Geologic Proof of an old earth creation.

[Job 33:6]

There's little need to adhere to a uniformitarian millions-of-years worldview when we can watch similar scenarios of stratification happening rapidly in real time.

(95) Experiments in Stratification - YouTube

Sedimentary experiments: Preliminary report (ianjuby.org)

Perhaps it's only a strange coincidence that the earth surface stratification that you are convinced is the product of hundreds of millions of years of gradual deposition and sea level changes, can likewise be directly observed happening rapidly within minutes, hours, or days.

But for those of us who believe God's word, and God's account of history, it is not surprising to find that the predominant pattern of mega-sequence sediment stratification found all over the earth is apparently similar to the stratification produced rapidly by moving water.

There's a pretty good reason for the lack of certainty if you stop to think about it. The ensuing geologic catastrophes following the recession of global floodwaters would cause almost as much upheaval as the global deluge itself.... e.g. sudden and extreme surface weight-displacements as waters run off continents, massive ice sheets and lakes bound up atop of continents with unstable dam structures waiting to fail and cause more floods. As such it would be predictably difficult to locate such a distinguishing boundary line. It's large-scale catastrophic burial on either side.


At the end of the day, there is so much evidence that points to a recent global flood, (it is hard to imagine a clearer record that might be left preserved in the earth as a testimonial to God's global judgment), it really shows how the whole controversy was never really about evidence to begin with. The idea of a recent worldwide judgment from a wrathful God is traumatizing to our human pride, and it is fully understandable why people would want to blot it out of history.



(I am often reminded of the Missoula Floods controversy, where conventional geologists were so upset about the idea of large-scale catastrophism in earth history that they fought tooth and nail against the scientific evidence of it... and this was a relatively minor geologic catastrophe... It doesn't matter how much evidence for a global flood there actually is... these modern institutions are collectively and spiritually bound in their rejection of it.)

If you'd like to provide a technical response to some of my counter arguments noted above as to why such position is untenable, I'll be here.

As noted before, we know when rocks have lithified prior to deformation. There's no explanation from YECs for how things like Paleozoic angular unconformities could form overlain by undeformed Mesozoic or Cenozoic strata.

 

[Daniel Martinovich]

.

As noted before, we know when rocks have lithified prior to deformation. There's no explanation from YECs for how things like Paleozoic angular unconformities could form overlain by undeformed Mesozoic or Cenozoic strata.[/QUOTE]

Don’t know about a technical paper but my response was as good as any scientific conjecture. That happened during the flood. Those deposits were individually laid over a half year period. In the meantime continent's are moving, volcanoes are going off. Angular unconformities are happening. Massive debris fields are floating around with animals clinging to them. Anytime they run into some exposed sediment layer they scurry off onto it only to to have themselves and their tracks buried by as another current of muddy water flows over it.
Your scientific conjecture of ages of rather uniformitarian occurrences burying the worlds fossil fuels are in fact hard to imagine.

 

[Job 33:6]

.

Don’t know about a technical paper but my response was as good as any scientific conjecture. That happened during the flood. Those deposits were individually laid over a half year period. In the meantime continent's are moving, volcanoes are going off. Angular unconformities are happening. Massive debris fields are floating around with animals clinging to them. Anytime they run into some exposed sediment layer they scurry off onto it only to to have themselves and their tracks buried by as another current of muddy water flows over it.
Your scientific conjecture of ages of rather uniformitarian occurrences burying the worlds fossil fuels are in fact hard to imagine.

Well, thank you for the response. So, we can ponder the feasibility of this idea, animals running around or swimming around I guess, trying to grab onto floating clumps of land.

Well, for starters, land doesn't float. Simply because things like sand are more dense than water. You don't go to the beach and throw sand in the water and watch it float I mean. But, I'm going to try to stick with my original suggestion regarding angular unconformities.

So I'll use diagrams to help explain.

So for starters, angular unconformities are erosional surfaces observed between beds of rock that are at two different angles. Such as observed in the following images:
Image 1:

Image 2:

Image 3:

So, let's take image #2 for example.

We see the angular unconformity observed between Devonian sandstone and silurian greywacke, then we have a conglomerate in between.

So let's look at our response here:
"That happened during the flood. Those deposits were individually laid over a half year period."

Ok. So, to clarify, here are some of the clear issues with this response.

It's common, similar to depicted in image #2, to find some kind of conglomerate or breccia, or some similar rock type between the formations of the unconformity.

So why is that important? So here are images of a conglomerate and breccia respectively:

And We see that they just rocks consist of pre-existing rocks joined together in a matrix.

The smaller rocks typically consisting of the superpositionally older deeper rock.

And so we might end up asking ourselves, if All this was laid over a half period time, maybe 6 months, then how did the sediment turn into rock in just 6 months? The lower layer could only logically predate the flood.

If the vertical silurian layers originated as a flood deposit wet sediment, how did it turn into rock within 6 months, or prior to the deposition of the overlying Devonian horizontal layers?

And I mentioned striations and slickenlines before as well.

So imagine taking a piece of chalk and rubbing it in the ground. It makes a streak. That's really all these are, they are streaks on rock where one block of rock has grinded on another rock as it's moved along a slip face or area where the rock separates and slides against a neighboring rock.

And these striations and slickenlines are important because they also demonstrate that this was solid rock that was moving around, and it wasn't loose wet sediment. Not only was it solid rock but it was large bodies of solid rock, massive dense rock scraping upon other bodies of massive dense rock.

Soft sediment just can't make features like these, no more could you make striations by picking up two handfuls of wet sand and rubbing them against each other, the greens would just roll and fall apart. It takes a solid lithified dense body of rock to make features like these.

And that's how you get things like angular brecciated material in the middle of these angular unconformities, these dense bodies of rock are scraping against one another and are ripping their surfaces apart forming a third mixture, a conglomerate or breccia inbetween.

So if we reach the conclusion that these were dense bodies in rock and weren't soft sediment, someone could ask the question, maybe they turned into rock and then moved after the flood.

Well this actually isn't possible either, because these rock types are often found in the early to mid paleozoic. Image number two includes Devonian and silurian Rock, And what's that we often find undeformed superpositionally overlying mesozoic and/or cenozoic rock.

So to explain,
Sometimes we find rocks in the following position:

Source: Inverted fault systems and inversion tectonic settings - ScienceDirect

If you have angular unconformities in Paleozoic strata, but it's overlaying by undeformed laterally continuous and originally horizontal Mesozoic or Cenozoic strata...

If the lower layers were put in motion after the flood ended, then how could it be possible that the overlying layers are not also deformed?

Therefore, the only logical conclusion is that these rocks were dense lithified rock prior to the deposition of overlying Mesozoic and Cenozoic rock.

And that's problematic if we try to view the collective series of layers as all having been deposited within a half year of each other.

Because it begs the question of how layers were deposited then lithified before overlying layers wherever deposited on top of it.

And this topic becomes even more complicated when you throw in the fact that you have things like trace fossils, foot tracks or burrows or things like this, that are in the layers of the angular unconformity. Thereby further or suggesting the passage of time before the overlying layers were ever deposited.

