Biblical Flood

[lucaspa]

OK, this is the thread to discuss all aspects of the Biblical flood and Flood Geology.

Flood Geolog is the theory that all sedimentary and metamorphic rocks and all the geological layers can be explained as having been deposited during a single world-wide flood. Flood Geology is an essential part of YEC.

 

[troodon]

And it's so easy to falsify.

 

[lucaspa]

And it's so easy to falsify.

Well, that is because it was falsified by 1831. The data that falsified it then still exists.

The first data that started doing in Flood Geology were unconformities discovered by Hutton in the 1790s. The most famous of those is at Siccar Point. The geological features there could not possibly have been laid down by a flood. Another early falsification were the volcanic cones in Auvergne, France. They have sedimentary layers at their base but the cones are too fragile to withstand water over them.

OTOH, a local flood in the Tigris-Euphrates Valley is very much alive as a basis for the legends in the Epic of Gilgamesh (which were reworked into the 2 flood stories in Genesis 6-8).

 

[troodon]

Siccar Point.

My goodness:

That is lovely.

 

[lucaspa]

Let me submit that the Flood stories (there are 2 intertwined in Genesis 6-8) are a metaphor of the Babylonian Conquest. Babylon rolled over Israel like a flood. When it was over 10 of the 12 tribes of Israel were gone. For good. There were only a few survivors, hanging on to what little they had saved from the conqueorors. And yet they did hang on, and in the end God is promising them that there will be a future; that they can rebuild Israel.

 

[lucaspa]

My goodness:

That is lovely.

Notice the vertical strata from center to right. The top of the vertical strata is uneven. Hutton realized this could only be due to erosion. Then there is the horizontal strata on top.

The vertical strata must have been laid down under as sea as horizontal in the past -- because there is no way to lay it down as vertical in earth's gravity. Then over an immense amount of time the strata were tilted and lifted above the surface -- where the erosion occurred. That gives the uneven surface between the vertical layers and the horizontal ones. Then the surface sunk again beneath the waves and the horizontal strata were laid down and "consolidated". Then once again all the strata were lifted above water.

A single flood taking place in a year could not possibly do all this.

 

[Cabal]

Notice the vertical strata from center to right. The top of the vertical strata is uneven. Hutton realized this could only be due to erosion. Then there is the horizontal strata on top.

The vertical strata must have been laid down under as sea as horizontal in the past -- because there is no way to lay it down as vertical in earth's gravity. Then over an immense amount of time the strata were tilted and lifted above the surface -- where the erosion occurred. That gives the uneven surface between the vertical layers and the horizontal ones. Then the surface sunk again beneath the waves and the horizontal strata were laid down and "consolidated". Then once again all the strata were lifted above water.

A single flood taking place in a year could not possibly do all this.

Is this a coastal point attached to the mainland, or is this an isolated spot surrouned by deep water?

Sorry for the newb questions, just I've never really grasped why flood geology isn't possible the way I have evolution, cosmology, etc.

 

[troodon]

Is this a coastal point attached to the mainland, or is this an isolated spot surrouned by deep water?

It's coastal.

Sorry for the newb questions, just I've never really grasped why flood geology isn't possible the way I have evolution, cosmology, etc.

Angular unconformities are formed by the process I explained in this post and lucaspa explained in his post above. They are incompatible with the Global Flood Model because they require a period of tilting and erosion to separate two distinct depositional periods, the one that deposited the tilted layers and the one that deposited the top, horizontal layers.

The flood model cannot provide this sequence of events. If a single flood deposited all of the earth's sedimentary rocks then bedding planes should always be found parallel to each other in strata, they should never truncate one another except along faults.

 

[Orogeny]

Another handy refutation of flood geology is the White Cliffs of Dover, which are composed primarily of chalk. The primary component of chalk is coccoliths, small skeletal plates of single-cell coccolithophores. These plates, which are made of calcium carbonate, are microscopic, and are plate-shaped, causing them to be easily suspended. The hydrodynamic conditions invoked by flood geology proponants would not allow deposition of a pile of coccoliths several hundred meters thick.

A coccolithophore. The individual plates are coccoliths. Notice that the plates are roughly frisbee shaped. This makes them very easily suspended by even a weak current.

 

[lucaspa]

Is this a coastal point attached to the mainland, or is this an isolated spot surrouned by deep water?

It's on the coast of Scotland. There are other examples of this type of unconformity inland.

Sorry for the newb questions, just I've never really grasped why flood geology isn't possible the way I have evolution, cosmology, etc.

There's never a need to apologize for questions. (there's sometimes a need to apologize for answers. )

Another example why flood geology is not possible are the nests of land dwelling dinosaurs, such as the Maiasaura nests in Montana. They are fragile, like bird's nests but larger, and any flood would have washed them away and broken them up.

Then consider the salt mines underneath Lake Erie. That layer of salt could only have been formed by the evaporation of a sea. Yet there are sediments on top of the salt layer (after all, it is under Lake Erie). If the salt deposits existed before the flood then the flood would have dissolved them. If the salt deposits are evaporation from the flood, then how do you get sedimentary layers, not to mention Lake Erie, over them?

 

[Orogeny]

Come on in here, Juve, C4. Let's have a nice, friendly discussion.

 

[juvenissun]

OK, this is the thread to discuss all aspects of the Biblical flood and Flood Geology.

Flood Geolog is the theory that all sedimentary and metamorphic rocks and all the geological layers can be explained as having been deposited during a single world-wide flood. Flood Geology is an essential part of YEC.

I will forgive you for the mistake on the red-colored part. But I do not agree with your (or whoever else's) description on the domain of flood geology.

