Falsifications of the Worldwide flood

One was God's solution of ridding earth of corruption, the other was to test the faith of Abraham.

So how does Noah's reaction have any relevance as you originally implied?

__________________

I guess fumy's away for a bit. The reason I asked about how he thought they were (sands of coconino) laid down at a very slow speed, was because I read on an evolution site, how they were thought to possibly be wind deposits. I've seen windstorms kick up sand pretty good, and it moves faster than that.

I normally post in another forum here and this place is the second priority forum for me. But, I am a geophysicist with a few years experience in the oil business. What exactly do you want to know about the coconino?

I can tell you a bunch about the Coconino, and it was definitly an aeolian deposit. There are animal tracks on it--terrestrial animal tracks. Given that the tracks can't be made under water, that should argue strongly for the aeolian interpretation.

"More than 20 types of track have been described as
distinct species by Gilmore who also noted the burrows of
wormlike creatures and trails probably of insects. These
footprints and trails have been found nearly everywhere
that the Coconino occurs, but as yet no skeletal remains
have been discovered." Edwin D. McKee, "Paleozoic Rocks of
Grand Canyon," Geology of the Grand Canyon," ed. by William
J. Breed and Evelyn C. Roat, Museum of Northern
Arizona/Flagstaff, 1974, p. 62

There were also scorpion and spider tracks--not exactly the kind of fauna found under the sea or a global flood I might note.

"Brady (1939, 1947) carried out a series of experiments with small
vertebrates and invertebrates and pointed out similarities between the
fossil traces and those formed by modern scorpions, millipedes, and
isopods. In addition, he found that in wet or slightly moist sand, no
trace was left by the scorpions he was working with but that they made
impressions in the dry sand."
~ Larry T. Middleton, David K. Elliott, and Michael Morales, "Coconino
Sandstone," in S. S. Buess and M. Morales, Grand Canyon Geology, (New
York: Oxford University Press, 1990), p.185

The pic is a bit dark, but this is from Brady's old report. It shows a comparison of a modern scorpion vs a coconino track. The comparision is quite close.

The second pic is of a vertebrate track. This was not made during a global flood my friend.

A link was given in post 1 where it says that the sand was deposited at slow speeds of about 1 to 3 or 4 mph. If true, how do we know this? As I mentioned, dessert dunes can be piled up with sand traveling much faster than that.

So you dont see that 100 years out of your life building a boat that you never really needed would be a fruitless exercise from a God who wants us to be good stewards of our time?
Tell me why you think that it was only a local flood. How does that line up with God's Word?

I was hoping you would give me the link, there are 26 pages on this thread after all and I don't want to have to search them all clicking on all the links. I want to see what this source says so that I can be sure you aren't taking it out of context.

And why didn't you comment on the pictures I went to the trouble to show you? It is a bit frustrating when people who don't want to accept the most widely held theories, (like the Coconino is an aolian deposit) fail to even acknowledge data clearly put in front of their eyes.

Yesterday I flew back from Las Vegas and our air route was over the Grand Canyon. Anyone who has ever looked at the aftermath of a flood from the air would look at the course of the Canyon and realize that a flood could not explain it.

Not to go to far on tangent, but I've never been to the Grand Canyon, but have flown over it (coming and going to Vegas) twice now. I imagine it's awe inspiring at ground level, but the view from the air is breath taking.

__________________
(The Library of Alexandria) questioned the permanence of the stars, but did not question the justice of slavery - Carl Sagan in Cosmos

So you do think Abraham taking Isaac to Mount Moriah was a fruitless exercise. Odd theology you have there.

__________________

So because I would consider that an aborted 100 year boat building excercise was a fruitless excercise you seem to think that I would also consider Isaac test of faith also fruitless. Odd logic you have there.
I presume from your earlier comments that you believe that the Noah flood was local not world wide. Again I ask could you explain theologically why you believe this to be so?