Could an evolutionist offer me with a rational objective analysis of this piece of evidence?
It's always fair to ask for a response. Thanks, here it is:
Rocks do not normally bend; they break because they are hard and brittle. But in many places we find whole sequences of strata that were bent without fracturing, indicating that all the rock layers were rapidly deposited and folded while still wet and pliable before final hardening. For example,....
(AIG Link)
Simply false. This sounds convincing to us only because we aren't geologists who understand rock, and our view is limited by the few rocks we've picked up on the surface. The reality is that rocks can indeed be bent under the earth, especially if heated to softness, if subjected to pressure, if bent slowly, etc.
Could an evolutionist offer me with a rational objective analysis of this piece of evidence? I'm curious on the honest interpretation evolutionists will provide if any at all.
While any geologist could give the same answer (which is obvious to any competent and honest geologist), here is one that is particularly useful because it is from a Christian standpoint.
https://geochristian.com/2009/10/06/six-bad-arguments-from-answers-in-genesis-part-6/
skip below the purple box for the full explanation.
Here is his shortened explanation:
I’ve read the AiG article, and it just doesn’t work.
The question is whether folds were formed when the rocks were solid or unconsolidated. Other Christian geologists I know have pointed out that Snelling uses selective evidence in his study, as other parts of the same layers show very clear signs of solid-state deformation.
The way to see how solid rocks can bend is to take rocks and put them in a press in an engineering laboratory and see how they behave under stress. That has been done many times, and indeed you can do all sorts of things to rocks by putting pressure on them. In Earth’s crust, this results in the folds and faults that make up much of the world’s major mountain belts. These rocks show many signs of solid-state deformation.
If one applies the same sorts of pressure to layers of unconsolidated sediments (sand, silt, clay, etc.) the results are very different. Instead of getting folded layers of rocks, one gets chaos, with blobs of material distorting and either sinking or rising, depending on density. This is called soft-sediment deformation, and is readily distinguishable in the field from solid-rock deformation.
What is observed on a massive scale in the Earth’s crust (with some exceptions) is deformation of solid rocks, not soft-sediment deformation. If the bulk of the sedimentary rocks were laid down by Noah’s flood (and the Bible does not say that they were) then soft-sediment deformation on a massive scale should be a dominant feature of the sedimentary rocks, and it isn’t.
The “all sediments must have been laid down rapidly and while being soft” argument is not consistent with laboratory and field studies, and should not be used as Christian apologetics.
With respect,
Kevin N (Christian geologist)
Please do see the figures, pictures, and other longer explanation material at the site.
The bottom line is that geologists have looked at the evidence. They have literally mountains of evidence from all over the world. They have tested ideas with lab experiments, calculations, millions of successful predictions, and so on. Geologists understand the rocks - how they form, how they behave, what they can and can't do, all based on the solid work of millions of experts. To ignore this when discussing rocks is either hopelessly naive & incompetent, - or blatantly dishonest.
Yet that's exactly what AIG did here. They hid the real explanation, instead giving an argument so delusional that even a freshman geologist would be able to see through it in a minute. They did so knowing that this would fool most regular people, lying again like they do so often. That's why this kind of lying hurts our Christian witness so much - because it's exactly what St. Augustine was talking about over 1,500 years ago, when he wrote:
Usually, even a non-Christian knows something about the earth, the heavens, and the other elements of this world, about the motion and orbit of the stars and even their size and relative positions, about the predictable eclipses of the sun and moon, the cycles of the years and the seasons, about the kinds of animals, shrubs, stones, and so forth, and this knowledge he holds to as being certain from reason and experience. Now, it is a disgraceful and dangerous thing for an infidel to hear a Christian, presumably giving the meaning of Holy Scripture, talking nonsense on these topics; and we should take all means to prevent such an embarrassing situation, in which people show up vast ignorance in a Christian and laugh it to scorn....If they find a Christian mistaken in a field in which they themselves know well and hear him maintaining his foolish opinions about our books, how are they going to believe those books in matters concerning the resurrection of the dead, the hope of eternal life, and the kingdom of heaven, when they think their pages are full of falsehoods on facts which they themselves have learnt from experience and the light of reason? Reckless and incompetent expounders of Holy Scripture bring untold trouble and sorrow on their wiser brethren when they are caught in one of their mischievous false opinions and are taken to task by those who are not bound by the authority of our sacred books.
In Christ-
Papias