Solving the Mystery of the Biblical Flood

edge"THIS IS NOT EVIDENCE. IT IS A STORY"Actually its a theory, one that you have not been able to poke any holes in, I might add."All at elevations below 1000 feet. This is not evidence of a worldwide flood."If I have convinced you that there was a post ice age rise of 1000 ft in sea level, I have accomplished much of what I set out to do and do not have much farther to go to reach my goal. For the evidence cited, those locations would of had to have been under water, they also could have been more than just shallowly submerged. Despite their fairly low elevations, they do point towards the possibility of a much deeper flooding having occurred at that time."Your source is questionable. It seems narrow in scope and kind of theatrical. You have to understand that some people become infatuated with certain effects or eras. Not to be taken seriously. I also note that it does not say that other eras were not similar in their own right. I think you read too much into this quote."The book "The Quaternary Era: With Special Reference to its Glaciation" by J.K. Charlesworth, is a questionable source?! Oh boy, maybe you should provide a list of the geology reference books you don't accept so I can avoid quoting from them. (LOL) But I think that perhaps when a source suddenly becomes questionable, it is perhaps because you disagree with it. You pay me high honor by challenging my source, my point must be sharp here indeed. I don't read too much into this quote, but it does show that there was extensive uplifting of the world's mountains in connection with the ice age.Most uplift would cause minor faulting, the majority of the uplift would be expressed in titling, which would be most clearly indicated by stream flow erosion patterns. What we find in ice age stream and river deposits is an extensive amount of sediments which the water flow cuts down through in non glacial times, creating terraces. This deposition has been attributed to glacial erosion over loading the carrying capacity of the stream. It is apparent that this is not the entire answer, for glacial depression would also slow down the current flow reducing the carrying capacity. Then when the area rebounds, the river grade is increased and it cuts down into the ice age deposits creating the ice age terraces we see today. We also find this pulse pattern of erosion turning up in rivers in ways that only periods of uplift alternating with periods of depression can account for. A computer model of the erosion of the Colorado river revealed that most of the erosion had occurred in pulses. "Erosion of the canyon was not uniformly fast or slow, but occurred in a series of pulses. Downcutting of the main stream was extremely rapid and was largely a function of the rates of uplift." (The Earth's Dynamic Systems; p.200) This cyclic pattern of erosion shows up in the sediments on the continental shelves, including even continents such as Africa which was not extensively glaciated."The margins of continents have afforded remarkable sites of cymatogenic tilting with repeated uplift upon the landward and depression upon the seaward side of axes trending closely parallel with present coasts. Corresponding with the polycyclic denudational history of the lands is therefore a polycyclic depositional record embodied in the offshore sediments." (The Morphology of the Earth; A study and Synthesis of World Scenery by Lester C. King 1962, p.223) By polycyclic King means that there occurred a number of distinct periods of rapid erosion of recently uplifted land followed by periods of little erosion. He also connected the uplift of the land with subsidence of the sea floors. King also noted. "Remarkable indeed is the correspondence, episode for episode, between events and landforms in Brazil and those already recorded (Chapter IX) from Africa. Such correspondence, continuing into Recent times, can only be a result of similar tectonic activity in the vertical sense on opposite sides of the Atlantic basin (King 1956 A)." (The Morphology of the Earth; by Lester C. King 1962, p.316) King noted that there was simultaneous uplift occurring in stages on both Africa and South America which he stated was the result of forces acting vertically. What happened of course was that with the ending of each stage of the Ice Age, the melt waters returned to the sea and pushed the ocean floor down and in turn created a vertical acting force beneath the land which caused the land to arch upward with the cracking tensional effects seen in the geology of the earth today. Then as the global climate cooled in the next advance of the Ice Age, the water was once again removed from the sea and the glaciated land areas sank down and the sea floors rebounded. This resulted in a lessening of relief and caused the pause or slowing of erosion seen in each advance of the Ice Age. This lessening of grade caused the rivers to flow more slowly towards the sea and resulted in the build up Ice Age sediments in river channels. Then when the ice melted and the land rebounded upward again, the river grade was increased and the river cut down in the Ice Age sediments forming the river terraces seen today.The return of the melt waters to the oceans has resulted in "hydro-isostasy," their weight pushed the ocean floors down into the earth and resulted in "epeirogenic," or vertical uplift of the land. This vertical upward movement is still going on and is wide spread in places were current scientific opinion has no explanation for it. This uplift is recorded in large areas which are believed to have been unaffected by recent tectonic uplift or glacial rebounding. "If such movements are real the problem remains of finding a plausible mechanism to explain them. It is obvious that such high rates in 'passive' tectonic settings of generally subdued relief cannot be sustained for long periods of time, otherwise they would generate a quite unrealistic topography (a sustained uplift of 200 mm per year would give rises to a 2000 m high mountain range in just 100,000 years assuming no erosion). This implies that such epeirogenic movements are episodic or oscillatory, with periods of uplift alternating with periods of subsidence. Although episodic or oscillatory movements must be related in some way to epeirogenic mechanisms (along passive continental margins) or plate interactions (along active plate margins), the specific processes involved are unknown. Nevertheless, the considerable areal extent of the regions affected by these rapid epeirogenic movements (up to 1000 km across) implies that the cause cannot lie just in the crust but must be deep-seated and probably involves the entire thickness of the lithosphere and even possibly a part of the asthenosphere." (Global Geomorphology; An introduction to the study of landforms by Michael A Summerfield 1991, pages 378-379)"So the continents were lower? How did they manage that? You didn't have ice sheets everywhere you know."No, we didn't have ice sheets everywhere, but what we do have everywhere is oceans. The weight of a glacier depresses the earth beneath it, and this in turn creates a surrounding glacial bulge. The removal of the weight of the glacial water from the world's ocean's would have created a some what similar effect in that the rebounding ocean floors would have pulled material from beneath the surrounding land areas, sort of a negative bulge. Then when the water returned the ocean floors where pushed down and the material was forced back out from under the ocean floor back under the surrounding land areas. Areas on the water side of the bulge would have been pulled down with the ocean floor, while the bulge area was pushed up. In small oceans these effects were less pronounced, while around larger oceans the effect was much greater. The Pacific margin shows results of these effects acting in conjunction with plate tectonics."Pulled down sort of like the Andes?" Answered above.

