I have sent along my objections - will you? (Don't forget to be polite!)

10 Comments

https://me.yahoo.com/a/JxVN0eQFqtmgoY7wC1cZM44ET_iAanxHQmLgYgX_Zhn8#57cad · 5 September 2012

But if we destroy all of the evidence that Noah's Flood didn't happen, maybe it could have.

Or something.

Glen Davidson

PS Yes, I know that's not why the developers are out to destroy it.

j. biggs · 5 September 2012

No doubt greed trumps religion every time.

Dave Thomas · 5 September 2012

Scientific American has also blogged in!

Robert Byers · 5 September 2012

The rocks say very little.
In reality they are the product of sediments and only rocks after being squeezed.
The non sediment rocks only say they have moved about.
Rocks here in no way hurt Noah.
In fact it shows what creationists want.
Massive gathering of sediment and deposition and being turned to stone. We simply make that process instant from great pressure during the flood year. (Or later events for this YEC)
We welcome a convulsing ground everywhere and folding and this smashed against that is what is to be expected.
it is in fact just raw data in the field.
Interpretation is what demands investigation.
The rocks are silent on process and time.
They just are.

Rolf · 6 September 2012

Unlike captain Queeg, Robert Byers need no prodding to "reveal his peculiar behaviors to the court." (Wikipedia)

An unwitting ally of ours.

dalehusband · 8 September 2012

Robert Byers said: The rocks say very little. In reality they are the product of sediments and only rocks after being squeezed. The non sediment rocks only say they have moved about. Rocks here in no way hurt Noah. In fact it shows what creationists want. Massive gathering of sediment and deposition and being turned to stone. We simply make that process instant from great pressure during the flood year. (Or later events for this YEC) We welcome a convulsing ground everywhere and folding and this smashed against that is what is to be expected. it is in fact just raw data in the field. Interpretation is what demands investigation. The rocks are silent on process and time. They just are.
Do you ever get tired of lying outright?

apokryltaros · 8 September 2012

dalehusband said:
Robert Byers said: The rocks say very little. In reality they are the product of sediments and only rocks after being squeezed. The non sediment rocks only say they have moved about. Rocks here in no way hurt Noah. In fact it shows what creationists want. Massive gathering of sediment and deposition and being turned to stone. We simply make that process instant from great pressure during the flood year. (Or later events for this YEC) We welcome a convulsing ground everywhere and folding and this smashed against that is what is to be expected. it is in fact just raw data in the field. Interpretation is what demands investigation. The rocks are silent on process and time. They just are.
Do you ever get tired of lying outright?
That would require Robert Byers to be aware that he's making a bullshitting fool out of himself in front of people who know better than him, AND it would require Robert Byers to be aware that using Jesus to break the Commandment about bearing false witness is a mortal sin. But, as we've seen repeatedly, Robert Byers is too stupid and too insulated to care.

Steve660 · 18 September 2012

For those interested there is an excellent debunking of creationist claims about Siccar Point (I know, because I wrote it!) published in the Australian Skeptic magazine: Moreton, S. (2011) Rocks in their heads. The Skeptic, 31(2), p.38-40. On-line: http://www.skeptics.com.au/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/theskeptic/2011/2.pdf There is a lot more evidence at the site of long ages than just the juxtaposition of the two rock groups. All is explained in the article, plus a review of the geological literature on the site. Separately, there's also a good series of photos in the mineralogical site mindat.org (just search on Siccar Point in the "Locality" search bar) which demonstrate that the junction is, in places, highly irregular (contrary to creationist claims). I have been there four times now!

DS · 18 September 2012

Steve,

Thanks for the link.

DS · 18 September 2012

The rocks say very much. In reality they are the product of sediments and only rocks after being squeezed over very long periods of time. The non sediment rocks only say they have moved about then been eroded, then been deposited on. Rocks here in hurt Noah. In fact it dont show what creationists want. Massive gathering of sediment and deposition and being turned to stone over millions of years. We simply make that process over a very long from great pressure not during the magic flood year. (No one cares what a YEC says) We welcome a convulsing ground everywhere and folding and this smashed against that is what is to be expected. it is in fact just raw data in the field. Interpretation is what demands investigation. The rocks are not silent on process and time. They just arent.