• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

The global flood: The sorting of fossils and sediments

Agnostic75

Well-Known Member
Since flood geology is such a broad topic, for purposes of this thread, I wish to limit discussions to the sorting of fossils and sediments.

A person has to understand a good deal about science in order to have informed opinions about evolution, and the age of the earth, but even laymen can often understand a good deal of evidence regarding the sorting of fossils and sediments.

Glenn Morton is a Christian geophysicist. He does not believe that a global flood occurred. He has studied flood geology for many years, and he has written many articles, including many Internet articles, on flood geology. He typically provides lots of scientific documentation that supports his positions. Consider the following:

Green River Formation and the Global Flood Page

Glenn Morton said:
Every feature of the Green River formation points to long periods of deposition. The coprolites of fish and birds, algal encrusting of logs, footprints, variations in laminae thickness consistent with known weather patterns, sunspots, and Earth orbital parameters.

Global Flood

Glenn Morton said:
A global Flood violates the second law of thermodynamics. The earth is made of continents and ocean basins. the continental platforms are made of granite and float high above the ocean basins. On the average, the surface of the continents is 5 km above the abyssal ocean floor. On average, the sediment cover on top of the continents 1.6 km. The average surface elevation above sea level is about 600 m.

The average oceanic sediment thickness is 300 m with an average elevation of -4500.

Here is why a global flood violates the second law of thermodynamics. The thickest sediments are on top of the continental platforms. If you think that this is not a problem, then perform the following experiment. Take a large brick place it onto the bottom of your bath tub. Fill the bathtub up to a level that is twice the thickness of the brick. Pour dirt into the tub and stir vigorously. let it settle out. Where do you think the thickest layer of dirt will be? It will be on the tub bottom not on the brick. In fact the sediment on the tub bottom will be twice as thick as the sediment on the brick if you truly stirred vigorously. In point of fact, the sediment is much thicker on the continents than it is in the ocean basins.

The average sediment thickness on top of the continents is nearly 1.7 km. The average sediment thickness in the ocean basins is only .3 km; a 5 to 1 ratio. This is a violation of the laws of physics for the Flood to have created the sediments as young earth creationists believe.

There are equations that can be derived which show that it is impossible to account for the sediment thicknesses by having a global flood. For more information see Morton (1980). I will stand by the problem but not my suggested solution. It has been disproven by subsequently acquired data.

Could the continents sink and then rise again after the Flood? No. If that had happened there should exist a huge, vertical fracture zone along each of these contnental shelves. There is none. During my career as a geophysicist,I have personally examined hundreds of thousands of miles of seismic data along the continental shelves of eastern Canada, the Eastern U.S, the Gulf of Mexico, Alaska, China, NW Africa, South Africa, Brazil, and England. In fact along some of these continental margins, not a single major fault occurs. The sediments simply thin out into the ocean. This makes these basins poor targets for oil exploration but very good regions from which to disprove the concept that the continents sank and rose during the Flood.

The fossils are too well sorted. I am indebted to R.S. Beal Jr. for reminding me of this. Conodonts are microscopic fossils which are the "teeth" of an ancient animal. The shape of these conodonts change with each succeeding geologic level are unique. In the Grand Canyon, in the Redwall limestone, is divided vertically into the Whitmore Wash, Thunder Springs, Mooney Falls and Horseshoe Mesa members. In each of these layers a peculiar shaped and unique conodont is found. A conodont named Gnathodes typicus is found in the Whitmore Wash member and not in the other layers. Scoliognathus anchoralis and Dolignathus latus are unique to the Thunder Springs member. Gnathodus texanus is found in the Mooney Falls member only and the conodont Taphrognathus variarus is limited to the Horseshoe Mesa member.

Conodont are extremely small and microscopes must be used to examine them. How in the world could a global flood so perfectly sort these tiny particles into layers that only contain conodonts of certain shapes? The turbulence of the flood was supposed to be so great and yet world-wide, microscopic animals are sorted vertically through the various layers of the geologic column.

In the Gulf of Mexico, when we drill wells, we always find the same vertical order of microscopic planktonic foraminifera, nannoplankton, and benthic foraminifera. I know that a peculiar shape of planktonic foram, Glob Menardi changed its coiling direction at the same geologic horizon as the last occurrence of D. brouweri "A", and the benthic foram, Cristellaria S. I know that microscopic benthonic Trimosina A is found above this level and the microscopic calcarious nannoplankton Discoaster A is below this level. Each of these fossil forms have a unique shape and are easily distinguishable. How could the flood so perfectly sort these small uniquely shaped creatures into vertical layers?