Percipient"My specialty, indeed anyone's specialty, is irrelevant here, for two reasons. First, relying upon association as a means of persuasion is one of the seven major fallacies of debate. "I have a degree from Incredible Reputation University, so you can trust me when I say...etc..." is a fallacious form of debate."Yes, you are correct. But I am very curous about what your field of interest is, I look forward to reading your e-mail."Fred Hoyle". I am not totally aware of his more recent work, but I can't help liking him. I like people who are willing to risk it all to stir the pot, and who knows, some of his crazier ideas may in the end turn out to be right.On the carbon flushing of bones you stated. "And certainly with no proposed mechanism for carbon substitution, you cannot have any evidence of such a mechanism taking place."Actually I do. "Because the rather numerous attempts at C14 dating of the present materials shed light on certain sources of error implicit in the radiocarbon method they are of interest from a methodical point of view, too. Determinations made on reindeer antlers have produced inconceivably low values (11,000-12,000 years BP), evidently owning to the fact that the CaCO3 contained in the porous antler material has reacted with CO2 and younger carbonates in the percolating groundwater." (The Pleistocene; Geology and Life in the Quaternary Ice Age by Tage Nilsson 1983, p.304)"If you really believe that the problem your having convincing anyone here is really just due to lack of sufficient background on the part of your fellow protagonists to properly interpret your arguments and evidence, then you don't need more research. So what's the real story?"Some people require more evidence than others to be convinced, and some will not be convinced by all the evidence in the world. By posting on this board I have learned better how the opposed geologist's mind thinks and what kinds of evidence he or she finds the most convincing. Building on what I have learned here, I plan to do additional research that should have a maximum impact. My paper would then be written limited to merely reporting the results with little or no theorizing. Such a bare bones approach may have a chance of getting published." Even if Moses wrote the Pentateuch, which is what most evangelicals believe, he lived long after the flood, and so the Biblical account of the flood is not contemporaneous with it. A contemporaneous account of the flood would have to have been written by someone who lived through it."Yes Moses wrote the Pentateuch, Jesus stated so himself at Mark 12: 26 "But concerning the dead, that they are raised up, did YOU not read in the book of Moses" If you consult the book of Genesis you will find three separate accounts of creation. Why would there be three if Moses was making it up himself? It is apparent than he was recording earlier accounts from the people involved who passed on ether a written or oral account on to their descendants. The account of the flood is likewise a combining of at least two separate accounts of the deluge. There is no requirement that a history be written. The history of many North American Indians is oral and recounts a number of geological events which have been referred to in learning more about how these events happened. For an event to be prehistoric, it can not be described in ether a written or oral history, such a description by definition makes an event historical. The deluge is a historical event, it more than meets the requirements."The weight of water in the world is roughly a constant. It doesn't matter whether it is tied up in glaciers or lies in ocean basins, it's still the same amount of weight. A catastrophic flow of water from glaciers to ocean basins doesn't cause mountains in the tropics to pop up. What it does is cause the ocean basins to depress somewhat (water is spread across much greater area) while the former glacial regions rebound."It should be remembered that in the ice age all the mountainous areas were glaciated and would have been subject to a degree of depression. Also that the depression of a tropical ocean area, will due to displacement can cause a rise in adjoining areas. I have also stated that some high elevations may have been merely covered by a glacial covering rather than having to have been depressed below the level of the flood waters. This would greatly reduce the amount of flexing required."entire herds surviving a worldwide flood by floating on flood detritus? Including elephants and giraffes? This seems possible to you? I guess it must, so can you add anything that would make it seem less utterly ridiculous to everyone else?"You have to remember what a big place the earth is, an animal that manages to survive here or there can add up to a vast herd. Plus we also have the historical account that speaks of special provisions made for the survival of a select group of animals, which probably included some of the ones least likely to survive on their own. The existence of floating or grounded glaciers and ice sheets opens up the possibility that many animals may have survived by climbing the ice as the water rose. Since all the high elevations were glaicated at that time, there were many possible points of refuge scattered all over the globe. Then of course we have rafting and such. Animals surviving this way may seem impossible until considering island animal populations. Many very remote islands have terrestrial animal populations. Their arrival on some of these islands may have required a sea voyage of longer duration than the deluge. All because something is improbable, doesn't mean it is impossible."okay, I'll bite. What's your evidence for genetic bottlenecks 10,000 years ago."First we have the Pleistocene extinction event, a time when many animals died. Second we have the pronounced differences in many animals between their ice age form and modern form. This change is indicative of the modern population being descended from a small selection of the ice age animals resulting in a change in the genetic average of the species. Thirdly we have direct evidence of this genetic bottleneck in the results of genetic testing with ice age genes that do not appear in modern populations such as the total lack of Neanderthal genes in Homo Sapiens Sapiens despite the fossil evidence of such in the past."with tsunamis and a massive comet strike. These cataclysms would have kicked up huge amounts of sediment at ocean margins world-wide, and as the rising water levels caused the oceans to move across the land it would have brought sediment with it and the tidal waves and climatic disruptions would have kicked up huge amounts of additional sediment."The postulated comet strikes are theorized to have impacted the continental ice sheets, there may have been no ocean impacts. There is evidence of tsunamis hitting a number of coastlines in this general time period which may or may not be connected with this event. But since this evidence is not found on all coastlines, any ocean impacts and resulting tsunamis were limited in their effects to only portions of the globe and did not create huge tsunamis traveling all around the world. A global glacial surging event occurring over a period of a few months would not create any tsunamis and would rather have caused a progressive rise in sealevel. We also have the reported account of 40 days of what was probably an impact rain, which would have been an earth wide steady heavy rain that would have tended to flatten the waves and may have stilled the winds. Without wind and with a heavy rain, the ocean is flat, without waves a rising sea level would leave little evidence of its passage. As I have been repeatedly pointing out, we do have evidence of this type of flooding event occurring while we have no evidence of a massive sediment creating flood you seem to be envisioning along YEC lines. Although I should mention I recently had a conversation with a soil geologist who stated that he had observed in his field work at all of the surface soil layer in the entire Midwest area that he had examined over the years had been worked by water, he even attributed it to a sudden release of glacial water that briefly flooded large areas of the world. It was interesting meeting a total stranger who yet seemed to share my thoughts. Now I haven't seen what he has seen, so perhaps what he saw was the result of many smaller separate events, but they all did have to occur recently and he was knowledgeable in glacial deposits. This does point out the possibility that the reworked by wave action surface deposits that you are looking for may actually exist and have been misinterpreted and overlooked.Unless you have other evidence or better objections, in this debate I will consider that my flood theory has at least been shown to be feasible, and it is now a matter of proving that what could of happened, actually did.

Joe MeertI think that while it is technically correct, it is a bit unfair to say that 'continental drift as envisioned by Wegener was rejected' when plate tectonics is such a direct continuation of Wegener's theory. I like to look at it as more of a suit that needed some major tailoring rather than it was exchanged for an all together different one. Even if I don't always manage to spell his name right, I feel that Wegener should be given credit for his visionary theory that was the foundation for so much of modern geology.

