Trilobites, Mountains and Marine Deposits - Evidence of a flood?

Thanks again Ray,I'll let you think about this while you are suspended. Message 159
For participating and providing your insight into how a flood can explain the evidence. Just pointing out that the comments that continue from those quick quotes were irrelevant to the question of how a flood can explain the evidence. So you agree that "fountains of the deep" do not explain fossils on mountaintops. Message 160
Previously (Message 141) you stated that the "great upheaval" explained how the mountains formed during the flood, now you say
"great unheaval" = Genesis Flood
and we are back to the problem of explaining how a flood creates mountains.You complained when I pointed out that one type of creationist "explanation" was circular, claiming that things appear the way they are because of the flood and the reason we know this is because the flood occurred and they appear the way they are, and yet your own explanation (Message 141) is just that: You then went on to point out that there were two sources of flood waters: rain and fountains.Neither have been known to produce mountains, so this still does not explain how the mountains were formed.Then you said the mountains were caused by the "great upheaval" which you now say = Genesis Flood, and we are back to no explanation for how the mountains formed.So how do the mountains form?Were the fossils on and in the sediment the mountains were formed from before or after the flood event?If before, then why is their existence on mountains any more proof of a flood than sediments with grass and non-marine life? Remember that the fossils on the mountaintops are supposed to be evidence of the flood.If after, then how did they grow in such profusion and depth in the short time of the flood?Enjoy.Edited by RAZD, : clarityEdited by RAZD, : more clarity

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

---

• • • Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click) • • •

Thanks ARCHITECT-426, Perhaps you've heard the story of the person on a diet who baked a tray of brownies, then cut the brownies into small enough pieces that you could round the calories off to zero, and then proceeded to eat the whole tray.The effect is accumulative. Now calculate the inertia of the mass moving at that speed. Curiously, nature is completely unimpressed by your opinion. Scientist study what nature does, rather than calculate formulas to attempt to show that something cannot happen.Surely you must know that if the mathematical model is wrong that the result is questionable at best, disastrously wrong at worst (how many structural designs have failed because the mathematics was wrong? Or are you one of those architects that ignore structure and let the engineers fix your design so that it works?)Any mathematical "proof" that something can't happen, when we have evidence of it happening, just shows that the math is wrong.Perhaps you have heard about the old story of an aeronautical engineer that calculated that a bumblebee cannot fly? Yes there are a lot of ignorant people on this planet. People who don't know squat about geology, yet feel capable of making statements about it. Of course if your bulldozer blade was as wide as a continent you would find it difficult to move dirt at even that speed with the same amount of energy. You have ignored the scale of the movement as well as the mass.\\And curiously we still have no explanation for the many ordered layers of marine fossils on mountaintops, sorted by fossil types and layered with evidence of undisturbed mature marine growth.Enjoy.

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

---

• • • Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click) • • •

From ICANT on Age Correlations and An Old Earth, Version 2 No 1For every spot of earth that is known to be covered by floods there were other spots that were not. All known floods were local/regional floods. There are also land that was originally seabed that has been lifted up above sea level (Mt Everest for example), and they have evidence of mature marine ecosystem growth in several layers, and the periods of those growth exceed thousands of years.I would expect to see evidence of flooding all occurring at the same time ... ie universal in the spacial-temporal matrix in the same way the evidence of a meteor impact in the Yucatan left a layer of Iridium around the world as dust from the impact settle world wide (demonstrating how massive the impact was).I would also expect to see a mass extinction event, as was seen from this impact causing a "nuclear winter" alteration that affected most living creatures, but with all deaths associated with flooding.See Wiki Chicxulub Crater, Mass Extinction

quote:

---

The main evidence of such an impact, besides the crater itself, is contained in a thin layer of clay present in the K—Pg boundary across the world. In the late 1970s, the Alvarezes and colleagues reported that it contained an abnormally high concentration of iridium.[48] Iridium levels in this layer reached 6 parts per billion by weight or more compared to 0.4 for the Earth's crust as a whole;[49] in comparison, meteorites can contain around 470 parts per billion of this element.[50] It was hypothesized that the iridium was spread into the atmosphere when the impactor was vaporized and settled across the Earth's surface amongst other material thrown up by the impact, producing the layer of iridium-enriched clay.[51] ...