Other fossils are equally well sorted but not on the characteristics that global Flood advocates suggest. I use some rather old books for this, because it illustrates how long ago this information was known. This is important because as long as this has been known, Christian apologists never talk about ammonites in their books on the Flood.

Ammonites were a nautiloid-like animal that lived in the Late Paleozoic and Mesozoic seas as the animal grew, it excreted a shell wall behind the animal but inside the shell which was attached to the outer shell. The junction of this interior partition with the external shell left a suture pattern on the exterior of the shell. This suture pattern was constant for each species and was constant for each individual throughout its life. A small individual had the same sutures as a large individuals of the same species. This is important because global flood advocates believe that the fossils are sorted according to the laws of hydrodynamical sorting. These laws, Stoke's Law and variations of it, would predict that the ammonites would be sorted by size, with the biggest ones on bottom and the smallest ones on top. (See Potter et al, p. 9)

Henry Morris, an expert on hydrodynamics (1967, p. 40) wrote:

"The hydrodynamic sorting action of moving water is quite efficient, so that each stratum would tend to contain an assemblage of fossils of similar shapes and sizes."
Now, what do we find? We find that the ammonites are not sorted by size in the geologic column, but are sorted by suture shape!

The same sized organism with different suture shapes are found at different stratigraphic levels. In the Jurassic ammonite zones are defined nearly world wide based upon the different sutures of the animals.

Since there is a limit on the size of posts, I will post more evidence later.
 

outhouse

Atheistically
People who believe in YEC and the flood do not care about knowledge, reason and logic or research claiming the opposite of their faith.

running to the end of your chain and barking doesnt catch the rabbit
 

Agnostic75

Well-Known Member
Flood Problems

chem.tufts.edu said:
[FONT=Times New Roman,Times]A global flood would have produce evidence contrary to the evidence we see.[/FONT]


[FONT=Times New Roman,Times]How do you explain the relative ages of mountains? For example, why weren't the Sierra Nevadas eroded as much as the Appalachians during the Flood?[/FONT]

[FONT=Times New Roman,Times]Why is there no evidence of a flood in ice core series? Ice cores from Greenland have been dated back more than 40,000 years by counting annual layers. [Johnsen et al, 1992; Alley et al, 1993] A worldwide flood would be expected to leave a layer of sediments, noticeable changes in salinity and oxygen isotope ratios, fractures from buoyancy and thermal stresses, a hiatus in trapped air bubbles, and probably other evidence. Why doesn't such evidence show up?[/FONT]


[FONT=Times New Roman,Times]How are the polar ice caps even possible? Such a mass of water as the Flood would have provided sufficient buoyancy to float the polar caps off their beds and break them up. They wouldn't regrow quickly. In fact, the Greenland ice cap would not regrow under modern (last 10 ky) climatic conditions.[/FONT]


[FONT=Times New Roman,Times]Why did the Flood not leave traces on the sea floors? A year long flood should be recognizable in sea bottom cores by (1) an uncharacteristic amount of terrestrial detritus, (2) different grain size distributions in the sediment, (3) a shift in oxygen isotope ratios (rain has a different isotopic composition from seawater), (4) a massive extinction, and (n) other characters. Why do none of these show up?[/FONT]

[FONT=Times New Roman,Times]Why is there no evidence of a flood in tree ring dating? Tree ring records go back more than 10,000 years, with no evidence of a catastrophe during that time. [Becker & Kromer, 1993; Becker et al, 1991; Stuvier et al, 1986] [/FONT]

[FONT=Times New Roman,Times]Most people who believe in a global flood also believe that the flood was responsible for creating all fossil-bearing strata. (The alternative, that the strata were laid down slowly and thus represent a time sequence of several generations at least, would prove that some kind of evolutionary process occurred.) However, there is a great deal of contrary evidence.[/FONT]

[FONT=Times New Roman,Times]Before you argue that fossil evidence was dated and interpreted to meet evolutionary assumptions, remember that the geological column and the relative dates therein were laid out by people who believed divine creation, before Darwin even formulated his theory. (See, for example, Moore [1973], or the closing pages of Dawson [1868].) [/FONT]