PercipientI like your idea of treating my posts as a technical paper up for review. I like what it conveys about how you view the quality of my posting. I also noted that you did not counter me on any of my points, I have to assume that you are unable to do so on at least some of them. You hope to side step my argument by changing your position from a party in a debate to one of a reviewer while raising the bar for me at the same time. Plus you hope to put me in a difficult position by requiring references on points not generally found in mainstream technical papers. If you think you need this much protection for your position, I seem to have already won the debate on at least some points. But I would like to continue this to see how far I can take it."of in situ CaCO3 substitution. Please provide references."
My first reference of course would be the geology book "The Pleistocene; Geology and Life in the Quaternary Ice Age" by Tage Nilsson 1983, p.304)
and the following articles.Olson, E.A. (ms), 1963. The problem of sample contamination in radiocarbon dating. Unpublished Phd dissertation, Columbia University, New York.
Taylor, R. E., 1982. Problems in the Radiocarbon dating of bone. In L.A. Currie (ed), Nuclear and Chemical Dating Techniques: Interpreting the Environmental Record,pp453-473. Washington DC, American Chemical Society."Never heard of Wisconsian glaciation being worldwide. Please provide primary references."The Wisconsin was the "fourth glacial stage of the Pleistocene Epoch in North America" and occurred at the same time as the Wurm which was the "fourth of the four classical glacial stages of the Pleistocene of Europe," (Dictionary of Geological Terms, 3rd ed.) in referring to the global effects of the Wisconsin ice age or glacial stage, I would be more correct to refer to it as the Wisconsin/Wurm glacial stage or fourth or last glacial stage of the Pleistocene, but I prefer the more commonly used term of 'Wisconsin ice age' which is much easier to use and perhaps the best known. The Pleistocene glacial stages were earth wide in their effects in that they are believed to have covered 30% of the land with glacial ice and as a direct result lowered sea level by over a hundred feet. On a question this simple a reference to any of a number of introductory books on the ice age would be best and I would suggest reading such for a basic background in this subject. However as requested, here a few references on the global effects of the last (Wisconsin) ice age that I happen to have on hand..Global ice volumes at the Last Glacial Maxium and early Lateglacial, Lambeck, Earth and planetary letters 181 (2000) 513-527.Ice sheets by volume, Clark, Nature, vol 406, 17 August 2000.Timing of the Last Glacial Maxium from observed sea-level minima, Yokoyama, Nature, vol 406, 17 August 2000.The timing of the last deglaciation in North Atlantic climate records, Waelbroeck, Nature, vol 412, 16 August 2001.Magnitude and timing of episodic se-level rise during the last deglaciation, Locker, Geology, September 1996, v.24, no. 9, p. 827-830.Refining the eustatic sea-level curve since the Last Glacial Maxium using far- and intermediate-field sites, Fleming, Earth and Planetary Science Letters 163 (1998) 327-342."Unaware of contrapuntal depression due to adjacent rise. Please provide primary references."You misstated the question, it should be phrased 'uplift due to nearby depression'. I referred to the phenomena of glacial bulges which are a band of uplifted area surrounding a glacially depressed area. Britannica states "A complicating factor near the periphery of former ice sheets is the so-called marginal bulge. , an American geologist, postulated that, if the ice load pressed down the middle of the glaciated area, then the Earth's crust in the marginal area tended to rise up slightly, producing a marginal bulge. . . . southeastern Baltic and northwestern Germany are subsiding. The Netherlands area is subsiding also . . . . The coastal area of southern New England is still slowly subsiding at the present time (1-3 millimetres per year)." The phenomena of a depression causing a rise in adjoining areas is described in a common encyclopedia with documented examples that are now subsiding as a result of the removal of the glacial weight nearby that had created the bulge they had been uplifted on. I referred to glacial or marginal bulging as an example of the effects of the return of a large amount of melt waters to the world's oceans. The increase in weight upon the earth's crust would have similar effects regardless if the depression was caused by ice or water. The following link had some technical information on glacial deformation of the lithosphere and the resulting effects seen at the earth's surface in the form of uplifting in the marginal areas.http://home.comset.net/aaman63/glacial/Here are some graphics from that page illustrating the effect of depression in one area causing uplift in adjoining areas. The fist pushing down in the pictures could be a glacier or a ocean with returning glacial melt waters increasing it's depth.As you can see from this graphic, under the right conditions, the depression of the ocean floors due to the return of melt water at the end of the ice age would have caused extensive uplifting of the adjoining land areas, and could have led to extensive uplifting of coastal mountain ranges. ( think of the mountain range 'root' or 'subbasement' as the 'barrier' in picture 3.)". The evidence from recent volcanic islands like the Galapagos is that only small animals like lizards successfully raft. Large animals are never found on such islands."What about the Galapagos tortoises? They are quite large (500 lbs) and obviously were rafted to the islands from at least South America. ( Galapagos Islands Guided Tour - The Endangered Galapagos Giant Tortoise ) A book I just picked up at the library "Wildlife of the islands" by William H. Amos, on pages 105-113 has information on island mammals. "It is evident that very large mammals are among the animals that have penetrated the islands least. The elephant, for example, went no farther than Java. The Javan elephants disappeared a thousand years ago . . . but there remains a population of the beasts on Sumatra." There is even a Javan rhinoceros, island tigers, leopards, bears, pigs and a number of primates. The island mammals are all restricted to SE Asia islands which are or were in the past not that far from land due to land bridges and tectonic movement of the islands over time. Most of these animals due to their locations had to have had to cross over ocean water by rafting or swimming. Due to the history of the area, it is not possible to accurately state how wide was the body of water they crossed. Recently in the Caribbean, Iguanas were rafted over 200 miles between two islands. (Science News, volume 154, p.267) Animals can and are still crossing large bodies of water. "Against all the odds, animals and plants have dispersed across formidable ocean barriers to populate islands throughout the world." (Coral Reefs & Islands; The Natural History Of A Threatened Paradise, by William Gray 1993, p.42) "At the same time, it became clear that many other volcanic islands had never been connected to any other landmass (Kennett 1982; Brown and Gibson 1983). The ancestors of present-day plants and animals on such islands as Hawaii, Tahiti, the Marquesas, the Galapagos, the Canary Islands, and the Azores all must have arrived by oversea dispersal." The Galapagos Tortoises are one of the better cases of long distance rafting of island animals. Refences on Galapagos Tortoises."Not familiar with genetic bottlenecks being responsible for significant morphological change. Please provide primary references."I would suggest referring to the works of Stephen Jay Gould who had a theory called Punctuated Equilibrium. The following link is about this, and appears to possibly have been written by you or at least by your long lost twin since the author has similar background and interests. http://www.cs.colorado.edu/~lindsay/creation/punk_eek.htmlA mainstream link on Punctuated Equilibrium. Evolution: Library: Punctuated EquilibriumA site on Stephen Jay Gould and his Punctuated Equilibrium theory 5 , References.Eldredge, N., & Gould, S. J. 1972. Punctuated equilibria: an alternative to phyletic gradualism. In: Models In Paleobiology (Ed. by T. J. M. Schopf).
Gould, S. J., & Eldredge, N. 1977. Punctuated equilibria: the tempo and mode of evolution reconsidered. Paleobiology, 3, 115-151.
Gould, S. J. 1980. Return of the Hopeful Monster. In: The Panda's Thumb. New York, New York: W.W. Norton Co. pp. 186-193On the total lack of Neanderthal genes in Homo Sapiens Sapiens despite the fossil evidence of such in the past. A news link on this, News | Penn State University and Krings et al.: Neandertal DNA sequences and http://www.cabrillo.cc.ca.us/~crsmith/neander.html
And a science article on the lack of Neandertal DNA in modern humans.Salvaged DNA adds to Neandertal's mystique.
Bower, Bruce
Science News, 2000, vol. 157, no. 14, pp. 213
SCIENCE NEWSA paper on a ice age fossil Human/Neandertal.
On the phylogenetic position of the pre-Neandertal specimen from Reilingen, Germany
Dean D.; Hublin J.J.; Holloway R.; Ziegler R.
Journal of Human Evolution, May 1998, vol. 34, no. 5, pp. 485-508(24)
Academic Press, Harcourt Place, 32 Jamestown Road, London, NW1 7BY, U.K.As I posted, we have evidence of ice age Neandertal/Homo Sapiens Sapiens breeding, yet DNA testing reveals a complete lack of Neandertal genes in modern populations.Since this post is already getting way too big, let me sum up a few point briefly. First none of what is posted here is planned to go into my paper. I also don't plan on making any Biblical references or to the flood. I like to do so in my book and here since it spices up the discussion. If I was merely in favor of an undocumented post ice age marine transgression, we wouldn't have much of a discussion. But just mention the flood and you light the fires. Even here most of my references to the Bible have been as a historical account which in light of the use of American Indian oral histories in archeology and geology, is appropriate given the subject matter. It also makes sense to refer to the Bible to dispel misconceptions that some have raised about it and the flood account, going to the horse's mouth so to speak, to set the record straight. Also if we want to use this format, I should only cover one point as I would do in a paper. Also this post and its references were thrown together, where as a paper has to have the precision of a Swiss watch. Perhaps in my next post I can do more of focused paper type approach.