So let's go back to the original response:
"Those deposits were individually laid over a half year period."

How does this response explain the existence of these, above describe, features?

And in my opinion, as a geologist, and as a Christian, is that it can't. If I'm being perfectly honest with myself about the topic I just don't see how to logically make sense of such features in a 6 month or 1 year time period, Or anything even remotely close to that.

 

[Daniel Martinovich]

“And in my opinion, as a geologist, and as a Christian, is that it can't. If I'm being perfectly honest with myself about the topic I just don't see how to logically make sense of such features in a 6 month or 1 year time period, Or anything even remotely close to that”

Your certainly not trying very hard so i’ll just have to keep repeating it till you do.
Who says a world wide flood consists of deep water encircling the globe all at once? But Rather in six month period, not in all places but many places currents coming and going exposing freshly laid sediment layers as the process reaches its climax.

Debris means floating trees and bushes that animals cling to. Those debris running into exposed sediment layers that will be flooded over and buried again.

Unconformities. Continents Rapidly moving under the water and pushing bedrock and newly laid sediments up and down causing unconformities as the rising waters re-bury them under new layers of sediment.

This wasn’t just some flood of rising water and rain but a world wide land mass altering catastrophe that continued altering the land well after the flood waters began to subside.

As a Christian. You should know that Jesus and his apostles verified the flood. Anthropologically, so do many dozens of indigenous cultures. My point being. If a continent creating catastrophe that included a process of world wide flooding eventually burying everything with land masses arising draining floodwaters into the oceans followed by and ice age. If that can be looked upon as a scientific conjectural and basis (bias) to explore geological formations with. Why not as a Christian? Why look at it through the bias and assumptions of those who seek to prove the Bible wrong? Especially in light of the other disciplines lending such credence to creation and a young earth.

 

[Job 33:6]

“And in my opinion, as a geologist, and as a Christian, is that it can't. If I'm being perfectly honest with myself about the topic I just don't see how to logically make sense of such features in a 6 month or 1 year time period, Or anything even remotely close to that”

Your certainly not trying very hard so i’ll just have to keep repeating it till you do.
Who says a world wide flood consists of deep water encircling the globe all at once? But Rather in six month period, not in all places but many places currents coming and going exposing freshly laid sediment layers as the process reaches its climax.

Debris means floating trees and bushes that animals cling to. Those debris running into exposed sediment layers that will be flooded over and buried again.

Unconformities. Continents Rapidly moving under the water and pushing bedrock and newly laid sediments up and down causing unconformities as the rising waters re-bury them under new layers of sediment.

This wasn’t just some flood of rising water and rain but a world wide land mass altering catastrophe that continued altering the land well after the flood waters began to subside.

As a Christian. You should know that Jesus and his apostles verified the flood. Anthropologically, so do many dozens of indigenous cultures. My point being. If a continent creating catastrophe that included a process of world wide flooding eventually burying everything with land masses arising draining floodwaters into the oceans followed by and ice age. If that can be looked upon as a scientific conjectural and basis (bias) to explore geological formations with. Why not as a Christian? Why look at it through the bias and assumptions of those who seek to prove the Bible wrong? Especially in light of the other disciplines lending such credence to creation and a young earth.

Well, thank you for the response. So, we can ponder the feasibility of this idea, animals running around or swimming around I guess, trying to grab onto floating clumps of land.

Well, for starters, land doesn't float. Simply because things like sand are more dense than water. You don't go to the beach and throw sand in the water and watch it float I mean. But, I'm going to try to stick with my original suggestion regarding angular unconformities.

So I'll use diagrams to help explain.

So for starters, angular unconformities are erosional surfaces observed between beds of rock that are at two different angles. Such as observed in the following images:
Image 1:
View attachment 317941

Image 2:
View attachment 317942

Image 3:
View attachment 317943



So, let's take image #2 for example.

We see the angular unconformity observed between Devonian sandstone and silurian greywacke, then we have a conglomerate in between.

So let's look at our response here:
"That happened during the flood. Those deposits were individually laid over a half year period."

Ok. So, to clarify, here are some of the clear issues with this response.

It's common, similar to depicted in image #2, to find some kind of conglomerate or breccia, or some similar rock type between the formations of the unconformity.

So why is that important? So here are images of a conglomerate and breccia respectively:
View attachment 317944
View attachment 317945

And We see that they just rocks consist of pre-existing rocks joined together in a matrix.

The smaller rocks typically consisting of the superpositionally older deeper rock.

And so we might end up asking ourselves, if All this was laid over a half period time, maybe 6 months, then how did the sediment turn into rock in just 6 months? The lower layer could only logically predate the flood.

If the vertical silurian layers originated as a flood deposit wet sediment, how did it turn into rock within 6 months, or prior to the deposition of the overlying Devonian horizontal layers?

And I mentioned striations and slickenlines before as well.
View attachment 317946
View attachment 317947
View attachment 317948

So imagine taking a piece of chalk and rubbing it in the ground. It makes a streak. That's really all these are, they are streaks on rock where one block of rock has grinded on another rock as it's moved along a slip face or area where the rock separates and slides against a neighboring rock.

And these striations and slickenlines are important because they also demonstrate that this was solid rock that was moving around, and it wasn't loose wet sediment. Not only was it solid rock but it was large bodies of solid rock, massive dense rock scraping upon other bodies of massive dense rock.

Soft sediment just can't make features like these, no more could you make striations by picking up two handfuls of wet sand and rubbing them against each other, the greens would just roll and fall apart. It takes a solid lithified dense body of rock to make features like these.

And that's how you get things like angular brecciated material in the middle of these angular unconformities, these dense bodies of rock are scraping against one another and are ripping their surfaces apart forming a third mixture, a conglomerate or breccia inbetween.

So if we reach the conclusion that these were dense bodies in rock and weren't soft sediment, someone could ask the question, maybe they turned into rock and then moved after the flood.

Well this actually isn't possible either, because these rock types are often found in the early to mid paleozoic. Image number two includes Devonian and silurian Rock, And what's that we often find undeformed superpositionally overlying mesozoic and/or cenozoic rock.

So to explain,
Sometimes we find rocks in the following position:
View attachment 317949
Source: Inverted fault systems and inversion tectonic settings - ScienceDirect

If you have angular unconformities in Paleozoic strata, but it's overlaying by undeformed laterally continuous and originally horizontal Mesozoic or Cenozoic strata...

If the lower layers were put in motion after the flood ended, then how could it be possible that the overlying layers are not also deformed?

Therefore, the only logical conclusion is that these rocks were dense lithified rock prior to the deposition of overlying Mesozoic and Cenozoic rock.

And that's problematic if we try to view the collective series of layers as all having been deposited within a half year of each other.

Because it begs the question of how layers were deposited then lithified before overlying layers wherever deposited on top of it.

And this topic becomes even more complicated when you throw in the fact that you have things like trace fossils, foot tracks or burrows or things like this, that are in the layers of the angular unconformity. Thereby further or suggesting the passage of time before the overlying layers were ever deposited.