[FONT=Times New Roman,Times]Why are geological eras consistent worldwide? How do you explain worldwide agreement between "apparent" geological eras and several different (independent) radiometric and nonradiometric dating methods? [e.g., Short et al, 1991][/FONT]

[FONT=Times New Roman,Times]How was the fossil record sorted in an order convenient for evolution? Ecological zonation, hydrodynamic sorting, and differential escape fail to explain:[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman,Times]the extremely good sorting observed. Why didn't at least one dinosaur make it to the high ground with the elephants? [/FONT]

[FONT=Times New Roman,Times]the relative positions of plants and other non-motile life. (Yun, 1989, describes beautifully preserved algae from Late Precambrian sediments. Why don't any modern-looking plants appear that low in the geological column?) [/FONT]

[FONT=Times New Roman,Times]why some groups of organisms, such as mollusks, are found in many geologic strata. [/FONT]

[FONT=Times New Roman,Times]why organisms (such as brachiopods) which are very similar hydrodynamically (all nearly the same size, shape, and weight) are still perfectly sorted. [/FONT]

[FONT=Times New Roman,Times]why extinct animals which lived in the same niches as present animals didn't survive as well. Why did no pterodons make it to high ground? [/FONT]

[FONT=Times New Roman,Times]how coral reefs hundreds of feet thick and miles long were preserved intact with other fossils below them. [/FONT]

[FONT=Times New Roman,Times]why small organisms dominate the lower strata, whereas fluid mechanics says they would sink slower and thus end up in upper strata. [/FONT]

[FONT=Times New Roman,Times]why artifacts such as footprints and burrows are also sorted. [Crimes & Droser, 1992] [/FONT]

[FONT=Times New Roman,Times]why no human artifacts are found except in the very uppermost strata. If, at the time of the Flood, the earth was overpopulated by people with technology for shipbuilding, why were none of their tools or buildings mixed with trilobite or dinosaur fossils? [/FONT]

[FONT=Times New Roman,Times]why different parts of the same organisms are sorted together. Pollen and spores are found in association with the trunks, leaves, branches, and roots produced by the same plants [Stewart, 1983]. [/FONT]

[FONT=Times New Roman,Times]why ecological information is consistent within but not between layers. Fossil pollen is one of the more important indicators of different levels of strata. Each plant has different and distinct pollen, and, by telling which plants produced the fossil pollen, it is easy to see what the climate was like in different strata. Was the pollen hydraulically sorted by the flood water so that the climatic evidence is different for each layer?][/FONT]


[FONT=Times New Roman,Times]How can a single flood be responsible for such extensively detailed layering? One formation in New Jersey is six kilometers thick. If we grant 400 days for this to settle, and ignore possible compaction since the Flood, we still have 15 meters of sediment settling per day. And yet despite this, the chemical properties of the rock are neatly layered, with great changes (e.g.) in percent carbonate occurring within a few centimeters in the vertical direction. How does such a neat sorting process occur in the violent context of a universal flood dropping 15 meters of sediment per day? How can you explain a thin layer of high carbonate sediment being deposited over an area of ten thousand square kilometers for some thirty minutes, followed by thirty minutes of low carbonate deposition, etc.? [Zimmer, 1992]

[FONT=Times New Roman,Times][/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman,Times]How do you explain the formation of varves? The Green River formation in Wyoming contains 20,000,000 annual layers, or varves, identical to those being laid down today in certain lakes. The sediments are so fine that each layer would have required over a month to settle.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman,Times][/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman,Times]How could a flood deposit layered fossil forests? Stratigraphic sections showing a dozen or more mature forests layered atop each other--all with upright trunks, in-place roots, and well-developed soil--appear in many locations. One example, the Joggins section along the Bay of Fundy, shows a continuous section 2750 meters thick (along a 48-km sea cliff) with multiple in-place forests, some separated by hundreds of feet of strata, some even showing evidence of forest fires. [Ferguson, 1988. For other examples, see Dawson, 1868; Cristie & McMillan, 1991; Gastaldo, 1990; Yuretich, 1994.] Creationists point to logs sinking in a lake below Mt. St. Helens as an example of how a flood can deposit vertical trunks, but deposition by flood fails to explain the roots, the soil, the layering, and other features found in such places.[/FONT][/FONT]




 
Last edited:

Agnostic75

Well-Known Member
Global Flood

Glenn Morton said:
The fossils are too well sorted. I am indebted to R.S. Beal Jr. for reminding me of this. Conodonts are microscopic fossils which are the "teeth" of an ancient animal. The shape of these conodonts change with each succeeding geologic level are unique. In the Grand Canyon, in the Redwall limestone, is divided vertically into the Whitmore Wash, Thunder Springs, Mooney Falls and Horseshoe Mesa members. In each of these layers a peculiar shaped and unique conodont is found. A conodont named Gnathodes typicus is found in the Whitmore Wash member and not in the other layers. Scoliognathus anchoralis and Dolignathus latus are unique to the Thunder Springs member. Gnathodus texanus is found in the Mooney Falls member only and the conodont Taphrognathus variarus is limited to the Horseshoe Mesa member.

Conodont are extremely small and microscopes must be used to examine them. How in the world could a global flood so perfectly sort these tiny particles into layers that only contain conodonts of certain shapes? The turbulence of the flood was supposed to be so great and yet world-wide, microscopic animals are sorted vertically through the various layers of the geologic column.

In the Gulf of Mexico, when we drill wells, we always find the same vertical order of microscopic planktonic foraminifera, nannoplankton, and benthic foraminifera. I know that a peculiar shape of planktonic foram, Glob Menardi changed its coiling direction at the same geologic horizon as the last occurrence of D. brouweri "A", and the benthic foram, Cristellaria S. I know that microscopic benthonic Trimosina A is found above this level and the microscopic calcarious nannoplankton Discoaster A is below this level. Each of these fossil forms have a unique shape and are easily distinguishable. How could the flood so perfectly sort these small uniquely shaped creatures into vertical layers?

Other fossils are equally well sorted but not on the characteristics that global Flood advocates suggest. I use some rather old books for this, because it illustrates how long ago this information was known. This is important because as long as this has been known, Christian apologists never talk about ammonites in their books on the Flood.

Ammonites were a nautiloid-like animal that lived in the Late Paleozoic and Mesozoic seas as the animal grew, it excreted a shell wall behind the animal but inside the shell which was attached to the outer shell. The junction of this interior partition with the external shell left a suture pattern on the exterior of the shell. This suture pattern was constant for each species and was constant for each individual throughout its life. A small individual had the same sutures as a large individuals of the same species. This is important because global flood advocates believe that the fossils are sorted according to the laws of hydrodynamical sorting. These laws, Stoke's Law and variations of it, would predict that the ammonites would be sorted by size, with the biggest ones on bottom and the smallest ones on top. (See Potter et al, p. 9)

Henry Morris, an expert on hydrodynamics (1967, p. 40) wrote:

"The hydrodynamic sorting action of moving water is quite efficient, so that each stratum would tend to contain an assemblage of fossils of similar shapes and sizes."

Now, what do we find? We find that the ammonites are not sorted by size in the geologic column, but are sorted by suture shape!

The same sized organism with different suture shapes are found at different stratigraphic levels. In the Jurassic ammonite zones are defined nearly world wide based upon the different sutures of the animals.

Raymond Moore (1933, p. 483-484) writes

"The sutures (junction of the shell partitions with the inner wall of the shell) are only moderately curved or angulated in the simplest amminoids. This type was characteristic of the later Paleozoic rocks but some of the amminoids of the Triassic are little, if any, more advanced. An increased number of bends and angles in the suture line, accompanied by a progressive complication in pattern, marks the development of most of the Mesozoic ammonoids. In many cases the suture pattern is so intricate that it is indeed difficult to trace. The diversity is amazing, but each type of suture is constant according to genus and species. Because even slight changes in the sutures are readily determinable and with other characters permit definite recognition of specific differences, these shells are well fitted to serve as markers of stratigraphic zones and of geologic time."

W. J. Arkell (1956, p. 8) writes of the vertical consistency of certain species of ammonites over the entire world. Evolutionists say that these ammonites lived in the seas world wide.

"From the Hettangian up to the Middle Kimeridgian these stages can be recognized all over the world, but after that the scheme breaks down owing to regional differentiation of faunas."

Below is the vertical sequence of Jurassic ammonites which was first defined in NW Europe but works over vast areas. Remember each species represents a separate suture pattern. The question is: Why would the flood perfectly sort ammonites according to their suture patterns-ammonites which otherwise are indistinguishable except for the markings on the shell?