​

[This message has been edited by wmscott, 06-06-2002]

​

[This message has been edited by wmscott, 06-06-2002]

edgeActually I have been posting evidence all along, you have just chosen to ignore most of it, or all of it. Now if you have accepted that the evidence presented so far does support a post ice age rise in sea level of nearly 1000 ft, we can then go on to examine the evidence for flooding at higher elevations. But if you are unwilling to accept the evidence of lower elevation flooding, there is no point in discussing evidence of high elevation flooding since it is impossible to have one without the other. If you are still rejecting the low elevation flooding evidence, we should discuss what your specific objections are, and go over them in detail.On the book "The Quaternary Era: With Special Reference to its Glaciation" by J.K. Charlesworth, perhaps you should consider the possibility that I quoted him correctly and the author knew exactly what he was talking about. Why not go to the library and find out? I found him very sound and reliable, not at all prone to exaggeration."What utter nonsense! The continent will attain an elevation related to the relative buoyancy of the lithosphere compared to the asthenosphere."You have forgotten to take into consideration the effects of local increases in pressure applied to the asthenosphere such as in the form of increased water depth in an ocean, will cause a increase in pressure beneath an adjoining continent which will in turn lift it. This pressure effect is widely known in geology for causing glacial bulging. What did you think caused the uplift in areas near an ice sheet in the ice age? You also need to remember that the earth is a closed system. If for example the weight placed on the earth's crust was to be increased by the addition of material from an extraterrestrial source, the average pressure applied to the asthenosphere would increase. Not a likely event, but it does show that due to the asthenosphere being trapped inside the earth, it is not free to flow like water around a boat in the sea. The thick viscosity of the asthenophere also means that local shifts in pressures applied to it are not readily transferred over the entire earth. Which is why a sudden shift of water from arctic ice sheets to oceans around the world, is too long distance of a shift in weight distribution for the thick and sluggish asthenosphere to respond to in the short amount of time since the ice age. This results in local increases and decreases in the pressure upon the asthenosphere which results in local up lift or depression. Remember also that areas covered by ice sheets in the ice age are still rebounding today, if these areas are still responding to local changes, how can you expect the large shift in water from the ice sheets clear to tropic oceans to already have been fully compensated for? It has not been long enough since the end of the ice for all the shifts to be compensated for, and for the earth to have reached a perfect balance of neutral buoyancy.

Percipient"You don't need to accomplish everything in a single paper, and in fact a sequence of papers gradually revealing your complete theory is more desirable."Yes I agree, that is what I am planning on trying to do.On the genetic bottle necks, since wipe spread genetic testing of the remains of ice age animals comparing them with modern animals has yet to be done. I was referring to the differences that show up in the skeletal remains which indicates a marked difference in comparison with modern animals. According to the PE theory, such sudden shifts are best explained by the modern animals being descended from a small group of the old animals. Other explanations may work, such as adaptation to the changing post ice age climate. But considering the marked changed in so many different species and the very short amount of time it would of had to of have occurred in, the PE effect on small groups appears to be the best answer. In the case of man, the missing Neandertal genes implies a considerable die off that the DNA is not present in any of the modern population. The concept that Homo Sapiens Sapiens and Neandertals inter bred is very controversial, but is strongly supported by the finds of at least two skeletons displaying features of both. To confirm the cross breeding theory, it would be necessary for DNA to be extracted from these remains and tests done showing DNA unique to each is present. But as far as I know this has yet to be done. Another interesting point is old accounts describing such inter breeding, but I know what you will say to that so I will skip it. Just considering the habits of human mating, I don't think it possible for a sperate human species to form, sex seems to be just about unstoppable, just ask any parents of teen age children. Even if the Neandertals were the most frigid part of the whole ice age, the hot human sex drive would have still melted them.(LOL) Which is why I don't believe that Neandertals would of have a chance to diverged into a sperate species.Yes the effects seen and looked for in glacial bulging are fairly small, but they are real and do happen. The depression of an ocean floor could cause a rise in nearby land, the question is how much it would rise and how long would it take. If there was a sudden depression of ocean floor, there would be a sudden rise in the land, the displacement has to go somewhere. We can argue about rates later, for now I will be content with having shown the effect.In the ice age the temperature was lower which lowered the snow line and the extent to which glaciers could grow down the sides of mountains and from cold regions into somewhat warmer ones. Many areas that were once thought to be ice free are now being recognized as having been glaicated. Even the mountains in the tropics were glaicated. even today Kilimanjaro in Africa is still a snow covered peak. In the Hawaiian islands, Mauna Loa and Moa Kea in the ice age were both glaicated. Due to colder temperatures at higher elevations, all the earth's high points were glaciated in the ice age with very few exceptions. As you point out, there may have been some high elevations in areas so dry that any snow that fell sublimed away long before it could create glaciers. If it can be proved that such high dry spots were NEVER glaciated, and shown that they were at a high elevation at the time, then they could be a problem. Oh, the reason the mountain glaciers are in valleys is the abrasive glacial action on the mountain side cuts into the mountain creating the valley. The valley in turn forms a sheltered refuge for the glacier in the face of rising global temperatures since the end of the ice age. In the colder ice age temperatures these mountain peaks were covered by ice or we would not have many of today's mountain valley glaciers.On the carbon flushing, I have put the papers on my shopping list, but have yet to read them. I also found out that most if not all carbon tests on bones are done using a solvent to remove traces of organic material which is what is actually dated. Tests done in this manner would be extremely susceptible to carbon flushing. Your objection to old sea floor cores not having newer dates overlooked the caulk like consistency of marine mud which prevents water movement, otherwise the cores would all show newer dates. Plus you are forgetting that I am theorizing very different effects in different environments from different causes. Things exposed to modern rainwater or groundwater, would have newer dates, things exposed to glacial melt waters would have older dates due to the great age of the CO2 contained in old glacial ice. The combination of this effect would result in bones found in sheltered places that were exposed to a soaking in old glacial melt waters having old dates, while the same type of bones in exposed areas would have younger dates due to the effects of rainwater. This is why old bones are not found in places where rainwater can reach them, and instead are only found in caves or beneath clay layers or in very dry climates. In two books that I have read dealing with this time period, the authors mentioned this pattern and wondered about its cause.Since writing a good science paper takes months, and I like to post once a week, I will try using a mini paper format with limited references. Since I am working on the writing rather than the subject, I may sometimes use unrelated subjects. Ran out of time this week, perhaps a progressive posting will work better. I am thinking of working on Mima mounds showing how they were formed, but first I will need to read up on the subject.