So let's go back to the original response:
"Those deposits were individually laid over a half year period."

How does this response explain the existence of these, above describe, features?

And in my opinion, as a geologist, and as a Christian, is that it can't. If I'm being perfectly honest with myself about the topic I just don't see how to logically make sense of such features in a 6 month or 1 year time period, Or anything even remotely close to that.

Let's go through it a step at a time then, we can just make this extra simple so that the issue will be as clear as day. You appear to have overlooked my entire response and haven't addressed any of it. So let's get down to the bare bones here.

So if we take image #2 of the unconformity. When did the silurian bedding lithify and harden from an original soft sediment state? Would that be pre, or post flood? And the same question would apply for the Devonian bedding.

And this is a very simple question. If this can't be answered, then the YEC position is effectively meaningless because none can clarify on how strata actually correlates to the flood in it's timing of deposition.

 

[Daniel Martinovich]

Let's go through it a step at a time then, we can just make this extra simple so that the issue will be as clear as day. You appear to have overlooked my entire response and haven't addressed any of it. So let's get down to the bare bones here.

So if we take image #2 of the unconformity. When did the silurian bedding lithify and harden from an original soft sediment state? Would that be pre, or post flood? And the same question would apply for the Devonian bedding.

And this is a very simple question. If this can't be answered, then the YEC position is effectively meaningless because none can clarify on how strata actually correlates to the flood in it's timing of deposition.

Working in construction. That would depend on the chemical makeup of each particular layer of sediment. Sediments with the right chemical makeups with aggregates or not can harden in a couple of hours. Im sure pressure can also be a factor. Some would remain pliable. Seems i recently saw a picture of an amazingly pliable deposit under other lAyers

As far as sedimentary aggregates mixed in. The world had rivers and oceans before the flood. Then who’s to say that the creation itself did not cause huge sedimentary deposits that the flood tore up and deposited as aggregate?

 

[Job 33:6]

Working in construction. That would depend on the chemical makeup of each particular layer of sediment. Sediments with the right chemical makeups with aggregates or not can harden in a couple of hours. Im sure pressure can also be a factor. Some would remain pliable. Seems i recently saw a picture of an amazingly pliable deposit under other lAyers

As far as sedimentary aggregates mixed in. The world had rivers and oceans before the flood. Then who’s to say that the creation itself did not cause huge sedimentary deposits that the flood tore up and deposited as aggregate?

Notice. And I appreciate your responses. But notice that, you could search far and wide. And you would be hard pressed to find YEC material that gives some kind of agreed upon statement to this kind of question.

Anyone can ask questions upon questions. But seldom would we find a YEC that could answer something so basic and fundamental as "was this layer lithified before or after the flood?".

It's so fundamental. It would be like, if we were discussing the game of baseball, asking where a pitcher stands when pitching the ball. Or where the quarterback stands before calling hike.

Geologists, we are over here playing NFL football, running complex routes and we're scoring touchdowns. And when we ask some of the most basic, I mean really fundamental and simply questions of our critics, we never get anything.

The most common answer to my question from YEC literature, would be that those are post flood layers, which would beg the question of how they lithified so quickly. Although, once you get toward the mesozoic, YECs are very divided over such a question. And with good reason which I'll explain.

And I agree. You could make a diamond instantaneously if you simply applied enough heat and pressure to an environment.

Now the follow up question there is, how much heat and pressure? How much pressure would be needed to take essentially the Earth's silurian strata and lithify it within a matter of days, weeks or months? And the answer is, It would take so much energy and heat and pressure that the planet would essentially turn into a massive ball of magma. The oceans would vaporize instantaneously and all rock would be melted beyond discernment.

This is dubbed, the heat problem, which I may have mentioned here before. But it's something that YECs tend to just ignore.

It would be like arguing that I could run around the planet a hundred times in two seconds. What would happen to my physical body if I did that? My body would be vaporized, it would require some sort of extreme defiance a physics to make it happen.

And that's basically where the conversation dies.

"Sediments with the right chemical makeups with aggregates or not can harden in a couple of hours. Im sure pressure can also be a factor."

Let me see if I can find a diagram for you.

These are a few diagrams that detail things like melting points and what rocks form under certain pressures and temperatures.

When somebody proposes an idea involving massive formations of rock that could very well span thousands of square miles, when someone proposes an idea that they might lithify perhaps in a few hours or so, what they're doing is they're essentially making a statement that flies in the face of everything we know about these rocks and their melting points and how they're crystalline lattice is formed by heat and pressure.

The rocks in that angular unconformity picture I showed, those aren't even metamorphic, they're just regular bodies of shale and sandstone. There's nothing about the quality of those rocks that indicates any significant amount of heat or pressure at all.

But this is how the conversation plays out every time. Because I've had this conversation, maybe even hundreds of times over the years with YECs, and they all kind of say the same thing. But never is this issue really addressed.

In fact quite the opposite, yec professionals openly acknowledge this issue. And I'll grab some quotes.
Flood-Model Heat Problems: Thermal Boundary Conditions

This is an article on the issue from answers in Genesis.

A quote from YEC professional Dr. Baumgardber:
"If released near the earth's surface, this amount of energy is sufficient to melt a layer of silicate rock 12 km thick or the boil away a layer of water 25 km deep over the entire earth. It is equivalent to the kinetic energy of 170 000 asteroids, each 10 km in diameter and traveling at 15 km/s. (Baumgardner 1990: 37)"

"For example, if most of the radioactive decay implied by fission tracks or quantities of daughter products occurred over the year of the Flood, the amount of heat generated may have been sufficient to vaporize all the waters of the oceans and melt portions of the earth's crust, given present conditions. (Vardiman 2000: 8)"

"A simple calculation shows that crustal rocks with their present amount of radioactivity would melt many times over if decay rates were accelerated. However, I would like to emphasize here that all creationist Creation or Flood models I know of have serious problems with heat disposal. (Baumgardner 1986: 211, cited in Humphreys 2000: 369-70)"

The heat problem is more specifically associated with friction caused by the motion of continents, but at all falls into the same category of extreme heat and pressure producing the features we see in incredible ways that blow all physics completely out of the water by many orders and magnitude.

And so, it's not just regional metamorphosis, it's not just angular uncomformities, as I'm describing above. It's the very fabric of basic physics that is just completely "out the window" in YEC views.

And you tell them, "hey, a human being can't run around the planet a dozen times in 2 seconds, it would defy basic physics of creation and existence", and they so..."well I think it happened". And you ask "well how is that possible? Knowing that such friction and speed and pressure and temperature would incinerate the human body?". And the conversation doesn't go anywhere. Because there is no answer to the problem.

Maybe that rock underwent extreme heat and pressure that lithified in in a couple hours. Well, what about that rock indicates that such an event occured?

And that's basically what's happening here. And I'm trying my best to explain this in the most sincere way, but this is exactly what's happening.

To summarize, there's just no evidence to indicate any form of rapid lithification. But if it happened, there should be evidence, the rocks would be metamorphosed.