In the geologic column with the ammonites and conodonts, we find them sorted according to "colors" not mixed up. One is correct to say that the flood could not sort everything perfectly, yet if the geologic column was built up by a 1 year flood, that is exactly what you must say happened. Ammonites were deposited in a strict order based upon suture shape. Since the suture shape could not have made that much difference in the sorting process, the only conclusion is that the ammonites were not deposited in one big catastrophe.

The only reasonable explanation is that the layers were laid down over a very, very long time period and the ammonites which lived in one time period died out before the next and were replaced.

The rates of deposition are too great to have allowed any animal life to have survived to leave traces of itself high in the geologic column. Below Austin, Texas lies approximately 15,000 feet of sedimentary rock which contains fossils of all sorts. On the surface all around Austin are dinosaur tracks.

Several years ago, I took an AAPG field trip to examine the carbonate rocks in South Texas. Some of the dinosaur tracks were seen at the Leander Section just north and west of Austin. (Moore and Bebout, p.33)

15,000 feet of sediment, which is deposited in 365 days, is being deposited at the rate of 41 feet of sediment per day or 1.7 feet per hour. At these rates, a dinosaur must fight the deep and raging waters of the flood for an entire year, never sleeping or getting sick (or he would be buried after merely 12 hours). During this year of fighting to stay on top of the sediments, he must be able to find food and fresh water throughout the year. Only after doing all of this, the dinosaur lives through the flood so he can leave his footprints along the San Gabriel River.

But dinosaurs are not the only ones who must perform this amazing feet. In the rocks around Austin one can find huge and small snails, and some type of bivalve-big and small- (I am not an expert in their names, although I believe they are called Turritella for the snails and pectins are abundant. Since bivalves normally open up upon their death, we can surmise that these were alive when they were buried and fossilized. But since they were found on top of the sedimentary column, these snails must have performed supergastropodian feats of movement in order to avoid being buried. This is not likely. It is far more believable that these animals lived where they grew and that the dinosaurs were walking on a mudflat, stepping on the bivalves and snails.

Astronomical cycles seen in the sediments. Various cyclicities have been observed in the thicknesses of laminae of various sedimentary sections throughout the world. Variations in laminae thickness have been observed over periods of 11 years solar cycle) 20,000 years precessional cycle, 100,000 year cycle of the earth's orbital eccentricity. These cyclicities are seen in rocks like the Eocene Green River formation of Wyoming, the Devonian Catskill Delta, a Triassic Hungarian carbonate platform, The Newark basin of New Jersey.( See Fisher and Roberts 1991, p. 1147; Fischer and Lee, 1993, p. a112; Balog et al, 1995;)

Why should these cyclicities be seen in rocks deposited during a single year? Why do the cyclicities correspond to the earth's orbital elements?
 

painted wolf

Grey Muzzle
Is there anything you actually want to discuss or is this going to be long cut and paste ramble about how silly the flood story is?

wa:do
 

Skwim

Veteran Member
"The driest place on Earth is the Dry Valleys Region of Antarctica (forfeit: Sahara Desert). Even though Antarctica is virtually all ice and snow, the Dry Valleys Region has no ice or snow and hasn't seen any rain for 2 million years. The second driest place is the Atacama Desert in Chile, which hasn't seen rain in 400 years."
Source: Wikipedia
 

Agnostic75

Well-Known Member
painted wolf said:
Is there anything you actually want to discuss or is this going to be long cut and paste ramble about how silly the flood story is?

I am not well-versed in flood geology, but I will eventually discuss some of it. One of my main intentions in starting this thread was to post articles that people could discuss who know a lot more about flood geology than I do.

It is not necessary to be well-versed in a topic to post articles about it. For example, I know very little about quantum physics, but it would be appropriate for me to post articles about it that might be useful to other people who know a lot more about it than I do.
 

Meow Mix

Chatte Féministe
Why are there not universal erosion lines directed seaward on all continents?

Imagine water washing off of a stone, the water will run away from the center in all directions.
 

shawn001

Well-Known Member
Nat Geo and the History channel, NASA, specifically the History channels "How the earth was made series" one of the best ever on the geology of Earth.

The desert used to be an ancient shallow ocean, which was formed by the uprise of the pacific plate against the south american one. Huge chunks of Gysum lay out in the middles of the desert. The desert is the oldest on earth at 150 million years.

Gypsum is water soulable, it melts instantly when you pour water over it and forms in .