edgeMy, my, as a geologist you should learn that using the buoyancy of a ship as an example of elevation changes in the earth's surface, is an analogy and not an exact replication of all the relative effects. Some effects that turn up in the earth do not have a direct analogy in the floating boat example. Models have their limits. I did not invent the concept of glacial or Marginal bulging, it is an accepted part of glaciology, even Britannica knows about it. (see post 317 to Percipient ) What is your position as a geologist on glacial bulging? I liked your point on the apparent lack of a glacial bulge around the Antarctica ice sheet. There are several possible explanations that spring to mind, first the bulge may be off shore and undiscovered, (not likely) second ocean floors are more flexible than continental crust and are perhaps too flexible to form a bulge, third a bulge did form only to slowly flatten out over time.On the rates of changes in elevations, I have been arguing in favor of two different types of mechanism, shallow (plastic deformation) and deep (fluid deformation). The shallow slow creeping flow in the asthenosphere is the one you are familiar with and I was talking about in my last post. The rapid deep fluidic movement deep inside the earth is another matter all together and I wasn't referring to it at all in my last post. I am trying to be more convincing in my argument by presenting things one step at a time. So let's concentrate on the shallow effects first before we go into the deep rapid flexing.I am very glad that as a geologist you accept the evidence of a post ice age flooding event of up to 1000 ft above current sea level. One of the obvious reasons for my constantly referring to low elevation evidence, is that there is simply more of it. As we go to higher and higher elevations, we have less and less of the earth's surface to work with. As we go to higher elevations the surface grades increase which also results in increased surface erosion. Combine this with the wide spread glaciation found at high elevations in the ice age, and we have a difficult time finding extreme elevations with an original ice free exposed surface dated to the end of the ice age. Then on these rare surfaces some one has to discover and write about unexplained high elevation deposits, and I in turn have to come across the reference. The combination of these factors puts a severe limitation on the amount of evidence I can refer to. He is a partial listing of evidence that could be what you are looking for.One way of getting around the erosional problem, is using evidence that reproduces itself and survives. Relic lakes containing trapped marine life that has adapted to fresh water, records the occurrence of a recent marine transgression at high elevations. The extent of the post ice sea level rise is indicated by the location of some of the relict lakes which contain sea like which has recently had to adapt to fresh water. "Lakes Titicaca and Poopo in South America have invertebrates which have marine affinities and carp-like fishes which have been claimed to have such affinities." (The Quaternary Era; by J.K. Charlesworth 1957, volume two, p.1418) Lake Titicaca, located in the Andes mountains at an elevation of 12,500 feet above sea level, is a relict lake and is the highest navigable lake in the world. The lake is 120 miles long and 50 miles wide covering 3,200 square miles with a maxim depth of 600 feet. The reason the same marine life is found in both lake Titicaca and lake Poopo is that they were both once part of lake Ballivian which formerly had a level 330 feet above the current level of lake Titicaca. Before it dried up into two smaller lakes, lake Ballivian would of had an elevation of 12,830 feet above sea level and contained marine life recently trapped from the sea.The Arctic Ringed seal turns up in Caspian Sea which is over a thousand miles away from the Arctic Ocean. The only reasonable explanation for finding the Ringed Seal so far to the south trapped in inland bodies of water, is that they were trapped there by a recent rise in sea level. The Caspian Sea not only has sea life from the Arctic Sea, it also has a number of living things from the Mediterranean Sea. Of the life that is indigenous to the Caspian Sea, 6% is from the Mediterranean Sea and 3% is from the Arctic. (The Caspian Sea by A.N. Kosarev and E.A. Yablonskaya 1994, p.122) The fact that at the end of the Ice Age, the Mediterranean Sea, the Black Sea, the Caspian Sea and the Arctic Ocean were all joined together as shown by the types of marine life found in the Caspian Sea, is undeniable.The Arctic Ringed Seal also turns up in Lake Baikal (elevation 1493 feet) in Siberia is nearly 1,000 miles from the ice covered arctic ocean and also has sponges, herring and salmon (Omul). All of which have adapted to freshwater. There are also beach terraces in the area that are found as high as 4,600 feet above the lake level of 1493 feet or 6093 feet above sea level. (The Quaternary Era; With Special Reference to it's Glaciation by J.K. Charlesworth 1957, volume two, p.1119)High level terraces have been reported in a number of locations around the world. Southeastern Ohio, 1100 to 2580 ft, Connecticut up to 1680 ft, Massachusetts up to 2,250 ft, Pennsylvania at 1,300 ft, Scotland 1150 ft, Alps 6190 ft, Tasmania 4,300 ft, "Carolina bays, Mina Mound, Submarine Canyons and other Topographical Phenomena" by William R. Corliss, Pages 77-83. Beaches with seashells at altitudes between 1,200 and 1,300 ft found in Great Britain and some Pacific islands, (1,250 ft on the Hawaii islands) (1,300 ft on the Marquesas islands) and the Persian gulf area 1230 ft. Pages 66-72.Uplifted Erratics above 1000 ft are found in a number of places around the world, Great Britain 2200 ft, New Hampshire 6000 ft, Alberta Rockies 4260 ft, and Wyoming 6750 ft. "Neglected Geological Anomalies" William R. Corliss, pages 222-6.I have been stressing the lack of erosion a global flood caused by a progressive rise would create in comparison with the YEC type flood models. But that is not to say there would be no evidence at all. As you can see we do have extensive minor surface erosional evidence. We have the raised shore lines and terraces, elevated erractits, marine traces, whales bones far inland, marine transgression in lakes, evidence of super flooding occurring at the end of the ice age and we have the Mima mounds. The Mima Mounds are rounded little hills or bumps ranging in size from a few inches to over a thousand feet arranged in very large numbers on plain surfaces like water ripples. They are found associated with the Spokane flood deposits and are a type of current caused deposit similar to streamlined drumlins created in super flood events. They are not limited to the NW however, they are found throughout out large areas of the American west from the Gulf of Mexico to the Canadian border and west into the west coast states. The combined area of plains displaying Mima Mounds is larger in extent than the state of Texas. The type of formation and the wide spread distribution indicates a movement of a depth of water across the land surface in the manner one would expect of the whole scale movement of water moving to or from the sea in a recent global flood event. Where the soil conditions were suitable we find evidence of water current effects which may have better preserved in the western part of North America perhaps in part due to the rain shadow of the Rockies.