And yet, to say that these rocks were there and were solid before the flood is just as problematic because these rocks have things like trackways and fossil forests and evidence of long spans of time within them. And so guys like Steve Austin and baumgardner,

They would rather accept the defiance of basic physics, because they know that the alternative is an old earth. And their theology won't let them do that.

It's an issue to say the least. It's physics and the fabric of nature and creation. That are foregone.

But there are theological alternatives. And that's where the conversation ultimately leads for most Christian scientists (though not all of course).

 

[Job 33:6]

Notice. And I appreciate your responses. But notice that, you could search far and wide. And you would be hard pressed to find YEC material that gives some kind of agreed upon statement to this kind of question.

Anyone can ask questions upon questions. But seldom would we find a YEC that could answer something so basic and fundamental as "was this layer lithified before or after the flood?".

It's so fundamental. It would be like, if we were discussing the game of baseball, asking where a pitcher stands when pitching the ball. Or where the quarterback stands before calling hike.

Geologists, we are over here playing NFL football, running complex routes and we're scoring touchdowns. And when we ask some of the most basic, I mean really fundamental and simply questions of our critics, we never get anything.

The most common answer to my question from YEC literature, would be that those are post flood layers, which would beg the question of how they lithified so quickly. Although, once you get toward the mesozoic, YECs are very divided over such a question. And with good reason which I'll explain.

And I agree. You could make a diamond instantaneously if you simply applied enough heat and pressure to an environment.

Now the follow up question there is, how much heat and pressure? How much pressure would be needed to take essentially the Earth's silurian strata and lithify it within a matter of days, weeks or months? And the answer is, It would take so much energy and heat and pressure that the planet would essentially turn into a massive ball of magma. The oceans would vaporize instantaneously and all rock would be melted beyond discernment.

This is dubbed, the heat problem, which I may have mentioned here before. But it's something that YECs tend to just ignore.

It would be like arguing that I could run around the planet a hundred times in two seconds. What would happen to my physical body if I did that? My body would be vaporized, it would require some sort of extreme defiance a physics to make it happen.

And that's basically where the conversation dies.

"Sediments with the right chemical makeups with aggregates or not can harden in a couple of hours. Im sure pressure can also be a factor."

Let me see if I can find a diagram for you.
View attachment 317962
View attachment 317963
View attachment 317964


These are a few diagrams that detail things like melting points and what rocks form under certain pressures and temperatures.

When somebody proposes an idea involving massive formations of rock that could very well span thousands of square miles, when someone proposes an idea that they might lithify perhaps in a few hours or so, what they're doing is they're essentially making a statement that flies in the face of everything we know about these rocks and their melting points and how they're crystalline lattice is formed by heat and pressure.

The rocks in that angular unconformity picture I showed, those aren't even metamorphic, they're just regular bodies of shale and sandstone. There's nothing about the quality of those rocks that indicates any significant amount of heat or pressure at all.

But this is how the conversation plays out every time. Because I've had this conversation, maybe even hundreds of times over the years with YECs, and they all kind of say the same thing. But never is this issue really addressed.

In fact quite the opposite, yec professionals openly acknowledge this issue. And I'll grab some quotes.
Flood-Model Heat Problems: Thermal Boundary Conditions

This is an article on the issue from answers in Genesis.

A quote from YEC professional Dr. Baumgardber:
"If released near the earth's surface, this amount of energy is sufficient to melt a layer of silicate rock 12 km thick or the boil away a layer of water 25 km deep over the entire earth. It is equivalent to the kinetic energy of 170 000 asteroids, each 10 km in diameter and traveling at 15 km/s. (Baumgardner 1990: 37)"

"For example, if most of the radioactive decay implied by fission tracks or quantities of daughter products occurred over the year of the Flood, the amount of heat generated may have been sufficient to vaporize all the waters of the oceans and melt portions of the earth's crust, given present conditions. (Vardiman 2000: 8)"

"A simple calculation shows that crustal rocks with their present amount of radioactivity would melt many times over if decay rates were accelerated. However, I would like to emphasize here that all creationist Creation or Flood models I know of have serious problems with heat disposal. (Baumgardner 1986: 211, cited in Humphreys 2000: 369-70)"

The heat problem is more specifically associated with friction caused by the motion of continents, but at all falls into the same category of extreme heat and pressure producing the features we see in incredible ways that blow all physics completely out of the water by many orders and magnitude.

And so, it's not just regional metamorphosis, it's not just angular uncomformities, as I'm describing above. It's the very fabric of basic physics that is just completely "out the window" in YEC views.

And you tell them, "hey, a human being can't run around the planet a dozen times in 2 seconds, it would defy basic physics of creation and existence", and they so..."well I think it happened". And you ask "well how is that possible? Knowing that such friction and speed and pressure and temperature would incinerate the human body?". And the conversation doesn't go anywhere. Because there is no answer to the problem.

Maybe that rock underwent extreme heat and pressure that lithified in in a couple hours. Well, what about that rock indicates that such an event occured?

And that's basically what's happening here. And I'm trying my best to explain this in the most sincere way, but this is exactly what's happening.

To summarize, there's just no evidence to indicate any form of rapid lithification. But if it happened, there should be evidence, the rocks would be metamorphosed.

And yet, to say that these rocks were there and were solid before the flood is just as problematic because these rocks have things like trackways and fossil forests and evidence of long spans of time within them. And so guys like Steve Austin and baumgardner,

They would rather accept the defiance of basic physics, because they know that the alternative is an old earth. And their theology won't let them do that.

It's an issue to say the least. It's physics and the fabric of nature and creation. That are foregone.

But there are theological alternatives. And that's where the conversation ultimately leads for most Christian scientists (though not all of course).

And even still, we go back to other considerations such as, what would we make of a massive formation of rock that potentially lithified and hardened perhaps in a matter of a couple hours, but then we look closer at it and we see it has things like millipede burrows. Or skolithos, which are very common in silurian strata.

What would we make of that?

So, there's this flood and massive amounts of water are just ripping up massive chunks of land. These formations are laterally continuous bodies of rock that span hundreds of miles, so it's not like this would have been picked up by water and just dropped off somewhere else. These are massive bodies of rock that span many miles.

But then you have animal burrows in it. So...when did that happen? So animals burrowed into sediment before the flood...and then the flood deposited the sediment? No that doesn't make any sense.

Ok, the animals burrows into the sediment...the only logical conclusion is in situ burial, so the rock didn't get transported, it's just there where it's always been.

But we can't draw that conclusion because it would suggest that the rock type wasn't actually deposited by the flood.

Well, the rocks must come from the flood, else the earth is old.

So we keep looping round and round.

And there's just no logical way out of it.

If the rock lithified before the flood, then the earth is old. So yec professionals argue that all post Cambrian strata must be post start of the flood. But that would require instantaneous lithification of rock, And so yec professionals then conclude that physics was broken. They attribute this to a miracle essentially. They don't even try to explain it.

But then even when we go a step further we see things like trace fossil burrows in these rocks and we have to wonder, what kind of instantaneous deposition and lithification occurred that allowed time for animals to live and burrow and do things like build nests and complex burrow networks? Animals can only do these things so fast.