[youtube]ZHe9gzx1ZZo[/youtube]
How the earth was made: Driest Place on Earth .s01e06. HDTV.720p - YouTube
 

painted wolf

Grey Muzzle
I am not well-versed in flood geology, but I will eventually discuss some of it. One of my main intentions in starting this thread was to post articles that people could discuss who know a lot more about flood geology than I do.
Darkendless is a very good resource as a professional geologist.

It' more useful to provide a direction for conversation than just cutting and pasting from wiki. What exactly do you want to discuss?

It is not necessary to be well-versed in a topic to post articles about it. For example, I know very little about quantum physics, but it would be appropriate for me to post articles about it that might be useful to other people who know a lot more about it than I do.
It's not necessary, but it helps to have an basic grasp of the subject... unless you want to ask questions and learn from others.
Generally people who know more about the subject won't be deeply informed by wiki. It's nice to double check things and brush up on stuff, but it's not a great scholarly resource. Though it should link to genuine scholarly resources.

wa:do
 

shawn001

Well-Known Member
"The driest place on Earth is the Dry Valleys Region of Antarctica (forfeit: Sahara Desert). Even though Antarctica is virtually all ice and snow, the Dry Valleys Region has no ice or snow and hasn't seen any rain for 2 million years. The second driest place is the Atacama Desert in Chile, which hasn't seen rain in 400 years."
Source: Wikipedia


The Atacama is the driest desert on earth. Anartica is considered a desert as well though and hasn't seen rain in 2 million years.

"The driest place on Earth is in Antarctica in an area called the Dry Valleys, which have seen no rain for nearly 2 million years. There is absolutely no precipitation in this region and it makes up a 4800 square kilometer region of almost no water, ice or snow. Water features include Lake Vida, Lake Vanda, Lake Bonney and the Onyx River. There is no net gain of water. The reason why this region receives no rain is due to Katabatic winds, winds from the mountains that are so heavy with moisture that gravity pulls them down and away from the Valleys."

Driest Place on Earth


Some parts of the atacama haven't rained for 400 years and some 23 million or the gypsum would literally melt with water as the video demonstrates.
 

shawn001

Well-Known Member
Why are there not universal erosion lines directed seaward on all continents?

Imagine water washing off of a stone, the water will run away from the center in all directions.


Not sure what the question is, rivers flow to the sea and all the continents have continental shelves.

There was a massive flood in the pacific northwest called the ICE age missolula floods and there is a ton of evidence for them.

From the USGS

http://vulcan.wr.usgs.gov/Glossary/Glaciers/IceSheets/description_
lake_missoula.html
 

shawn001

Well-Known Member
Part of this Global flood question was answered a long time ago back in the early 1920's I believe when they studied the formation of niagara falls and thefalls escarpment.

There was no global flood. Lots of major floods around the world however, but never a global one. The story was taken by the sumerians and is called the epic of gilgamesh, thousands of years before the noah flood story.
 

Agnostic75

Well-Known Member
painted wolf said:
It's not necessary, but it helps to have an basic grasp of the subject, unless you want to ask questions and learn from others.

As you said, "it's not necessary." I can learn by studying the articles that I post, and I can also ask questions when I want to.

This thread has already started some useful discussions.

painted wolf said:
Generally people who know more about the subject won't be deeply informed by wiki. It's nice to double check things and brush up on stuff, but it's not a great scholarly resource. Though it should link to genuine scholarly resources.

I have not mentioned Wikipedia in this thread, and my two sources are scholarly. Glenn Morton is a geophysicist who has written widely on the global flood. Since the website address of my other source says chem.tufts.edu, I assume that that means Tufts University, possibly the chemistry department. There are many scholarly references at the end of the article.
 
Last edited:

camanintx

Well-Known Member
If all of these geologic layers were formed during a single event, they why do we find evidence of fires within these layers? A little hard to have something like a forest fire in the middle of a flood, isn't it?
 

painted wolf

Grey Muzzle
As you said, "it's not necessary." I can learn by studying the articles that I post, and I can also ask questions when I want to.

This thread has already started some useful discussions.
it's picking up. :)

I have not mentioned Wikipedia in this thread, and my two sources are scholarly. Glenn Morton is a geophysicist who has written widely on the global flood. Since the website address of my other source says chem.tufts.edu, I assume that that means Tufts University, possibly the chemistry department. There are many scholarly references at the end of the article.
woops.. got my threads mixed up. :p

wa:do
 
Top