edgeWhat is your position as a geologist on glacial bulging?You didn't really address the evidence, you merely brushed it aside and ignored it. Your rational for dismissing it was also very flawed. On "terraces above a lake", of course they are above the lake, otherwise they would be underwater! And if you raise the level of that lake to that elevation (6093 ft ) it would flood most of the world since the lake drains into the ocean. On raised terraces you replied " you write this as thought you've never heard of plate tectonics." The areas cited are not believed to have subject to significant tectonic uplift in recent geological history. The reason I referred to these terraces as just terraces, and not as marine terraces is because they have not been positively identified as such, and for some of them there may be a none deluge answer that fit their creation. But considering their locations and common elevations, a common global source seems to be a reasonable explanation for most if not all of them. The Glacial erratics cited are unusual in their being found at higher elevations then their sources which are a considerable distance away. For these rocks to have reached their destinations requires ether a much thicker ice sheet with much greater powers of uplift, or the rocks were uplifted by rafting. And much of the evidence I cited you didn't even address. You asked for evidence, but when I provide it, you are unable to handle it. If you really wish to show me the errors of my ways, you should be dissecting this evidence piece by piece, showing me how it all could have been created without a global flood. But instead you didn't even ask for a single reference. Since I know you are capable of much more, I believe you have gone into summer mode and shifted your mind into neutral until fall. OK, but once summer vacation is over and you put your mind back in gear, maybe you can properly address the evidence presented.

PercipientYou are correct on all points of course. Writing a paper is very different than posting and requires a different approach, one in which everything is nailed down very tight and backed up by dozens of solid references. Where as posting is more like a conversation.Getting the information I need on Mina mounds is going to take awhile, state budget problems have the inter library loan program all jammed up for the moment. So it is going to take me a while to put anything together, and I think I am falling under summer's spell as well. the weather is just too nice and I have other demands on my time, like getting back to doing research.

edgeedge-"It is a natural phenomenon. It exists." OK, I gather you accept Glacial Bulging. Now, if you understand the mechanism behind it, do you understand that the size of the bulge is proportional to the cause. That the larger the glacier, the bigger the bulge? Do you also see that the depression of any large area under a load could create a similar effect?"terraces above a lake" edge-"if I have terraces above a documented paleo-lake such as Lake Missoula, you would infer that they were caused by a global flood?" Now that would depend on how high above the lake they were and if the surrounding terrain could have locally contained the resulting lake.edge-"Are you saying that the terraces Darwin noted on the west coast of South America are not in a tectonically active area?" Those terraces were not cited in the listing I posted.edge-"I also do not necessarily accept that the source is always known." Best part of your whole post. But if we were to discuss this it would need to be on a case by case basis.edge-"Whale bones at an elevation of 400 feet is not evidence of a global flood" 670 ftedge- "I have done this." Hardly. You have made assertions, but you have failed to substantiate them with references that provide evidence which supports your position. This out cropping or that formation, etc., etc.edge-"this is just another indication of your ability to know all and see all." You flatter me, but I think you have me confused with someone else. (LOL)

PercipientActually I am intrigued by your thought that I should debate Tranquility Base. I have been tempted myself a few times when I have looked at his posts. But I do not wish to destroy his belief system and I respect his motivation even if his science is dead wrong. Having some things in common puts me in a position of knowing where he is vulnerable. But instead of attacking his position in a debate setting I would rather offer him a better position from which to do what he is trying so hard to do, I would suggest that he read my book and consider my flood theory as an alternative since it is scriptural compatible, which would be his main concern. But I doubt he could let go of YEC which is in conflict with scripture anyway. I know you think we are both wrong, but I think you will agree that at least my theory comes much closer to being acceptable than his position. With his, the basic theory is physically impossible, where as with mine, it is a matter of whether or not it actually happened.In referring to the posting here as more of a conversation, I was referring to the quality of all the posts, not just mine. In fact, I seem to be the one doing more of the leg work. Many here seem to sit on their orthodox position like a throne and just snipe snipe snipe.It will be sometime before I can write on Mina Mounds, so in the mean while I will do a brief test paper on a 'reinvent the wheel' type subject. Sort of a test paper like what you might ask a student to write. You can play professor and go over it and let me know where it needs work and suggest improvements."The Non Expansion of Ice"Wm. Scott AndersonAbstractOne of biggest misconceptions people have about water ice is that it expands. As shown in this paper and experiments; water expands as crystallization occurs, not after. Ice is the already expanded form and doesn't expand or shrink aside from normal thermal expansion and contraction.Introduction.Ice floats due to its having a lighter density of 0.917 than water at 1.0, this lighter density is due to ice's crystal structure occupying more space than water in it's polymeric or liquid state. The lighter density of ice is due to it simply taking up more space than an equal weight of water would. This has led to the popular myth that ice expands as the mechanism behind the bursting of frozen water pipes. A detailed examination of a number of frost damaged water pipes revealed a common pattern of rupture.In all cases the pipe had burst due to high internal water pressure, not ice expansion. The rupture was in the form of blister or swelling, which is particularly pronounced in copper pipe. (pretend I have few pictures of pipe blisters here)
In the larger blusters the cross section of the pipe is more than doubled, which is far above the percent expansion of water into ice. If a ice crystal had formed in the center of the blister, lateral growth would have stopped once the ice had come into contact with the pipe walls.The way these blisters have formed is that the water pipe froze at two different places with water trapped in-between. Then as the entire pipe frozen, the ice grew towards each other. With the ice taking up more space than the water, and water is basically incompressible, enormous pressures are generated.. The pipe begins to swell and stretch until it splits. The high water pressure effect turns up as the root cause in all forms of frost breaks, a fitting blows off, closed values leak and form icicles, pressure vessels rupture.Glass unlike copper pipe, has very little stretch in it, so stories abound about ice breaking glass. The most common story is of forgotten soda bottles left to chill in the freezer. The interesting part is that it is the bottom of the glass bottle that breaks. If expanding ice was the cause, the bottles would be split from the top down as the ice formed. Rather it is the hydraulic pressure of the water trapped beneath the ice that blows the bottom out. The soda freezes first in the neck and then ice grows thicker like the ice on a lake with the ice reaching down the cold sides of the bottle. The ice has some tensile strength which results in the area at the bottom of the bottle with little or no ice reinforcement, being the weakest spot once enough ice has formed to raise the internal pressure high enough to break the glass.In theory if a compressible material was present at the bottom of the soda bottle, it would compress under the pressure and prevent it from rising high enough to break the bottle. In his youth the author conducted a series of experiments with glass bottles that demonstrated this effect. (pretend there is a picture of a glass narrow mounted canning jar frozen solid) Glass canning jars were fitted with a 2 by 2 inch square of Styrofoam glued to the bottom of the jars. The jars were filled with cold water and put outside in zero degree (f) weather in a Wisconsin winter to freeze.The pattern of freezing was a from the top down with ice forming first on the water surface and then extending down the inside of the jars sides. The last part to freeze was the space just above the Styrofoam. Instead of the bottom blowing out, the foam compressed under the hydraulic pressure of the trapped water.
(pretend I have some pictures here of glass bottles filled with ice.)In some of the close up pictures the pattern of freezing is clearly visible. The mechanism of water crystallization is along the wet side of the ice, as each water molecule docks into it's place in the forming ice crystal. Since ice is less dense than water, the expansion takes place as each molecule joins the crystal and takes up a little more space than it did a moment before. The pressure resulting from this expansion is located where it occurs, on the wet side of the ice where the crystallization is happening. Due to this, the ice doesn't expand, it is the end product of crystallization. As a result ice is stable and if an outlet is available for the volume increase due to crystal expansion beneath ice, any water filled cavity can be frozen without damage to the container.ConclusionsOnce the way water freezes is understood, it solves many minor mysteries such as how in ground swimming pools survive the winter in cold climates. The pressure beneath the ice results in minor upward movement in the ice, not in the sidewise expansion that many fear would crack their pool. It is due to this unfounded fear that people sometimes put logs in their pools and accounts for the sale of numerous winter pool floats. As long as the ice is free to move upward, pools in cold climates are in no danger of freezing damage. This is why an excellent design for in ground pools in such areas, would have walls tipped slightly outward which would allow free upward movement of the winter ice. Bad designs would have an inward tilt or rims or lips that would block ice movement and result in high water pressures beneath the ice. In theory such a problem design could be corrected by a drain line located beneath the frost line with a overflow relief that would release the pressure.In geological settings of spalling and frost heaving, this results in slightly different effects then what many expect. In the case of 'ice wedging', the ice is just the cap that holes the water pressure in. The expansive force opening the crack is not the ice in the top of the opening, but the trapped water lower down in the opening which can act through pores at a distance away from icing. In the case of frost heaving, the frozen ground traps the top layer of the unfrozen groundwater beneath it. As freezing extends downward, the trapped water below is put under increased pressure, but is held in check by the weight of material above it. This results in an even lifting of the ground surface under ideal conditions. If frost layer has a thin weak spot, more water will rise in that area, the movement of water and soil results in a mud jacking effect more commonly call frost heaving. Dark surfaces with a higher absorption of solar heat such as roadways, are prone to this effect, which is why it is so important to have a well drained road bed, well above the local water table to reduce this effect. This highlights the reason for the need of drain tiles at the base of basement foundations, to allow the water trapped beneath the frost layer to drain away, rather than to apply hydraulic pressure against the wall which could collapse it into the basement space. This illustrates the existence of a pressurized water/soil mixture beneath the ground frost layer that can be prone to movement, resulting in soil profiles in cold climates showing fluidic flow effects such as is seen in the tundra.Even something as simple as freezing water can have very different effects than what we may expect, if we haven't taken the time to really understand how it happens. Even the simplest mysteries can have unexpected large effects.ReferencesIce and Ice Formations: Structure and properties of ice, Britannica 1999 CD.Yes I know I should be referring to various papers here, but I have had difficulty locating and reading the appropriate papers. I use Ingenta and the local university library, but perhaps you could make some suggests on better ways of locating relevant papers. Ingenta for example seems to have listing of less than 5% of what is out there, and their fees are prohibitive and they don't have an individual subscription rate. ( If I had the money I would get the library subscription, I think I have enough books to qualify. LOL)

