Summations Only

If you go back to Message 1 you'll see that the thread's originator was inquiring about the principles of flood geology. If the principles you're applying don't include any dating methods then that's fine, but there's nothing in the thread's original proposal that excludes them.--Percy

Hi MindSpawn,It's important that we understand your position, so thank you for providing that, but now that that's out of the way we need to understand the evidence that led you to your position. Apparently someone named Rohl had some evidence that was persuasive to you. Perhaps you could describe that evidence?--Percy

Hi Mindspawn,Would it be possible to give a clearer statement of what layers you believe came from the flood, because you appear to be saying that both Carboniferous and Permian layers could be flood layers, and later you say that the P-T boundary could represent the flood layers. They can't all be the flood layers.So remaining focused on coal layers, are Carboniferous coal layers pre or post flood, and why do you think so? Are Permian coal layers pre or post flood, and why do you think so? Or if you think the coal layers from the flood are somewhere in mid-Carboniferous or mid-Permian or even somewhere else, why do you think those are the flood layers?--Percy

Do you propose a vastly different time frame from the standard 4500 b.p. flood and 6000 b.p. creation event? Because unless you do, the flood needs to account for the vast majority of the geological record, not just a portion of the Permian and the PT boundary. I would guess something like 90% of the geological record needs to be explained by the flood. 6000 years just isn't enough time to lay down all the other layers. As an example, the 1500 years from creation to flood is not enough time to lay down the layers of just the Carboniferous, let alone those prior to it.HBD

This thread is not for the purpose of debating evolutionary time frames , I believe those time frames are wrong. This thread relates to the flood, so could we kindly focus on other arguments against my flood hypothesis. Maybe we can meet one day in a radiometric thread and discuss evolutionary time frames.Have you got any proof for your hypothesis that the 18 ages of the Triassic/Jurassic are clear cut layers above one another? any possibility that the appearance of certain distinctive fossils could have been concurrent? Nevertheless I believe there were rapid changes after the flood when certain categories took turns to proliferate. As for ammonites, they have always been around since the Cambrian, but the warm oceans of the Triassic/Jurassic especially suited them, so they logically simultaneously proliferated in separate niches throughout the world at the same time, whereas the warm water types were rare in the colder carboniferous climes. And so we had an ammonite explosion in the warm oceans after the PT boundary. It takes only a few decades for any localized fast breeding population to become distinctive, hence all the distinctive breeds of ammonites during the Triassic/Jurassic.there is a lot of evidence found in ancient cities of recent dinosaurs in:
Nile Mosaic of Palenstrina | DouglasHamp.com
Evidence of Dinosaurs at Angkor | Answers in Genesis
http://www.bible.ca/tracks/tracks-cambodia.htm
Ancient Dinosaur Depictions | Genesis Park

Could you give some supporting evidence for this. Maybe certain rock formations you can point to in the carboniferous that are impossible to form quickly, anything to help your case, thanks.Just to give some background to my view, I believe that the landmass was small and grew during the 1750 years before the flood, hence the initial layer of trilobites followed by the semi-aquatic animals as the ocean bed slowly rose up from the sea over a few hundred years.I believe all life was already there, but land-based fauna were incredibly isolated into a small area (island) and then land masses rose from the ocean.

The dating of the flood is a critical component, and you can't ignore it, try as you might. As it is, there is about a 250 million year discrepancy between your belief and reality. You can't just say that is what you believe and let it go at that, especially when all the evidence contradicts your belief.You have two big problems to deal with:--Either the flood was 250 million years ago, in which case you have to figure out how to completely rearrange the fossil evidence to place humans and a lot of other things back that far, or--If the flood was where biblical scholars place it, about 4,350 years ago, you have to figure out how to make all those layers and ages representing 250 million years compress into that short time frame, which incidentally happened during historic times without anyone noticing!Face it: your belief system runs contrary to overwhelming evidence, but you are willing to just ignore that evidence to maintain your beliefs. I believe there is a term for that...In either case I'll not be wasting any more time with you. You seem impervious to evidence and reality.

Its impossible for the whole planet to have been covered in water since humans have been alive. We'd be able to see the resulting genetic bottleneck in all the organisms alive today. The fact that the genetic bottleneck is absent proves that modern organisms did not stem from a small group. Ergo, no Flood. Its a myth. It never happened. Get over it.

It would have been refreshing to see your arguments against compressing everything from the early Triassic through to current , into 4500 years? I am sure you have many such arguments other than radiometric dating. I have tried to show you evidence for dinosaurs being concurrent with human civilizations and I am prepared to answer any further discrepancies you may pick up.When I look at the sediments down the Mississippi basin, the rapidity of current sedimentation seems more in tune with recent timeframes (thousands of years) rather than millions of years for the deposition of the Jurassic/Cenozoic sediments in Southern USA.Edited by mindspawn, : No reason given.Edited by mindspawn, : No reason given.

Where did you do this?I've reviewed your responses in this thread and I see a lot of questions that cannot be answered by compressing all of human history into only 5000 years. But I don't see much of an attempt to provide evidence for anything. Just a bunch of "I believes".Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

Could you be more specific? When I learn of bottlenecks of certain animals (cheetahs) I see this as occurring relatively recently. According to the bible each animal was represented by 7 animals on the ark. Given two alleles in each animal, this would cause a maximum range of 14 alleles for each animal from the ark (in those genes that have two possible alleles). Do you see any animals that have more than fourteen possible allelles? If so I would agree with your logic, but we have to take into account some mutations to those alleles too.We should exclude fish , small reptiles and insects and smaller organisms from any such analysis, these could have survived the flood outside the ark. Is there a wide variety of alleles today, have you got proof that there was no such bottleneck? Edited by mindspawn, : improving post

Four links that show archaeological evidence in early civilizations for their knowledge of dinosaurs. Dinosaurs were depicted in pottery and architecture in the same manner as other animals, as if their presence was just as common at that time. (Post 110)Edited by mindspawn, : adding post number

The issue is that the required bottleneck is not there but since that fact is irrelevant and unrelated to Flood Geology maybe the most recent thread on the subject would be a better place to follow up. See No genetic bottleneck proves no global flood.The Biblical flood stories prove that the Biblical Flood never happened.

Maybe I will get a chance one day in that thread, but you guys are keeping me pretty busy on this thread for now. Thanks for the link.

Biologists can detect genetic bottlenecks that happened to species in the past.If The Flood occured, then we'd see a genetic bottleneck in all the species affected by The Flood appearing from the same time in the past.We do not see that genetic bottleneck, therefore The Flood could not have occured.