Then you have other things like animal feeding traces where animals are roaming around eating vegetation or poking worms out of the ground. Animals have left feeding traces in the rock record. And it just begs this question of how catastrophic could it really have been if an animal is just roaming around scrounging for food?

Bird trackways. If it was really chaotic, wouldn't a bird fly away? Why are there bird trackways of birds just casually walking around?

You can look at the length between fossil footprints to tell if an animal was walking or running. Plenty of animals were just walking around, casually. What's up with that?

Dinosaur nests with eggs in them right smack dab in the middle of the Mesozoic? That's like right in the middle of the stratigraphic column and so it's right in the middle of the flood. So these communities of dinosaurs were just...building nests, like birds build nests today, these dinosaurs were just building nests and laying eggs right in the middle of the flood? And again, these are in situ features. Rock body spanning hundreds of miles, they didn't get picked up and transported here. It's not like dinosaurs were living on some giant dense rock that was magically floating around, they laid eggs and then the flood randomly then covered them months after the flood began.

And even if we did think that a flood did cover these dinosaurs while they were laying eggs, what about all the paleozoic strata below those dinosaurs? How did that get there? So the flood deposits Paleozoic strata, then a community of dinosaurs comes in and builds nests and lays eggs and then the water comes back and then buries the dinosaurs?

Like what is happening in this YEC view?

Nobody is really capable of putting these pieces together.

If you have Mesozoic strata that overlies Paleozoic strata, and the Paleozoic strata came from the flood, then the flood must have unfolded in that particular region. So how would a community of dinosaurs be alive in that very same region building nests and laying eggs? Only to be later buried by Cenozoic strata?

It's just bad. It's real bad. And the more you know, the worse it gets. And the more questions you ask in an effort to resolve the issues with YEC flood views, the more it unravels.

But like I said, fortunately there are theological alternatives.

 

[Daniel Martinovich]

Notice. And I appreciate your responses. But notice that, you could search far and wide. And you would be hard pressed to find YEC material that gives some kind of agreed upon statement to this kind of question.

Anyone can ask questions upon questions. But seldom would we find a YEC that could answer something so basic and fundamental as "was this layer lithified before or after the flood?".

It's so fundamental. It would be like, if we were discussing the game of baseball, asking where a pitcher stands when pitching the ball. Or where the quarterback stands before calling hike.

Geologists, we are over here playing NFL football, running complex routes and we're scoring touchdowns. And when we ask some of the most basic, I mean really fundamental and simply questions of our critics, we never get anything.

The most common answer to my question from YEC literature, would be that those are post flood layers, which would beg the question of how they lithified so quickly. Although, once you get toward the mesozoic, YECs are very divided over such a question. And with good reason which I'll explain.

And I agree. You could make a diamond instantaneously if you simply applied enough heat and pressure to an environment.

Now the follow up question there is, how much heat and pressure? How much pressure would be needed to take essentially the Earth's silurian strata and lithify it within a matter of days, weeks or months? And the answer is, It would take so much energy and heat and pressure that the planet would essentially turn into a massive ball of magma. The oceans would vaporize instantaneously and all rock would be melted beyond discernment.

This is dubbed, the heat problem, which I may have mentioned here before. But it's something that YECs tend to just ignore.

It would be like arguing that I could run around the planet a hundred times in two seconds. What would happen to my physical body if I did that? My body would be vaporized, it would require some sort of extreme defiance a physics to make it happen.

And that's basically where the conversation dies.

"Sediments with the right chemical makeups with aggregates or not can harden in a couple of hours. Im sure pressure can also be a factor."

Let me see if I can find a diagram for you.
View attachment 317962
View attachment 317963
View attachment 317964


These are a few diagrams that detail things like melting points and what rocks form under certain pressures and temperatures.

When somebody proposes an idea involving massive formations of rock that could very well span thousands of square miles, when someone proposes an idea that they might lithify perhaps in a few hours or so, what they're doing is they're essentially making a statement that flies in the face of everything we know about these rocks and their melting points and how they're crystalline lattice is formed by heat and pressure.

The rocks in that angular unconformity picture I showed, those aren't even metamorphic, they're just regular bodies of shale and sandstone. There's nothing about the quality of those rocks that indicates any significant amount of heat or pressure at all.

But this is how the conversation plays out every time. Because I've had this conversation, maybe even hundreds of times over the years with YECs, and they all kind of say the same thing. But never is this issue really addressed.

In fact quite the opposite, yec professionals openly acknowledge this issue. And I'll grab some quotes.
Flood-Model Heat Problems: Thermal Boundary Conditions

This is an article on the issue from answers in Genesis.

A quote from YEC professional Dr. Baumgardber:
"If released near the earth's surface, this amount of energy is sufficient to melt a layer of silicate rock 12 km thick or the boil away a layer of water 25 km deep over the entire earth. It is equivalent to the kinetic energy of 170 000 asteroids, each 10 km in diameter and traveling at 15 km/s. (Baumgardner 1990: 37)"

"For example, if most of the radioactive decay implied by fission tracks or quantities of daughter products occurred over the year of the Flood, the amount of heat generated may have been sufficient to vaporize all the waters of the oceans and melt portions of the earth's crust, given present conditions. (Vardiman 2000: 8)"

"A simple calculation shows that crustal rocks with their present amount of radioactivity would melt many times over if decay rates were accelerated. However, I would like to emphasize here that all creationist Creation or Flood models I know of have serious problems with heat disposal. (Baumgardner 1986: 211, cited in Humphreys 2000: 369-70)"

The heat problem is more specifically associated with friction caused by the motion of continents, but at all falls into the same category of extreme heat and pressure producing the features we see in incredible ways that blow all physics completely out of the water by many orders and magnitude.

And so, it's not just regional metamorphosis, it's not just angular uncomformities, as I'm describing above. It's the very fabric of basic physics that is just completely "out the window" in YEC views.

And you tell them, "hey, a human being can't run around the planet a dozen times in 2 seconds, it would defy basic physics of creation and existence", and they so..."well I think it happened". And you ask "well how is that possible? Knowing that such friction and speed and pressure and temperature would incinerate the human body?". And the conversation doesn't go anywhere. Because there is no answer to the problem.

Maybe that rock underwent extreme heat and pressure that lithified in in a couple hours. Well, what about that rock indicates that such an event occured?

And that's basically what's happening here. And I'm trying my best to explain this in the most sincere way, but this is exactly what's happening.

To summarize, there's just no evidence to indicate any form of rapid lithification. But if it happened, there should be evidence, the rocks would be metamorphosed.

And yet, to say that these rocks were there and were solid before the flood is just as problematic because these rocks have things like trackways and fossil forests and evidence of long spans of time within them. And so guys like Steve Austin and baumgardner,

They would rather accept the defiance of basic physics, because they know that the alternative is an old earth. And their theology won't let them do that.

It's an issue to say the least. It's physics and the fabric of nature and creation. That are foregone.

But there are theological alternatives. And that's where the conversation ultimately leads for most Christian scientists (though not all of course).