edgeI asked: Do you also see that the depression of any large area under a load could create a similar effect?edge-"And just what has this to do with a global flood that was so brief that it left no traces?"The transference of the weigh of water to ocean basins would result in their being depressed would in turn result in uplift in the surrounding area. This effect accounts for part of change in relative elevations after the deluge. And the flood 'left no traces' only in comparison to YEC flood models, otherwise we would have no evidence over which to debate.On highly elevated terraces-edge-"As far as I can see you have not addressed this issue. It is important if it is to be evidence."According to my source, none of the cited terraces are from local lakes, the surrounding terrain is too low to have retained a lake to a high enough elevation to have formed the terraces.On highly elevated erratics far from and/or above their source- Edge-"Well give us some. With documentation, please."Boulders of gray geiss on the summit of Mount Washington, New Hampshire, elevation over 6000 ft. Nearest possible source is several miles to northwest and at 3000 to 4000 ft lower elevation. Rehwinkel, Alfred M. "the Glacial Theory and the Flood," The Flood, Saint Louis, 1951, p. 298. Also cited by Flint, Richard Foster; "Glacial erosion and Transport," Glacial and Quaternary Geology, New York, 1971, P. 111. ( this source has a table of glacial erratics that are elevated above their sources.) Rather than referring to a number of different references, for the moment let's start with the table in this one reference which probably contains many of the same examples referred to by others, and will be easier for you to check up on.

Percipient"You both need to look to evidence from the real world" I do, here is a partial listing of just some of the evidence that points towards a recent global flood.Relic lakes containing trapped marine life that has adapted to fresh water, records the occurrence of a recent marine transgression at high elevations. The extent of the post ice sea level rise is indicated by the location of some of the relict lakes which contain sea like which has recently had to adapt to fresh water. "Lakes Titicaca and Poopo in South America have invertebrates which have marine affinities and carp-like fishes which have been claimed to have such affinities." (The Quaternary Era; by J.K. Charlesworth 1957, volume two, p.1418) Lake Titicaca, located in the Andes mountains at an elevation of 12,500 feet above sea level, is a relict lake and is the highest navigable lake in the world. The lake is 120 miles long and 50 miles wide covering 3,200 square miles with a maxim depth of 600 feet. The reason the same marine life is found in both lake Titicaca and lake Poopo is that they were both once part of lake Ballivian which formerly had a level 330 feet above the current level of lake Titicaca. Before it dried up into two smaller lakes, lake Ballivian would of had an elevation of 12,830 feet above sea level and contained marine life recently trapped from the sea.The Arctic Ringed seal turns up in Caspian Sea which is over a thousand miles away from the Arctic Ocean. The only reasonable explanation for finding the Ringed Seal so far to the south trapped in inland bodies of water, is that they were trapped there by a recent rise in sea level. The Caspian Sea not only has sea life from the Arctic Sea, it also has a number of living things from the Mediterranean Sea. Of the life that is indigenous to the Caspian Sea, 6% is from the Mediterranean Sea and 3% is from the Arctic. (The Caspian Sea by A.N. Kosarev and E.A. Yablonskaya 1994, p.122) The fact that at the end of the Ice Age, the Mediterranean Sea, the Black Sea, the Caspian Sea and the Arctic Ocean were all joined together as shown by the types of marine life found in the Caspian Sea, is undeniable.The Arctic Ringed Seal also turns up in Lake Baikal (elevation 1493 feet) in Siberia is nearly 1,000 miles from the ice covered arctic ocean and also has sponges, herring and salmon (Omul). All of which have adapted to freshwater. There are also beach terraces in the area that are found as high as 4,600 feet above the lake level of 1493 feet or 6093 feet above sea level. (The Quaternary Era; With Special Reference to it's Glaciation by J.K. Charlesworth 1957, volume two, p.1119)High level terraces have been reported in a number of locations around the world. Southeastern Ohio, 1100 to 2580 ft, Connecticut up to 1680 ft, Massachusetts up to 2,250 ft, Pennsylvania at 1,300 ft, Scotland 1150 ft, Alps 6190 ft, Tasmania 4,300 ft, "Carolina bays, Mina Mound, Submarine Canyons and other Topographical Phenomena" by William R. Corliss, Pages 77-83. Beaches with seashells at altitudes between 1,200 and 1,300 ft found in Great Britain and some Pacific islands, (1,250 ft on the Hawaii islands) (1,300 ft on the Marquesas islands) and the Persian gulf area 1230 ft. Pages 66-72.
Uplifted Erratics above 1000 ft are found in a number of places around the world, Great Britain 2200 ft, New Hampshire 6000 ft, Alberta Rockies 4260 ft, and Wyoming 6750 ft. "Neglected Geological Anomalies" William R. Corliss, pages 222-6.I have been stressing the lack of erosion a global flood caused by a progressive rise would create in comparison with the YEC type flood models. But that is not to say there would be no evidence at all. As you can see we do have extensive minor surface erosional evidence. We have the raised shore lines and terraces, elevated erractits, marine traces, whales bones far inland, marine transgression in lakes, evidence of super flooding occurring at the end of the ice age and we have the Mima mounds. The Mima Mounds are rounded little hills or bumps ranging in size from a few inches to over a thousand feet arranged in very large numbers on plain surfaces like water ripples. They are found associated with the Spokane flood deposits and are a type of current caused deposit similar to streamlined drumlins created in super flood events. They are not limited to the NW however, they are found throughout out large areas of the American west from the Gulf of Mexico to the Canadian border and west into the west coast states. The combined area of plains displaying Mima Mounds is larger in extent than the state of Texas. The type of formation and the wide spread distribution indicates a movement of a depth of water across the land surface in the manner one would expect of the whole scale movement of water moving to or from the sea in a recent global flood event. Where the soil conditions were suitable we find evidence of water current effects which may have better preserved in the western part of North America perhaps in part due to the rain shadow of the Rockies.I know you reject all of this evidence, but could you show me how exactly they came about without a flood? Or are you so sure that you are right, you no longer need to concern yourself with evidence? If so, wouldn't that make your belief a sort of religious belief?No comment on my little test paper, am I to assume it was so perfect that you couldn't find any fault with it? Knowing you, I don't believe that for a minute.