---

I would NOT expect to see evidence of marine growth in the muck from such a flood, as it would not have had sufficient time to develop the mature ecology seen in shell deposits. This is discussed in detail at the beginning of this thread.EnjoyEdited by RAZD, : st

Unfortunately no reference was cited for this (mis)information.

quote:

---

Wiki Himalayas Geology

​

The Himalayan range is one of the youngest mountain ranges on the planet and consists mostly of uplifted sedimentary and metamorphic rock. According to the modern theory of plate tectonics, its formation is a result of a continental collision or orogeny along the convergent boundary between the Indo-Australian Plate and the Eurasian Plate. The Arakan Yoma highlands in Myanmar and the Andaman and Nicobar Islands in the Bay of Bengal were also formed as a result of this collision.

​

During the Upper Cretaceous, about 70 million years ago, the north-moving Indo-Australian plate (which has subsequently broken into the Indian Plate and the Australian plate[7]) was moving at about 15 cm per year. About 50 million years ago this fast moving Indo-Australian plate had completely closed the Tethys Ocean, the existence of which has been determined by sedimentary rocks settled on the ocean floor, and the volcanoes that fringed its edges. Since both plates were composed of low density continental crust, they were thrust faulted and folded into mountain ranges rather than subducting into the mantle along an oceanic trench.[6] An often-cited fact used to illustrate this process is that the summit of Mount Everest is made of marine limestone from this ancient ocean.[8]

​

The 6,000-kilometre-plus journey of the India landmass (Indian Plate) before its collision with Asia (Eurasian Plate) about 40 to 50 million years ago[6]

​

Today, the Indian plate continues to be driven horizontally at the Tibetan Plateau, which forces the plateau to continue to move upwards.[9] The Indian plate is still moving at 67 mm per year, and over the next 10 million years it will travel about 1,500 km into Asia. About 20 mm per year of the India-Asia convergence is absorbed by thrusting along the Himalaya southern front. This leads to the Himalayas rising by about 5 mm per year, making them geologically active. The movement of the Indian plate into the Asian plate also makes this region seismically active, leading to earthquakes from time to time.

---

So it looks like the Himalayas began to be trust up 50 million years ago. The shells would be somewhat older.Enjoy

Meaning thousands of years to build up the layers and layers showing growth within a mature marine ecology.

quote:

---

Discover how Mount Everest got its name, what kind of rock is on top, and how it's getting taller every year.

​

The summit of Mount Everest was actually the seafloor 470 million years ago! That's right, the rock that comprises the "summit pyramid" or uppermost part of Mount Everest is gray limestone that was deposited on the northern continental shelf of northern India during the early to middle Ordovician Period of the Paleozoic Era, long before India began its northward journey towards Eurasia and the eventual collision of tectonic plates that uplifted the Himalaya and Tibetan Plateau. Called the "Qomolangma Limestone" by geologists, the summit rocks are well-bedded limestone (grainstone) with fragments of common Ordovician marine invertebrate shells, such as trilobites, brachiopods, ostracods and crinoids. The Qomolangma Limestone has been altered by heat, pressure and fluids that have altered the original limestone, so it is now a low-grade metamorphic rock. These rocks have been brought to the roof of the world through continual uplift caused by the collision of India and Eurasia (still on-going today), deep erosion of the Greater Himalaya, and fault displacement along the South Tibetan detachment that has tectonically placed the summit rocks over higher-grade metamorphic rocks below.

---

Qomolangma is the Tibetan name for Mt. Everest.... "trilobites, brachiopods, ostracods and crinoids" ... many of which are now extinct.Brachiopods are interesting critters, the larvae are free swimming before settling to the bottom and attaching themselves to the substrate with a pedicle. They also have growth lines, and live from 3 to 30 years.Lower down the mountain is a different kind of rock, not metamorphic but sedimentary, and the shells there are complete:

quote:

---

​

Roadoceras subroadense (Zakharov and Pavlov, 1986) closely resembles R. prodromus (Ruzhentsev) and R. roadoense (Bse) and was recorded from the lower member of the Barabash Formation of possibly Capitanian age. This member is about 200 m thick and characterised by containing the brachiopod Anidanthus ussuricus Fredericks, Liosotella cf. licharewiana Kotlyar, Waagenoconcha krystofovichi Fredericks, Petrospirifer alatiformis Licharew and Spiriferella lita (Fredericks). It overlies the member yielding the foraminifer Geinitzina sp., Tetrataxis sp., Pachiploides sp. and the bryozoan Stenopora clapa Kiseleva.

---

Perhaps some creationist can explain how you can have one layer of mature marine growth on top of another one without the water existing there for decades, if not millennia, and then add up all the layers that make up the limestone formation and other rocks to depths of 200 meters or more, adding decades (or more) for each layer ...Let the song and dance, complete with hand-waving and wails of denial commence. Because it is always the details that flummox creationist facile "explanations" based on ignorance of the total evidence.EnjoyEdited by RAZD, : .

Go to any ocean bottom in the world and look at the fully developed ecosystem of organisms living and dying: every place you look you will see organisms of all ages interacting -- that is mature marine growth. By contrast immature marine growth would not show such a fully developed and mature ecosystem and none of the organisms would have reached older ages -- which is what you should observe for sessile organisms (like brachiopods) in any newly inundated area --- the maximum age of sessile organisms can only be the length of time the area has been inundated.The magic flying flood purportedly lasted less than a year, so the maximum age for any sessile marine organisms that grew in an area inundated by the fantasy flood should be 1 year AT THE MOST. It means they don't grow out of water, there has to be water covering the area for them to grow there, they are organisms that live in water. There fixed it for you. Note the length of time needed for each layer to be a mature ecosystem -- some brachiopods were 30 years old when they died and were gradually buried by silt as new brachiopods grew around and on top of them ... brachiopods have growth lines, like tree rings. Even one layer means marine growth lasting longer than the reported time for the purported magic flying flood. Tens of layers means centuries of growth, hundreds of layers means millennia. Yep it's already started.Enjoy

And how does that robust earth shaking activity preserve delicate growth like fan corals and crinoids unbroken and still attached to the bottom ... it's magic. The water sings, the water dances, it does whatever creationists need it to do, in spite of no evidence of water EVER behaving that way ... it doesn't matter because all creationist need to do is imagine it and it is so. Enjoy

You just exchanged one problem for another -- the length of time needed to grow those layers over layers over layers exceeds the time you pretend lapsed between your purported creation date and your purported flood date. The song and dance is in full swing. Once again the magic flying flood transports huge blocks of sediment intact and undisturbed, as if on a flying carpet, while in other locations it wreaks havoc on the land. Fascinating. There is no rational link between a flood and tectonic activity, tectonic activity is not caused by floods, and there is absolutely NO mention of earthquakes etc in the bible so you are MAKING STUFF UP. As I said above, you've traded one problem for another -- you don't have millenia for the growth to accumulate to the depths and degree that we see.But I'm glad you agree that it is impossible for the shells to have grown during the flood.Enjoy

And now you have created another problem: where is all the real estate that those layers came from? The whole world is covered in multiple layers. Everywhere you look it is layers on top of layers. Glad you admit it. Too bad you didn't stop there.EnjoyEdited by RAZD, : .

Song and dance in full swing.Thanks for ruining another thread with your delusions.Note you still have not adequately explained the evidence, while your explanation keeps shifting ground.Enjoy

and since what you have shown isn't true the fossil record is relevant. See how easy that is? Curiously I only need tree rings and carbon-14 levels correlations that can only occur if they show the same thing -- age -- to invalidate YEC fantasy earth ages. You have admitted you can't explain the correlations.The earth is OLD and denial of that fact is delusion.EnjoyEdited by RAZD, : .

the topic is Trilobites, Mountains and Marine Deposits - Evidence of a flood?Not the grand canyon, not any fantasies about flood sediment layers but whether shells and marine deposits are evidence of a flood.Even Faith says the deposits were not made on the tops of the mountains during the flood. That the mountains were made after the deposits were laid in a normal marine environment, and they were then lifted to the tops of the mountains during the raising of the mountains.Thus the answer for this thread (so far) is no, Trilobites, Mountains and Marine Deposits by themselves are not Evidence of a flood.Enjoy

Hi KyleConno and welcome to the fray, Curiously this thread is about trilobites on mountaintops, not holes in Siberia. You will note that this topic is being dragged off topic by some posters, when there are other threads to discuss the Grand Canyon and the fantasy flying flood.Thanks.

Without addressing the age issues (ALL of them) any comments about floods is rather irrelevant pipe dreaming when discussing how trilobite and other marine deposits end up on mountain tops. It becomes fantasy self-delusion.Enjoy

That's why it is the Fantastic Flying Flood Fantasy.Enjoy