Yes I did answer your question, you either failed to comprehend it or chose to ignore to it because it is an inconvenient truth which clashes with your beliefs.
Either way you are the one avoiding the burden of proof with this futile attempt at diversion.
You did? Would you be able to say which question you answered?
sjastro said:
Scientists are not making assumptions but using evidence based on GPS, geodetic data, thermochronology, strath terrace dating, sediment analysis, isostatic compensation and geological markers.
That is what you said, and I asked you to "Please clarify. Are you saying no assumptions are made here?"
I asked because your statement is not true.
In all those methods, or models, assumptions are made.
You notice you did not answer the question?
Let me try one more time with an extra caveat, you don’t appear to grasp the concept of geological time scales.
Mountain building occurs on geological time scales lasting tens of millions of years, you are only interested in what has happened in the last 4500 years.
Based on the assumption that the rate is constant, slow and gradual, they do.
We have passed that stage, though. Or at least I thought we did.
It doesn’t take much insight to realize 4500 years is far too short for any significant changes in mountain height, and let’s not forget you accepted the tectonic uplift rates from the 2006 Andes link which if applied to a 4500 year interval is still insignificant.
I used it as an example.
Persons were limiting it. Are you doing that as well?
There is another variable I should have mentioned it’s called the conservation of mass.
If every single drop of water from oceans, lakes, rivers, ice sheets and groundwater was converted to water vapour and added to the existing vapour in the atmosphere and allowed to rain, the total depth for the global flood would be ~2700 meters.
Your figures are at least correct.
There’s as much water in Earth’s mantle as in all the oceans.
A reservoir of water three times the volume of all the oceans has been discovered deep beneath the Earth’s surface. The finding could help explain where Earth’s seas came from.
Genesis 7:11 'all the fountains of the great deep burst forth, and the floodgates of the heavens were opened.'
Water came from beneath, and water goes in the earth as well.
This is an idealized case for the earth being perfectly smooth, if we included ocean basins for example, the depth would be less.
This leads to the absurd situation that Mt Everest would have a fraction of its current height at the time of the flood to be covered by water and the tectonic uplift rate would have to be many magnitudes times greater than the measured rate to achieve its current height.
If all factors are not taken into consideration, and included, I can see how this conclusion is reached.
If you disagree with this the burden of proof is on you to show it is wrong, since this is a science forum miracles violating the conservation of mass, or massive acceleration in the recent past without supporting evidence is not allowed.
There are
Basic assumptions of science, and you deny this, so I think we need to clarify this first.
I checked GPS, and geodetic data, and these both use assumptions.