Tranquility BaseWelcome! I have peeked a bit a your posts a bit to from time to time. We fight for the same goal, only from different angles. As a fellow soldier I salute you for your noble efforts in the battle against the evil lies that slay men's minds. Having said these kinds words, I must also say you are fighting your war with dull broken rusty old weapons of little effect. I am impressed you have done as well as you have working with so little. I would like to offer to rearm you with better weaponry. If you would like, I would be happy to e-mail you a copy of my book which explains in detail the problems with YEC and uses geology to explain how the flood happened. My theory is outlined in my first post here and these are the basic main points.1. the earth and life is very old. (billions of years old)2. The geologic record records the long existence of life on this planet and was not created by the flood.3. There never was a 'canopy' or underground water sources for the flood.4. There have been a number of ice ages, and it was the abrupt ending of the last one that flooded the world.5. The flood was triggered by a Carolina Bay type comet impact event occurring on the North America ice sheet and possibly others as well. These impacts caused an 'impact winter' with associated heavy global rains as predicted by impact theories and as described in the Biblical record.6. The already on going melting of the ice age glaciers combined with the impact events resulted in the documented releases of 'Super Floods' of glacial melt waters being released from the ice sheets. This water flowed into the sea and caused them to rise above the land. (how the flood gates of the deep were opened)7. The sea level rose progressively and did little erosional damage to the earth's surface except for areas where the terrain funneled the moving water which created the streamlined super flood erosion found in those areas. Minimal erosion is indicated by the fact that the ice age surface is still intact in most areas.8. At the end of the flood the increased water depth pushed the ocean floors down which in turn caused an uplift in the land areas. We find evidence of this in uplift and depression and tilting associated with the comings and goings of the ice ages."What exactly is impossible in the YEC flood stance?" The 'Y'.The earth is very old as demonstrated by over two hundred years worth of geologic findings. This was recognized even by the creationists two hundred years ago, which is why they attempted to explain the existence of the fossil record by claiming it was created all at once by the flood. They were basically shifting the problem from creation and dumping the burden of proof on the flood. This in turn has created the mess we have today of YEC flood theories vainly trying to account for the entire geologic record in a flood that the Bible states lasted only about a year. I spend two chapters in my book on this, and it is an issue better dealt with at length and in detail. In short here, let me sum up a few of the basic reasons why creation of the entire fossil record by the flood is impossible. First how do you rip up the entire surface of the earth, rocks, hills, mountains and keep them all in suspension with only the water the earth has? The amounts of material involved would require currents on the order of a kitchen blender set on puree, yet some how when this mess all settles out, many delicate fossils are laid neatly out just as the animal died with each bone in it's place. We also have the existence of huts built of Mammoth bones, an animal that died off in the flood, found intact on the ground surface. There have been other finds of Mammoth hunters camp sites, and these sites are found at or near the ground surface. How could a flood current rip up a camp site and then redeposit it? The impossibility of this is further highlighted by the occurrence of submerged pre flood Ice Age landscapes found on the continental shelves. "part of the floor of the North Sea that emerged because of a Pleistocene drop of sealevel. The dogger Bank emerged, and was dry land long enough to win covering peat bogs, fragments of which have been dredged up by fishermen from depths of 40 meters (128 feet). Elsewhere on this temporary land forests grew. Fishes now swim over the tree trunks, drowned by the last upswing of ocean level. Mammoths roamed over the plain; recently their tusks have been dredged up from the bottom of the North Sea." (The Changing World of the Ice Age by Reginald Aldworth Daly 1963, pages 183-184) If the YEC flood theories were true, this preflood landscape should have been ripped up and scattered, instead fish peacefully swim over the rotting remains of a submerged forest. Here beneath the waves, part of the old world still remains, preserved for all time in a watery tomb, untouched by any great disturbance.If the YEC type flood had occurred, since the flood was global, we would find the same deposits on the ocean floor as we do on land. But that is not what we find, instead except for areas that were once above water, the oceans are totally lacking in fossil remains of land animals. In short the pattern of fossils found on land and sea floors, is in complete conflict with YEC flood models.These are just a few of the very simple problems with YEC flood models. If you want to go over this in more detail, I would suggest you first read my book and let me know what your thoughts are. I would be very interested in your opinion on it any how. I suggest you consider the OEC viewpoint, OEC is not any less religious then YEC, it is just more scientific. YEC is actually just a docturinal interpretation that is in conflict with scripture and a whole lot of geology.

Percipient"I don't think it's within my power to persuade you that your evidence provides no support for your conclusions." That sounds about as close to a concession as I am probably going to get from you, so I will take it.I am very surprised you are unable to provide any helpful feedback on my test paper. Personally I didn't think it was very good and some of the points were poorly supported and the near total lack of references was appalling. It was just something I threw together that I thought you could dissect and I could keep hammering on until I had all the dents out of it. I will have to take a look at Stephen Austin's paper some time. But I prefer to learn the writing style of scientific papers by reading the real thing. I also have a copy of "A Handbook for Scholars" which covers writing science papers. I pretty much know what I can and can not state in a paper. What I am worried about is my lack of academic qualifications and affiliations. That remains my one big concern. My only other worry is making sure my lab work is of an acceptable level of quality.