The Grand Canyon Paradox

If the material were supposed to be still soft when the erosion happened, landslips would probably fill the canyon back in. Its a question of slope stability, and waterlogged unconsolidated material has precious little.

Of course the validity of this experiment would depend on when within the flood year people think lithification happened...

Marble is actually thermally altered (metamorphosed) limestone, not volcanic rock.

This one is a trilobite again. The way it has deformed certainly doesn't look like flexure along mobile joints though.http://www.notam02.no/~oyvindha/image.html

on p156 of this (free google account required) there are some nice diagrams of deformed ooliths. These are rounded concentric banded bodies of calcite or aragonite that make up some limestones. Not fossils, but not capable of bending along hinged parts like a trilobite might be. The whole chapter looks useful actually.

quote:

---

If you think that the pre-flood terrain was pretty much level (all the more able to build a huge, perfect garden), then all of the waters of the ocean would have covered up the pre-flood earth.

---

But how can it have been level? The levels of the majority of the continental and oceanic crust are determined more by their densities and thicknesses than the amount of uplift. The lower density and greater thickness of continental crust means that it 'floats' higher in the mantle than oceanic crust, making its average elevation ~800m above sea level, where as the average elevation of oceanic crust is a couple of km below sea level as it is much denser and thinner.