The Flood = many coincidences

Peg observation:1. Fish fossils found in marine-derived sedimentary rocks on top of mountains is not strange at all and is not BEST explained by a flood covering the mountains.First of all, the fossils are contained IN the rock. They are part of the rock and as you go deeper into the stratigraphic layers, the fossils change systematically. Not only that, but the rocks and fossils also change systematically as you move laterally along the layers. This pattern of fossils is seen in individual mountains, mountain ranges, and you can see the same patterns on separate continents. The reason rocks and fossils change with stratigraphic height/depth, as well as laterally, is because of changing depositional environments.If you imagine yourself at a beach, what are the possible depositional environments you can see from that vantage point?You have a beach deposit where you are standing, where the sand is dense and gets wet as the tide moves in. In wet sand, what do you see? Footprints, some shells, vegetation, and clams if you dig down, maybe some crab debris. If you look into the ocean, the water gets deeper. You get fish, shellfish, carbonate minerals settling out of the water forming limestone, and reef systems. Even deeper out, you start getting clay settling out of the water because the water is too cold and dark to precipitate carbonate so you get shale. Different types of animals live in the deep ocean. Even deeper you may get siliceous ooze precipitating out on the seabed and again different types of sea life.Looking towards land, you might see dune fields, with scorpians, lizards, shrubs, etc. Even further out see alluvial fans, braided stream environments, mountain ranges, valleys. All with different rocks and animal life and vegetation.All these sediments, animals, and vegetation leave evidence of their existence in the rocks. This is why we know a great flood is NOT responsible for the rocks and fossils we see today.

Peg observation:4. Sea mounts. I would add that, yes, the world has been flooded. Much of the ice that comprised alpine and continental glaciers -- for which we have abundant evidence -- melted. Glaciers are still melting and sea levels are still rising and sea mounts are getting deeper and deeper. However, we do not require a 4,000 to 10,000 (or ?) year old flood to explain why sea mounts are under water or why islands and continental coasts are currently facing future inundation. The explanation may be quite simple: wave erosion and climate.Peg, for you the flood is plausible because you see the geological evidence around you as individual pieces of a puzzle. As isolated rock formations. What you need to understand is that all the rocks or formations around you represent ancient geologic events and processes that cannot have formed in the absence of the surrounding rock formations (i.e., events and processes). Therefore, you cannot consider the formation of the sea mounts, or extinction events, or fossils in rocks on mountain tops, etc. without considering what the rocks look like on the other side of the valley, or on the marine floor, or on the adjacent continent.Once you start looking at how the rocks all intimately fit together over square miles, over hundreds of square miles, and from one continent to another, then you will realize that a global flood is a wholly inadequate model that consistently fails to explain the beautifully intricate and integrated geological puzzle before us.If you are interested in learning why geologists have made the interpretations they have, pick up a book on historical geology. That's an excellent place to start.

Hear, hear!

Wow. I am at a loss for words.Have you ever picked up a geology book and taken the time to actually read about the science you so gleefully distort and misrepresent?The subjects of your last post are things I learned about during my first year of study at the university and that was nearly 20 years ago.Maybe it's time to start a thread on architecture and see how you like it...

Vesuvius is the result of continent-continent collision between African and Eurasian plates. The African plate is subducted beneath the Eurasian plate and formed the volcanoes on the western shores of Italy and also east through Greece and Turkey. Cascadia Subduction Zone.

Not all plates subduct at the same angle and subducting plate dynamics are very complicated.Near the subduction zones, newly subducted slab angles tend to be fairly high -- forming volcanoes closer to the subduction zone. But the deeper the plate goes, the warmer it gets, so it's likely the slab will become somewhat buoyant and the angle will become shallower -- forming volcanoes further away from the subduction zone.Crust type and composition strongly affects how a subducted slab will behave.Some geos even think you can subduct a spreading center! How about that?

They are examples of what exactly? You are either a POE or certifiably delusional.Plate movement is measured on a daily basis. Or is there a world-wide conspiracy to blame?

He doesn't have to construct a model because there is apparently no data and no geological evidence to model... other than that observable when one sports his/her god-goggles, that is.

---

This message is a reply to:
	Message 153 by Architect-426, posted 06-18-2009 12:51 PM		Architect-426 has replied

---

Replies to this message:
	Message 157 by Coragyps, posted 06-18-2009 4:29 PM		roxrkool has not replied
	Message 172 by Architect-426, posted 12-29-2009 11:09 PM		roxrkool has not replied

---

Profile

Reply    Peek

To borrow a few words of another: Nothing in geology makes sense except in the light of chemistry.My job entails attempting to unravel the mysteries of why and how ore deposits form and this would be impossible without a good understanding of chemistry. I use chemistry every single day as a geologist.