Today at 10:40 PM Jase said this in Post #21
Why is it impossible?
Well, there's not enough water on Earth, for one...
And
here are some of the rest of the reasons why.
Because you assume the topography of the world we see today, is the same as it was before the flood? Nope.
Evidence supporting that assertion? None whatsoever.
If the flood is so falsified, expain fluidisation pipes, massive coal beds, footprints in Grand Canyon Sandstone layers that scientists said had to made underwater to account for the patterns, or how about a large fossil deposit in France of sea, land, and lake species all piled together? Were they neighbors? 
The funny thing is that coal is a problem that your young earth model cannot explain. Footprints in sandstones of the Grand Canyon also cause problems for your model considering, if you had examined the evidence more closely, the footprints are of reptiles and the sandstone is of a desert environment. Large fossil deposits occur when local floods happen. However, YECs/flood "geologists" have yet to account for the
aforementioned features fatal to your model. I keep linking to the thread. If it's not falsified, why can't they be addressed? Because YECists cannot.
The geological column is also believed to have been caused by a massive catastrophe.
No, it's not. The geologic column is composed of a great deal of different layers of many different compositions formed in different environments. Furthermore, practices such as age dating and biostratigraphy indicate that they are not all the same age. And most fatal to your model, perhaps, is the fact that the geologic column is so distinctly stratified this way. If a global flood is responsible for the entire geologic column, and if this flood lasted less than one year as flood geologists insist, then we should see no stratification or such variations in materials represented in the layers. We should see no massive salt beds. We should see no igneous intrusions. We should see no angular unconformities--or any unconformable surfaces between layers at all. We should see no paleosols. We should see very little limestone or other chemical precipitates at all. In fact, we should see hardly any fossils whatsoever.
The geologic column is exactly what it cannot be if your model is correct.
Or explain why other civilizations have mentioned a global flood?
So what?
First of all, not all of them are global flood myths and not all of them are the same as your myth. Many of them are different. Why do civilizations have flood myths at all? Because many civilizations arose in river valleys which were, to no one's surprise, prone to flooding. People write about what they see and things that happen to them.
Or how about the amount of sedimentary layer on the ocean floor fitting in line with a large flood?
Except it doesn't at all. It may sound harsh, but especially on this point you reveal your complete ignorance of geology. You have no idea what you are talking about to the point that you have oversimplified marine geology to its extreme. Have you actually looked at deep sea cores drilled by the Deep Sea Drilling Project or the Ocean Drilling Project? Probably not if that's your claim. The oceans contain a wide variety of materials, and many of them are biogenic, that is precipitated from fluids and formed from the shells of dead microorganisms--that takes a great deal of time and certain climatic conditions. Those organisms would have a tough time comprising the sedimentary strata on the ocean floor with a global flood going on--plus there just isn't enough time with your model. The oceans also reflect evidence of windblown dust particles and volcanic eruptions are evidenced by ash layers. Furthermore, the sediments also increase in thickness away from spreading axes. It's consistent with plate tectonics operating, not a global flooding event.
The sediments on the ocean floor hurt your case and are in no way in line with a large flood. The fact that their fossil content with depth (and thus age) matches not only radiometric dating of oceanic crust, predictions based upon plate movements, and magnetic anomalies correlated with those on continents with age shows just how wrong your model is.
The evidence in the earth contradicts your model. Thus your model is falsified. There are a variety of threads going around that have yet to be addressed. Instead they are met with silence as YECs continue to ignore the evidence that refutes their model and continue to claim that "the earth must be young!" and "a global flood must have happened" in every other thread.