Does sediment have to be completely lithified before the unconformities can form? I would say no. How many hours, days, months or years would it take various sediment layers to become stable enough to break rather than bend or squish if they were being forced up or dropping down due to earth movement underneath?

 

[Job 33:6]

Does sediment have to be completely lithified before the unconformities can form? I would say no. How many hours, days, months or years would it take various sediment layers to become stable enough to break rather than bend or squish if they were being forced up or dropping down due to earth movement underneath?

If you have brecciated fault gouge between them, and slickensides, I would say, in my opinion, such features indicate that this rock was hard and dense before deformation, especially in the case of things like propagating faults or a series of clean breaks that get smaller the further you go from an epicenter of deformation. Slickensides are oftentimes so smooth it's almost polished and shiny. Breccias have sharp angular fragments which we don't really see in individual uncemented grains.


But even if there was any doubt, I actually have another card up my sleeve. I have many cards.

Listen to this one.

Ductile deformation of bilaterally symmetrical trilobites.

So sometimes geologists will go out and they'll look at rocks that have been deformed due to orogenesis. The same orogenesis that results in the formation of things like angular unconformities.

And we'll ask "well, what's the angle of deformation or the direction of stress or strain on this body of rock? " It tells us what direction the mountain range advanced on a location or it can help with understanding the original nature of a formation prior to deformation. What did this rock look like before it got bent? Basically.

Well, one thing you can do is you can seek out fossils like trilobites. Trilobites have bilateral symmetry, and the right side of their body matches the left side, just like in people. Right side has an arm and a leg, left side has an arm and a leg.

But the catch is, trilobites are hard shelled, shells made of calcium carbonate like horseshoe crabs today. So what would it mean it you found a trilobite, in which it's hard shelled body, were deformed at the same angle as the body of rock in which it was contained?

That's right. It's a clear demonstration of ductile deformation of dense lithified rock as a product of slow application of pressure. Too much pressure and you end up with brittle deformation, like a rubber band breaking. But slow and steady, like a blacksmith bends a sword under heat and pressure, can bend the most dense metals.

And as the images below show, you can also find strained brachiopods, cephalopods, bivalves etc. And things like graptolites are further interesting because sometimes you may find incremental segmenting of the fragile shell as the rock slowly bends around it, such as in the diagram below. Just try to think about how a graptolite could break in such a way if the rock were not already dense and solid (figure 15-17). Or, how could a trilobite fossil bend in such a way? Only under pressure and heat. And if the surrounding body of rock is bent in the same direction, I would think there is little doubt that much like these hard shells, the rock around them was hard too.

And trilobites, you don't find them in the Mesozoic or Cenozoic, but in Paleozoic strata, such as the ordovician and silurian as we've been discussing, they are common.

And that's another way we know, these rocks were absolutely hard and dense prior to deformation in I'd say most instances. There are exceptions that involve soft sediment deposition though and in such instances, qualities of the rocks are different.

It's just too much. And the list goes on. Go to New York or Connecticut and you get half a dozen individual layers of glacial till stacked one on top of the other (YECs refer to this as the ice age) but in actuality evidence suggests many independent ice ages and glaciation events even within a single ice age of the pleistocene. Just ask the question of what the evidence is for the ice age, and soon you may find that same evidence in numerous depths of the stratigraphic column indicating many ice ages as opposed to just one.

I'll post now before I lose my progress but ending this post mid thought...

 

[Daniel Martinovich]

Not very convincing. Plus i just found about five non creationist websites that say lithification can occur immediately upon deposit. Wasn’t sure if they meant that at first until i found one that clarified it by sighting the type of material that this occurs with.
Also tried to find any evidence of hurricanes burying swamps including the 2004 tsunami. (You aught to read up on that one.)
There just isn’t anything out there in known history from a somewhat uniformitarian viewpoint that would bury the amounts of coal and oil we have. Especially when the coal fields are of the type consisting of plants and trees which screams rapid burial by large scale catastrophe. That is why the uniformitarian types like to steer the question of coal to peat bogs.

 

[Job 33:6]

Not very convincing. Plus i just found about five non creationist websites that say lithification can occur immediately upon deposit. Wasn’t sure if they meant that at first until i found one that clarified it by sighting the type of material that this occurs with.

I'm curious about this. I can't imagine it would be comparable to what we've been discussing, but Id be curious to see what you are referring to. What do you see?

And like I noted before, a diamond can form instantaneously as well, but that doesn't mean it's feasible that the conditions for diamond formation, pressures and temperatures, were present worldwide in some manner that didn't metamorphose rock.

Lithification is a process, so it may be a matter of me needing to clarify on where in that process the rock is, and why.

 

[Job 33:6]

I'm curious about this. I can't imagine it would be comparable to what we've been discussing, but Id be curious to see what you are referring to. What do you see?

And like I noted before, a diamond can form instantaneously as well, but that doesn't mean it's feasible that the conditions for diamond formation, pressures and temperatures, were present worldwide in some manner that didn't metamorphose rock.

Lithification is a process, so it may be a matter of me needing to clarify on where in that process the rock is, and why.

I don't think anyone can really look at an image like this and say "yea, those scrape marks formed while the rock was actually still unconsolidated sediment".

Because if it wasn't cemented (I'll change my word here to help clarify my own ideas), then the grains would roll, and there would be no friction, and thus the striations or slickenlines wouldn't form.

It's the same reason roller blades don't make scratches on a rink, but ice skates do, because one just rolls whole the other scrapes.

The only way to make slickenlines is if the grains are combined and cemented together.

Which takes us back to the original question. How did all of these formations nearly instantaneously become rock? And not only that, but in the case of an angular unconformity, how did the silurian bed become rock, then turn vertical (if it was soft sediment, how would it even fracture and then at such an angle?), Then you have the deposition, lithification and cementation of the devonian layers over top. Then as solid bodies of rock, they're grinding past eachother. But this unconformity is established before overlying mesozoic or Cenozoic deposition even occurs. And then further, somehow life managed to dig burrows and build nests and develop burrow networks somehow fast enough in the midst of this...extreme environment.


Even if we completely ignored the idea that rock doesn't just instantly form the moment a sand grain falls into the sea, what do you do when you have a community of dinosaur nests built right in the middle of the flood?

I would say, these were dense rocks for long periods of time, hence life could populate an area and build nests and lay eggs etc. But here we have this odd scenario where we're contemplating how rocks form, perhaps instantaneously, big massive formations spanning hundreds of miles. So how would life, living and breeding and burrowing and building nests and feeding traces, how does all this fit with our instantaneous cementation narrative?

If you throw a bag of sand into the middle of the Atlantic ocean, it would sink and it would remain sand. It wouldn't just instantly turn into rock.

It would take extreme heats and pressures to do something like that. But such an environment runs contradictory to the chemistry of the rocks themselves (no evidence of metamorphism for example in many such as in those of the angular unconformity noted above), but also it conflicts with evidence that we have of life living and thriving during these times. Like, for another example, how would Devonian coral reefs grow?

