REAL Flood Geology

More to the point, there are places with large aggregate accumulations of fossils - la brea tar pits for instance - and there should be representatives of all kinds of animals rendered extinct by a world wide flood mass extinction event all jumbled together, yet there are no dinosaurs in la brea - no tiny ones, no medium size ones, no big ones, no flying ones, no swimming ones, no land based ones - but there are many extinct animals of small to large size (from insects to ground sloths and mastodons for instance). La Brea Tar Pits:

quote:

---

Over 650 species of Pleistocene Epoch plants and animals have been found and identified at La Brea (dating from about 10,000 to 40,000 years ago), including many mammoths, mastodons, saber-toothed cats (including Smilodon fatalis), dire wolves (Canis dirus), giant sloths (Glossotherium harlani), ground sloths, bison, a western horse, the short-faced bear (Arctodus simus), rodents, rabbits, birds, turtles, lizards, insects, mollusks, and many other animals and plants. One ancient human skeleton was found in the La Brea pits (about 17 bones from a woman who dates from about 9,000 years ago). The oldest organism found in the La Brea Tar Pits is a wood fragment that dates from 40,000 years ago.

---

And
La Brea Tar Pits
http://www.tarpits.org/research/pit91/pit91.html

quote:

---

Rancho La Brea is one of the world's richest fossil deposits and the sticky asphalt (commonly referred to as "tar") has trapped and preserved more than three million fossils, many found in pristine condition.

​

"Every specimen we find in Pit 91 helps us piece together a giant "puzzle" from the past to help us understand what life was like in ancient L.A. Each year brings us closer to filling in the big picture," said Christopher Shaw, collections manager and Pit 91 project coordinator at the Page Museum. "Last year we collected more than 1,000 specimens in a two-month period, including three saber-toothed cat skulls, four dire wolf skulls, and bones from giant sloths, horses, bison, coyotes, birds, rodents and even some insects and plant fossils."

---

More than 3 million fossils recovered so far ... and not ONE dinosaur.There are no places where dino fossils mix with elephant fossils. How does water do that?Edited by RAZD, : for mat ing

---

Join the effort to unravel {AIDS/HIV} {Protenes} and {Cancer} with Team EvC! (click)

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand

​

RebelAAmericanOZen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

How about mountain ranges would all appear to be the same age?

The flood would cause all mountain ranges to appear the same age??? I guess you're putting out an if "the mountain ranges were all caused by the flood".In my vision, the appearances of the various mountain ranges would largely be unaffected by the flood.Moose

Maybe it's the difference between the overall "jagged" appearance of the Sierra Nevada relative to the "rounded" appearance of the Appalachians. I feel I see a difference in the erosion and I am sure I am not alone in this observation as I have heard several others familiar with the geology of both ranges make similar comments.Do you have an alternative perspective?

"There are no places where dino fossils mix with elephant fossils. How does water do that?"There are obviously no places because the species didn't exist at the same time or die at the same time in the flood. Like you said, species with the same body mass should sink at the same rates, and therefore be fossilized in the same strata due to fluid mechanics.Remember, this is a thread about what should exist if the flood DID happen, not that the flood didn't happen which I agree with.

Wouldn't mountain ranges be affected by the runaway subduction necessary to produce Everest after the flood?

If one postulates a YEC time frame for the total age of the earth, wouldn't mountain ranges display a similar appearance? Seems this would have to hold true regardless of whether the mountains were formed before the flood or during it. All mountains the world over would be nearly the same age. The only major force for erosion would be an inense but short-term exposure to water or ice.We would see new ranges like the Himalayas, Alps, and Rockies displaying lots of evidence of runoff. We wouldn't have rounded, ancient ranges like the Appalachians looking as they do. These ranges have been broken down by forces that take centuries: wind erosion, lichens digesting the rock, and other gradual processes.YECs would argue, 'abracadabra' fashion, that the flood waters caused this erosion we see in ranges like the Appalachians. (Never mind for the moment whether the erosion they display really could be caused by that.) That still leaves them to explain why the same flood waters would do so much less thorough job on these other ranges.___Edited by Archer Opterix, : Typo repair.

---

ArcherAll species are transitional.