For one thing: there ARE sedimentary material on the earth before the global flood.

 

[Orogeny]

OK then Juve, let's get this started:

Please present an argument, with geologic evidence, that there was a global flood as described in the Bible.

 

[sungaunga]

Hi folks i really don't see what all this fuss is about. God told Noah to build a boat, he built it, animals got on it and the water covered the highest mountain tops. Yes, you can't believe in evolution and the global flood at the same time. And theres a reason why evolution never happened and will never happen. If the Flood were a local flood, God would have repeatedly broken His promise never to send such a flood again. God put a rainbow in the sky as a covenant between God and man and the animals that He would never repeat such an event. There have been huge local floods in recent times but never has there been another global Flood that killed all life on the land. We can trust the Bible.

 

[Orogeny]

Please present an argument, with geologic evidence, that there was a global flood as described in the Bible.

 

[Papias]

It constantly amazes me how little the supporters of flood geology know about actual geology. Please, if you are sure that a flood happened, take just a few minutes to read about the history of flood geology. Many sources can describe that, but a good and easy one is here: (just the history section of this page: Flood geology - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia)


Note also that flood geology has been abandoned by practically all geologists. The Geological society of America, the main geological society worldwide, had this statement, approved by publication in it's journal to all members, issued:

***************************************
Acceptance of deep time is not confined to academic science. If commercial geologists could find more fossil fuel by interpreting the rock record as having resulted from a single flood or otherwise encompassing no more than a few thousand years, they would surely accept this unconventional view, but they do not. In fact, these profit-oriented geologists have joined with academic researchers in refining the standard geologic time scale and bringing to light the details of deep earth history.
****************************************


These are the geologists (who are mostly Christians) who have looked at the evidence. Anyone who advocates flood geology needs to address this fact, before simply relying on one or another of the Bibles.

Papias

 

[juvenissun]

Hi folks i really don't see what all this fuss is about. God told Noah to build a boat, he built it, animals got on it and the water covered the highest mountain tops. Yes, you can't believe in evolution and the global flood at the same time. And theres a reason why evolution never happened and will never happen. If the Flood were a local flood, God would have repeatedly broken His promise never to send such a flood again. God put a rainbow in the sky as a covenant between God and man and the animals that He would never repeat such an event. There have been huge local floods in recent times but never has there been another global Flood that killed all life on the land. We can trust the Bible.

Agree. You are a very blessed person.

 

[juvenissun]

Please present an argument, with geologic evidence, that there was a global flood as described in the Bible.

We have a global ocean which is only a few hundred meters lower than 30% of the earth.

 

[juvenissun]

It constantly amazes me how little the supporters of flood geology know about actual geology. Please, if you are sure that a flood happened, take just a few minutes to read about the history of flood geology. Many sources can describe that, but a good and easy one is here: (just the history section of this page: Flood geology - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia)


Note also that flood geology has been abandoned by practically all geologists. The Geological society of America, the main geological society worldwide, had this statement, approved by publication in it's journal to all members, issued:

***************************************
Acceptance of deep time is not confined to academic science. If commercial geologists could find more fossil fuel by interpreting the rock record as having resulted from a single flood or otherwise encompassing no more than a few thousand years, they would surely accept this unconventional view, but they do not. In fact, these profit-oriented geologists have joined with academic researchers in refining the standard geologic time scale and bringing to light the details of deep earth history.
****************************************


These are the geologists (who are mostly Christians) who have looked at the evidence. Anyone who advocates flood geology needs to address this fact, before simply relying on one or another of the Bibles.

Papias

Why are you repeating this useless argument again and again? Do not simply quote what others said. What is your idea? I guess you are a historian. A historian should look forward, even he spends most of his time looking backward.

 

[Calypsis4]

A single flood taking place in a year could not possibly do all this.

Yes, it could. It could have been done in moments and most likely was...by the great cataclysm of the Noahic deluge.

One thing for certain; you have no empirical investigation to verify your claims. But there were living witnesses to Noahs flood as recorded in the Biblical account.

The evidence for the flood of Noah is not only massive, it is world-wide:

Marine life in the Himalayas:

Fossil fish in the Alps"

Ripple marks in the mountains of Germany;

Ripple marks at high elevation in Utah:

Tens of thousands of fossils found at high elevation in Agate Springs, Nebraska. Did all those animals migrate there at the same time only to become slowly fossilized? Or were they seeking higher ground from the receding waters of the flood & got instantly buried by volcanic ash?

Green River Formation in Wyoming. The same question arises here. Flood conditions (with subsequent earthquakes and volcanoes) provide the best conditions for the formation of fossils:

Dinosaurs instantly buried and fossilized while in the act of fighting:

The top view of the same thing...from Mongolia.

Fish was instantly buried in the act of giving birth:

A fish that was instantly buried and fossilized in the act of eating another fish:

Polystrate fossils of trees extending through what is supposed to be 'millions of years' of sediment and rock. There is no way those trees could have stood for that long without deteriorating. Evolution is a myth.

Entire forests buried with the trees standing upright in layer after layer of strata. This begs the same question: Did all those trees (many without bark or roots) stand for millions of years awaiting slow and gradual burial by evolutionary forces? No way.

The most likely explanation for this phenomena is what we have observed at Mount St. Helens Spirit Lake since the eruption of 1980:

It didn't take millions of years for this to happen.


All of this and much more I can post later reveal evidence for the flood that Moses wrote about in Genesis. The flood of Noah is responsible for most of the fossils we find in nature and not the slow and gradual processes of uniformitarianism.