Corals die in today's time because the oceans are half a degree or so warmer than they were 50 years ago. So how could there be entire coral reef Devonian systems that grew in situ in Devonian rock, in this hypothetical environment in which rock is instantaneously forming?

I know you can what I'm saying here.

 

[Daniel Martinovich]

View attachment 317988

I don't think anyone can really look at an image like this and say "yea, those scrape marks formed while the rock was actually still unconsolidated sediment".

Because if it wasn't cemented (I'll change my word here to help clarify my own ideas), then the grains would roll, and there would be no friction, and thus the striations or slickenlines wouldn't form.

It's the same reason roller blades don't make scratches on a rink, but ice skates do, because one just rolls whole the other scrapes.

The only way to make slickenlines is if the grains are combined and cemented together.

Which takes us back to the original question. How did all of these formations nearly instantaneously become rock? And not only that, but in the case of an angular unconformity, how did the silurian bed become rock, then turn vertical (if it was soft sediment, how would it even fracture and then at such an angle?), Then you have the deposition, lithification and cementation of the devonian layers over top. Then as solid bodies of rock, they're grinding past eachother. But this unconformity is established before overlying mesozoic or Cenozoic deposition even occurs. And then further, somehow life managed to dig burrows and build nests and develop burrow networks somehow fast enough in the midst of this...extreme environment.


Even if we completely ignored the idea that rock doesn't just instantly form the moment a sand grain falls into the sea, what do you do when you have a community of dinosaur nests built right in the middle of the flood?

I would say, these were dense rocks for long periods of time, hence life could populate an area and build nests and lay eggs etc. But here we have this odd scenario where we're contemplating how rocks form, perhaps instantaneously, big massive formations spanning hundreds of miles. So how would life, living and breeding and burrowing and building nests and feeding traces, how does all this fit with our instantaneous cementation narrative?

If you throw a bag of sand into the middle of the Atlantic ocean, it would sink and it would remain sand. It wouldn't just instantly turn into rock.

It would take extreme heats and pressures to do something like that. But such an environment runs contradictory to the chemistry of the rocks themselves (no evidence of metamorphism for example in many such as in those of the angular unconformity noted above), but also it conflicts with evidence that we have of life living and thriving during these times. Like, for another example, how would Devonian coral reefs grow?

Corals die in today's time because the oceans are half a degree or so warmer than they were 50 years ago. So how could there be entire coral reef Devonian systems that grew in situ in Devonian rock, in this hypothetical environment in which rock is instantaneously forming?

I know you can what I'm saying here.

It was exactly as i postulated at first, chemical makeup and pressure. I thought that was just common sense. Anyway here is the website that verified what i read on a number of others. The others said lithification can occur upon deposit. I just wasn’t sure they meant exactly that.
Learning Geology: Diagenetic processes

 

[Job 33:6]

View attachment 317988

I don't think anyone can really look at an image like this and say "yea, those scrape marks formed while the rock was actually still unconsolidated sediment".

Because if it wasn't cemented (I'll change my word here to help clarify my own ideas), then the grains would roll, and there would be no friction, and thus the striations or slickenlines wouldn't form.

It's the same reason roller blades don't make scratches on a rink, but ice skates do, because one just rolls whole the other scrapes.

The only way to make slickenlines is if the grains are combined and cemented together.

Which takes us back to the original question. How did all of these formations nearly instantaneously become rock? And not only that, but in the case of an angular unconformity, how did the silurian bed become rock, then turn vertical (if it was soft sediment, how would it even fracture and then at such an angle?), Then you have the deposition, lithification and cementation of the devonian layers over top. Then as solid bodies of rock, they're grinding past eachother. But this unconformity is established before overlying mesozoic or Cenozoic deposition even occurs. And then further, somehow life managed to dig burrows and build nests and develop burrow networks somehow fast enough in the midst of this...extreme environment.


Even if we completely ignored the idea that rock doesn't just instantly form the moment a sand grain falls into the sea, what do you do when you have a community of dinosaur nests built right in the middle of the flood?

I would say, these were dense rocks for long periods of time, hence life could populate an area and build nests and lay eggs etc. But here we have this odd scenario where we're contemplating how rocks form, perhaps instantaneously, big massive formations spanning hundreds of miles. So how would life, living and breeding and burrowing and building nests and feeding traces, how does all this fit with our instantaneous cementation narrative?

If you throw a bag of sand into the middle of the Atlantic ocean, it would sink and it would remain sand. It wouldn't just instantly turn into rock.

It would take extreme heats and pressures to do something like that. But such an environment runs contradictory to the chemistry of the rocks themselves (no evidence of metamorphism for example in many such as in those of the angular unconformity noted above), but also it conflicts with evidence that we have of life living and thriving during these times. Like, for another example, how would Devonian coral reefs grow?

Corals die in today's time because the oceans are half a degree or so warmer than they were 50 years ago. So how could there be entire coral reef Devonian systems that grew in situ in Devonian rock, in this hypothetical environment in which rock is instantaneously forming?

I know you can what I'm saying here.

And just like the polystrate forests or fossil forests, these things like coral reefs, they were flung into place from waters of a distant land. This is in-situ growth.

Two Medicine Formation - Wikipedia
The wiki site for egg mountain, interestingly enough the site rests upon a deformed Mesozoic anticline.

So this is a nice and simple case here. The land must have been horizontal, dinosaurs lived, then the land was later deformed. The dinosaurs wouldn't have been building their nests and laying eggs in a communal fashion on layers that were actively bending?

Time had to pass.

These are in-situ events and it's all in place where it originally was. The dinosaurs didn't get hurled there from some waters of a foreign land. This was their home.

 

[Job 33:6]

It was exactly as i postulated at first, chemical makeup and pressure. I thought that was just common sense. Anyway here is the website that verified what i read on a number of others. The others said lithification can occur upon deposit. I just wasn’t sure they meant exactly that.
Learning Geology: Diagenetic processes

Well yea, of course a rock can form instantly, I agree with that. But in order to do that, it would require incredible heat and pressure. So much so that, there would presumably be some kind of partial melting or metamorphosis, or you know, something that suggests that this occurred. And having life and fossils just, right smack dab in the middle of it, you know. How did anything live even for a fraction of a second in such an environment? If sediment is under so much heat and pressure that it's just instantly or within some brief amount of time cementing and becoming rock, how could there be things like burrows or trackways or nests or...coral reefs or fossil forests or...etc etc.

This reminds me of the Eocene green river formation. It has over 5 million varves in it. And this is just the Eocene. It's early Cenozoic, way late to the game, post dating deposition of precambrian, Paleozoic and mesozoic layers. And it alone has 5 million varves. And in those varves are things like foot tracks from birds roaming around what appears to have been a prehistoric lake.

Some YECs would say, well maybe multiple varves formed per day. But if you have 5 million varves, how many per day are we talking about? 5,000? 10,000? What is that like an inch of sediment deposited ever 10 seconds? And the same issue arises. How in the world are animals alive in the middle of this utter chaos? Walking around. Building nests, feeding, just birds casually walking, not flying.

