Where is the flood? YEC answer to geology

Given the depth of the Grand Canyon (in places over a mile - Wikipedia) to what depth is included in the biblical flood scenario? In message #8 of the Exploring the Grand Canyon, from the bottom up roxrkool states

quote:

---

The mountain range was then eroded (and we know this because the Zoroaster Granite does not intrude any of the overlying sedimentary rocks) down to small rolling hills (I think), and soon after covered by a transgressing sea which deposited limestone, shale, sandstone, and even volcanic lava

---

This quote is regarding the bottom layer of Vishnu Schist. Do Young Earth Creationists believe that the flood deposited up to one mile of rock/soil down to this lowest layer of Vishnu Schist? If not at what point does the flood layer begin?Edited by Vacate, : A different aproach

To make this fly I suggest that you take out all references to the Biblical Flood Myth and concentrate on what the evidence of a flood should be.Can you edit the original message to make it narrow and focused?

---

quote:

---

When introducing a new topic, please keep the message narrowly focused. Do not include more than a few points.

---

The biblical flood dropped in the span of a year what geologists claim took millions of years to accumulate. IF a flood of that magnitude where to happen today would the same effect be re-created? Will a flood wear away and re-deposit hundreds of feet of solid rock?

quote:

---

I suggest that you take out all references to the Biblical Flood Myth

---

Though what I said seems quite abstract - What I am trying to understand is how 6000 years ago an event happened that dumped hundreds of feet of solid rock in a short time. If a flood happened today - is there any possible way to explain and therefore re-create what is said to have happened in the bible?*Try as I might I can't find a more concise way to present this thought. The idea of the flood depositing that MUCH, to me, has no logic - so I hope to get an understanding of how it IS logical to others. The topic can be dropped, I don't mind, I have never seen answers forthcoming anyhow. Edited by Vacate, : added rules quote

I still don't see this as promotable as it stands it is simply to vague.There are several possible lines in here, one is the question of how a flood can be recognized. Another has to do with the Biblical Flood myth. The former is a question of science. The later could be treated as science or as a matter of faith & belief.I will leave this open and perhaps one of the other Admins will see this as promotable.

---

I tried to make it a lot less vague, I agree completely it needed a re-work. Making it less vague however I changed my approach entirely! My direction is essentially the same - I would like some clarity on YEC geology

I'm still having troubles with this. If you really are asking then the answer is "Yes!" and it is a very short thread, the opening post and one reply.Would it be more productive if you just asked for their model for the creation of the Vishnu Schist and then worked on the next layer?How is this different from other Grand Canyon threads we have had?In the original message you posted you asked what a flood would look like. That is a really great question because there are recognizable signs of a flood and I do not think it has been discussed. Would that be a more productive endeavour than just rehashing the Grand Canyon?

---

The simplest response being "yes!" is whats most illogical, to my understanding, about YEC geology. I have read many attempts , here and on other sites to explain one layer or another. What I don't see is a grand explanation the complete "flood layer" that includes the basic "HOW?"An analysis of a hypothetical "present day flood" would have decidedly obvious effects that are not reflected when viewing the "YEC flood layer".I am new to the site and still absorbing the huge volume of topics/ discussions - but this most general question seems lacking on this site and all others - If each layer can be explained, can ALL layers be explained in a (approximate) one year deposition?There is no flood model available to explain this, yet the notion persists ... I guess thats what I wanted to address.I have no trouble letting this die, there are still many threads to absorb on the site that go in much finer detail than the one I have presented.

Okay. Closing this one and please feel free to open another when you wish.