Lake Varve Sediments and the Great Flood

I'm setting up this thread basically to continue a discussion Creationist and I began elsewhere, but anyone is welcome to chime in of course. I'm curious as to how one might reconcile the geological record of lake varves (and marine ones, sure, but let's worry about lacurstrine sediments first) with A, the idea of a global flood around 4000 years ago and B, an earth formation date of around 6000-10000 years ago.

Thread moved here from the Proposed New Topics forum.

Well, of course, some of them are formed annually. But that does not mean that all of them are. For instance, in the Mount St. Helens eruption, 25 ft. of fine layered sediment was put down in a single afternoon. To say that all varves are layed down annually is a fallacy. Experiments have been done to show that these layers can be put down quickly.http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/1775All of these observations are consistent with a global flood.

You are confused. While all varves are laminations, not all laminations are varves. There are scientist who devote careers to studying these things.And as far as Brethault and Julien are concerned, this is nothing new. It is Geology 101 stuff. It has no bearing on varves or even a real sedimentary environment. Why would a flume experiment using sand-sized particles have anything to do with low-flow regime lacustrine deposition? These are the questions YECs need to, but won't, ask.

And your point? It has everything to do with it, since varves are interpreted as laminations being laid down yearly, while these experiments clearly show that is not necessarily so. How do you know which are low-flow and which are not? Perhaps you can fill me in.

The point is that laminations in sediments deposited by a debris flow are not varves. You seem to equate the two. Again, different geological setting, different grain-sizes, different sediment influx, different current velocities... You remain confused. These laminations that Brethault and other see would not be called varves by any geologist. I know from the general geological setting, the grain sizes, the sedimentary textures and the composition of the grains. What Brethault and others are using would never be found in varves. I know it's a mystery to you, but your professional YECs are preying upon your ignorance of this subject.

Hardly. We see them (in lake Suigetsu in Japan) forming each year with a particular pattern. The pattern marks the change of seasons.If you think you are so smart then go to this thread and explain what is there: Age Correlations and an Old Earth: Version 1 No 3 (formerly Part III).Please note two things:
1) An important point it to explain the correlations between the different methods.
2) No one, not one single creationist or creationist site has been able to tackle what is in that thread. Will you be the first?

Perhaps you misunderstood my OP. I said no one denies that varves are not annual. Your mistake is in assuming that because we see varves being put down annually that all varves are put down that way. All you have proven is that you cannot think outside the uniformitarian box. Oooh. I don't know, you make it seem so hard.

Creo, if you don't mind my asking, do you have a BS in Biochemistry?

Your mistake is in assuming that because lying Creationists tell you geologists assume all varves are put down the same way that it is the truth. No one except the lying Creationists think that all varves are put down the same way. What is different is that the biologists and geologists that actually look at such things can tell a lot about how a specimen was created.It is simply another example of how the folk selling ID and Creationism play fast and loose with reason and the truth to keep the flow of money coming in from the Christian Cult of Ignorance and Communion of Bobbleheads.

---

Immigration has been a problem Since 1607!

My MY. Did I say geologists? Or did I just accuse uniformitarianists, which Nosy is undoubtedly one. Since Creationists admit that some varves are put down annually, the only one that seems to be lying is you. Your mistake is in assuming that no Creationists are biologists or geologists. All you have proven is that YOU are the one that is playing fast and loose with reason and the truth.

No, I don't mind your asking at all. No I do not. Do you?

Sorry but that is simply a nonsense assertion. The key point is that it is possible to look at records, whether it is varves or ice layers or coral layers or the geologic column and determine how they were laid down. The ones in the OP are annual layers. Not at all, Creationists can be geologists or biologists, but geology and biology cannot be done anyway except under the old earth models. There are no Young Earth models or Biblical Creation models to use.

---

Immigration has been a problem Since 1607!

Really? What would distinguish a varve that was put down annually from several that were put down quickly? Really? Why is this so? http://www.biblicalgeology.net/

To everyone,The people on the other side of the issue from you in this discussion are your honorable opponents, not crafty connivers. Please keep the discussion on a higher plane and the focus on the issues.

---

--	Percy
	EvC Forum Director