I mean, if I made a list, it's just rugged.

You have this heat problem lurking in the background that even the YEC professionals know cannot be touched.

You have these strained bilaterally symmetrical trilobites demonstrating ductile deformation.

You have slickenlines and brecciated faults demonstrating cementation of strata prior to turning of the formation to produce an angular unconformity.

And you have these odds and ends like the green river formation and dozens of layers of glacial till from independent glacial advances

Then you have have life...living, walking, eating, pooping, breeding, nesting, grazing, burrowing etc. All just like, right there in it. As if...

it looks as if time passed. And all this, you know, I've been generous in not even going into every other field that is hiding out around the corner. Chemistry and physics produced radiometric dating. Biology now has its own genetic clocks, you have astronomers looking at deep space with their starlight position saying that the universe must be old else light from stars wouldnt have had time to reach us, you have millions of asteroid craters on the moon, as if it's been around for awhile...

And on and on and on and on.

And...even amongst biblical scholars, many don't view Genesis as describing a 6 day creation. Dating back even to St Augustine in the 6th century, granted he never thought the earth was billions of years old, but he also didn't perceive Genesis days as 24 hour periods either.

 

[Daniel Martinovich]

Well yea, of course a rock can form instantly, I agree with that. But in order to do that, it would require incredible heat and pressure. So much so that, there would presumably be some kind of partial melting or metamorphosis, or you know, something that suggests that this occurred. And having life and fossils just, right smack dab in the middle of it, you know. How did anything live even for a fraction of a second in such an environment? If sediment is under so much heat and pressure that it's just instantly or within some brief amount of time cementing and becoming rock, how could there be things like burrows or trackways or nests or...coral reefs or fossil forests or...etc etc.

This reminds me of the Eocene green river formation. It has over 5 million varves in it. And this is just the Eocene. It's early Cenozoic, way late to the game, post dating deposition of precambrian, Paleozoic and mesozoic layers. And it alone has 5 million varves. And in those varves are things like foot tracks from birds roaming around what appears to have been a prehistoric lake.

Some YECs would say, well maybe multiple varves formed per day. But if you have 5 million varves, how many per day are we talking about? 5,000? 10,000? What is that like an inch of sediment deposited ever 10 seconds? And the same issue arises. How in the world are animals alive in the middle of this utter chaos? Walking around. Building nests, feeding, just birds casually walking, not flying.
View attachment 317991

I mean, if I made a list, it's just rugged.

You have this heat problem lurking in the background that even the YEC professionals know cannot be touched.

You have these strained bilaterally symmetrical trilobites demonstrating ductile deformation.

You have slickenlines and brecciated faults demonstrating cementation of strata prior to turning of the formation to produce an angular unconformity.

And you have these odds and ends like the green river formation and dozens of layers of glacial till from independent glacial advances

Then you have have life...living, walking, eating, pooping, breeding, nesting, grazing, burrowing etc. All just like, right there in it. As if...

it looks as if time passed. And all this, you know, I've been generous in not even going into every other field that is hiding out around the corner. Chemistry and physics produced radiometric dating. Biology now has its own genetic clocks, you have astronomers looking at deep space with their starlight position saying that the universe must be old else light from stars wouldnt have had time to reach us, you have millions of asteroid craters on the moon, as if it's been around for awhile...

And on and on and on and on.

And...even amongst biblical scholars, many don't view Genesis as describing a 6 day creation. Dating back even to St Augustine in the 6th century, granted he never thought the earth was billions of years old, but he also didn't perceive Genesis days as 24 hour periods either.

I have spent plenty of time debating the other disciplines. My favorite are the biologists because that is the easiest. Your sadly misinformed on the cosmos. No one knows jack about it. We are literally in the cell is a little glob of jelly stage in our understanding of the cosmos. Everyone, young and old age has the same problems. Most hypothesis tested are not only proving wrong but creating even more questions. My prediction is the creationists will start to get a handle on it first because they are starting from a better perspective. But that is a long ways off.

The Bible is a way more supernatural book than 99% of Christians know. It doesn’t deal in speculations, guesses or predictions that can mean anything or come to pass at anytime. But i digress. Anyway, its nice debating with you. It helps me but i really don't have the kind of time i need to keep it up. I shouldn’t be such a troll and throw a comment at something that passes me by when i don’t really have time to give the discussion justice.

 

[Job 33:6]

My prediction is the creationists will start to get a handle on it first because they are starting from a better perspective. But that is a long ways off.
.

I think that, well, I just don't think it's coincidental that you end up with everyone aligned in the same direction on an old earth. And you know, James Hutton published the theory of the earth with his angular unconformity at siccar point back in the 1700s. So it's not like we haven't had time to chew on the topic.

And some might say, well maybe there was a miracle that eliminated the heat problem. And maybe there was a miracle that sped up the speed of light, and maybe there was a miracle that sped up plate tectonics without getting all the friction and heat there, and a miracle that sped up molecular clocks and evolution (such as hyper mutation rates as some YECs propose). Even though we observe 1 varve per day depositing today, maybe tens of thousands deposited per day in the past, maybe rocks underwent cementation almost instantaneously.

We could say "maybe" for all of these things and many many more, and just throw miracles at all of them.

Or, we could simply conclude that everything is just old.

If you'd like to poke at my side, feel free. I'll leave the mic on the table.

And lastly, I'll just mention it one more time. Many biblical scholars don't view Genesis as describing a 24 hour day with Yom. I mentioned St Augustine from the 6th century, but there are countless today. And I think for very good reason which I made a nice post about elsewhere that you're welcome to take a look at here:
Genesis for Normal People

 

[Daniel Martinovich]

I think that, well, I just don't think it's coincidental that you end up with everyone aligned in the same direction on an old earth. And you know, James Hutton published the theory of the earth with his angular unconformity at siccar point back in the 1700s. So it's not like we haven't had time to chew on the topic.

And some might say, well maybe there was a miracle that eliminated the heat problem. And maybe there was a miracle that sped up the speed of light, and maybe there was a miracle that sped up plate tectonics without getting all the friction and heat there, and a miracle that sped up molecular clocks and evolution (such as hyper mutation rates as some YECs propose). Even though we observe 1 varve per day depositing today, maybe tens of thousands deposited per day in the past, maybe rocks underwent cementation almost instantaneously.

We could say "maybe" for all of these things and many many more, and just throw miracles at all of them.

Or, we could simply conclude that everything is just old.

If you'd like to poke at my side, feel free. I'll leave the mic on the table.

And lastly, I'll just mention it one more time. Many biblical scholars don't view Genesis as describing a 24 hour day with Yom. I mentioned St Augustine from the 6th century, but there are countless today. And I think for very good reason which I made a nice post about elsewhere that you're welcome to take a look at here:
Genesis for Normal People

 

[Daniel Martinovich]

Just for the record. I didn’t say there were miracles involved in solving any of those “problems.” I just think your just plain old wrong about them and either are ignoring or don't know the information necessary to make an informed hypothesis on them. You have a bit of a habit of putting words in peoples mouths to construct little straw men that sre easily knocked down.