Summations Only

Flood geology is the attempt to reconcile the observable geological data with the historical evidence for a flood provided by the bible.Flood geology is an alternative interpretation of the observable data which, unlike conventional geology, does not conflict with what Young Earth creationists deem to be the true word of God.So, for example, flood geologists argue that the existence of fossils are evidence of a catastrophic flood rather than slow changes over millions of years on the basis that fossilisation (rather than decomposition) occurs as a result of being buried rapidly during a flood.Flood geologists also cite the positioning of fossils in the geologic column as evidence of a catastrophic flood in terms of how different types of life were impacted and the order that their remains then settled. So, for example, humans due to their superior intelligence were able able to recognise the danger and make to higher land thus resulting in human fossils at the top of the fossil order. And so on...Flood geology necessarily assumes that a catastrophic flood occurred and seeks to interpret all other geological evidence into that framework.

Well technically I would object to my own characterization. I was doing my best to follow Percy's request to put forth a creationist perspective.I could have just said something along the lines of "Flood geology is a pile of un-evidenced biblical bollocks" and arguably been more factually accurate. But that probably wouldn't have qualified as attempting to accurately describe a creationist position on the matter.....Really Dr A - Try to be less literal in your interpretations

OK. Sorry. On the more positive side of things I have looked up (i.e. Wiki'ed) a bit more about what those who advocate flood geology have said and done and what the currently preferred flood geology model is. The main current theory seems to be "runaway subduction". LinkBasically this is a massive and sudden re-arrangement of tectonic plates. Further details can be found in the link.An alternative to this is the "Hovind Theory" which describes a giant ice meteor coming towards Earth, breaking into fragments and causing catastrophic flooding and "super cold snow".There are other versions of flood geology but as far as I can ascertain these are two of the most publicised currently. The creationist position seems most succinctly summed up by the following:(From Answers in Genesis via Wiki)

quote:

---

The debate about the age of the earth is ultimately a question of whose word we are going to trust: the all-knowing truthful Creator who has given us His inerrant book (the Bible) or finite, sinful creatures who give us their books that contain errors and therefore are frequently revised. If you firmly trust and carefully read the Bible and become informed on creationist interpretations of the geological record, you can easily see how the rocks of the earth powerfully confirm the Bible’s teaching, both about Noah’s Flood and a young earth.

---

Basically, so the argument goes, it's all just a matter of interpretation and those who advocate a flood interpretation will argue that their explanation has equal or greater explanatory power than that of conventional science.