But a supposed world-wide flood, as a single event, with water levels covering even the highest mountains, and nearly extincting all land animals, would be expected to leave geological evidence.
__________________ I can picture in my mind a world without war, a world without hate. And I can picture us attacking that world, because they'd never expect it. --- Jack Handey, Deep Thoughts
But a supposed world-wide flood, as a single event, with water levels covering even the highest mountains, and nearly extincting all land animals, would be expected to leave geological evidence.
Well, there is geological evidence. But the problem is that the geological evidence there is does not point to a global flood.
__________________ Don't worry, I'm from the Church and I'm here to help!
There is no conspiracy. Come along. The helicopter's waiting.
The problem with the flood is that the evidence that is present disproves that the flood could've happened. So... that's a problem.
No, it's not.
Evidence can be interpreted.
And even though it can be correlated with different types of evidence from different sources, all that shows is an ability to correlate.
In addition, it's not the evidence that matters, it's the weight of the evidence --- (someone correct me if I'm wrong, please).
If you have an ice core sample, showing a 7000-year period of manufacture, alongside of a tree core sample from the same vicinity showing a 7000-year period of growth, I would still go with the weight of God's Word over the weight of those two correlated objects; even if every artifact on earth was correlated.
Let God be true, and every man a liar (including me), if that's what it has to come down to.
If you have an ice core sample, showing a 7000-year period of manufacture, alongside of a tree core sample from the same vicinity showing a 7000-year period of growth
...
Sorry to snip it, but you're in good company - it happens to the Bible too!
I remember reading C.S. Lewis who stated that even if the first trees had been made in a moment, they could still have contained rings and therefore had an apparent age.
But the rings in the trees are not even, they show evidence of some good years and some bad ones... and this pattern matches in all of the trees except in some trees the pattern is followed further out and others further in indicating older and younger trees... and in another forest the pattern is similar but different, again through all the trees
so just accidentally leaving rings that could have been interpreted as age starts to look more like a deliberate act of deception
The accident / deception debate continues into all other forms of dating.
Radio carbon has a half life of 5730 years so is useful for the events within the last 26,000 years and overlaps with tree ring dating, which is used to improve the accuracy of C14 dating. There are many forms of radio isotope dating, most with fewer problems than C14 dating, which in some cases go back billions of years, and agree where they overlap, with each other.
And there are non-isotope forms of dating such as racemization of amino acids
In 1900 an estimate based on the rate the oceans are gaining salt, gave a figure of 80 to 100 million years, but these are minimum values because salt is also lost from the oceans.
In my own personal life I looked at what appeared to be annual sediment lines in the rocks along my grandmother’s long gravel drive, over a kilometre with lines averaging 2 mm thick came out at ½ million years.
For a YEC this was not a comforting thought, and I never did work out if or why God chose in so many ways to deceive so many people
Linear Mode