The OP asks for a realistic geological appraisal of what we would see today had a global flood taken place.In geology there are some things you just can't have. One of those, if we postulate a flood, is runaway subduction.Remember it is not necessary to have 'runaway subduction' to make the flood happen. YECs do not use tectonic activity to explain the flood. They use the flood to explain tectonic activity. Different thing.Plate tectonic theory falsifies a young-earth scenario. YECs need an magic potion to make that challenge disappear. So they reach for their magic flood weater. Those waters can do anything. Need continents to move around at F-16 speeds? Okay. Abracadabra.But geology is science, not superstition. In real life, runaway subduction would generate so much heat and quake activity that water would be the last of anyone's worries. No one would be tlaking about a global catastrophic Flood. They would be talking about a global catastophic Crustal Crackup or a global catastrophic Lava Flow. Steam might be a bit of a nuisance here and there. Water, no.If we want to examine realistically what we would find around us given a global catastrophic flood four millenia ago, runaway tectonic activity is something we can't have and still keep our flood premise.F-16-speed subduction is not needed to supply a cause for the flood. The co-existence of the two events would be impossible. All water on earth would boil off in the runaway heat. No water, no flood. The worldwide evidence for the flood we saw would actually be evidence against any global catastrophic crustal movement around the same time.Today--check me on this, geologists--we would see no significant tectonic structures at all. If the earth were 6,000 years old, tectonic activity would just be getting started. No plates, no subduction zones. In my part of the world, no islands of Taiwan or Japan, both of which owe their existence to subduction zones.___

---

ArcherAll species are transitional.

When I posted my message, I was thinking a recent massive flooding event superimposed on the geology and terraine of an old Earth. A YEC time frame for the total age of the Earth brings up another question (did I long ago start a topic on it? I'll have to check up on that.) - What was the nature of the earth at the end of the creation week and prior to the flood?I think the earth looks very old. It has a three-dimensional complexity that can only be from a very long time period of many, many different processes. Or God created an Earth with apparent age. But much of the above is off-topic, so don't respond to it. I need to find that old topic, if it exists, or a new topic needs to be started. Working back: I was working the idea that God did a "miracle flood", that does not have any sort of rational real world process behind it. Runaway subduction would cause a LOT of things, probably the least of which would be the sea level rise. But again, isn't this getting off-topic?Working futher back: You're proposing that the flood would have caused all mountain ranges to be like the Appalachians? I say, no flood event, however extreme, is going to turn the Sierra Nevadas, the Rockies, the Alps, or the Himalayas into the Appalachians.Bottom line - I think that 40 x 24 hours of the hardest rain possible (requiring a miracle) would strip existing mountains of all soils and other sediments. The effect on hard rock? I don't think that much.The affect of the flood waters running off? Running off to where? Again, a miracle is needed to get rid of the water. What's the erosional and depositional effects of a miracle? I haven't a clue. I leave you with a link to an old topic I started (6/2/2002):
YEC Geologic Column - Created with apparent age?. Now I'll have to get back and re-read that sucker myself.Moose

---

Professor, geology, Whatsamatta U
Evolution - Changes in the environment, caused by the interactions of the components of the environment. "Do not meddle in the affairs of cats, for they are subtle and will piss on your computer." - Bruce Graham

​

"The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness." - John Kenneth Galbraith

​

"I know a little about a lot of things, and a lot about a few things, but I'm highly ignorant about everything." - Moose

It's magic water, RAZD. It does everything.
All you have to do is swirl it around and say 'abracadabra.'La Brea seems to require the existence of magic tar as well.
Maybe we'll see some YECs plop a fist into that.

---

ArcherAll species are transitional.

Archer requests: You are right as such processes take millions of years to get going in the least. Unless of course, all these processes were intentionally designed to fool everyone who places the evidence of God's creation over the words of those who presume to speak for God.

Minnemooseus states: NO, I am proposing that such differential weathering is yet another falsification of any global flood.ABE - OK I'll shut up now, you are right, am off-topicEdited by anglagard, : No reason given.

Okay, gotcha.That is a gap in my OP. I didn't set a conditional age of the earth, just the condition of a global flood.That was by design, as it were. I thought it would be interesting to discuss geological results of a global flood in both young and old earth scenarios. We have an obligation to tackle the young-earth results, of course, because that will be of the most benefit to YECs in reassessing the scientific validity of their models.It would be good to make clear in our responses how old we understand the earth to be at the time of the flood we postulate._

---

ArcherAll species are transitional.

I have seen numerous YECs using runaway subduction to get around the necessary water requirements for the flood. So it appears that YECs not only use plate tetonics to explain away the problems of the flood but the flood itself.Alright, so we should be examining this as if we ditch runaway subduction and imply the magic water conditions, how should the Earth look like geological, fauna and florally?So assuming the water was magic...this is getting absurd.

That is still not a problem. Remember, to flood everything above even the peeks, the Floodist pretend that there were no high mountains so that a few thousand feet of water is all that is needed to cover the earth.Any mountain over a few thousand feet tall that exits today must be a POST flood creation.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion