Solving the Mystery of the Biblical Flood II

Edge:
Is it necessary for you to do that yet?
TB:
Yes professional creationist geologists look at paleocurrents and 2D/3D compositional distribution to come to the conclusion that the geo-col is dominated by (i) nmarine inundation and (ii) high energy events.Except that the one-big-flood hypothesis was rejected two centuries ago, before Charles Darwin was born!You are not coming up with unique solutions. Besides we are not using the same data. For instance you ignore completely radiometric dating.We are both coming up with solutions but they are differnt and obviously not uniqiue. We do not igore radiometric dating. We fully accept the decay patterns and ascribe them to accelerated decay which is what generates catastrophic tectonics.Accelerated by a factor of 10^6-10^7! And all decay rates accelerated by almost exactly equal amounts!Despite the fact that different radioactive processes proceed by different physical mechanisms. Which makes that whole claim a load of sauropod dung.They were also drifting slowly 60 My ago.Only if you assume constant radiodecay.Since present-day continental-drift rates agree well with those over the last few million years, that is independent calibration of radioisotope-decay rates.And let us not forget about the Oklo Reactor.Besides how do you accumulate the coral reefs we see in the geological record. And the evaporites. And the fossil record.I've given you our just-so solutions before. You have equally big problems with paleocurrents, huge sorted beds, cyclothems etc. The evidecne for high energy events is overwhelming.Paleocurrents can be produced by rivers and submarine landslides.Huge sorted beds -- like?Cyclothems -- climate/deposition alternations.

Wm:
How could these stumps supposedly settle in muddy YEC flood waters and end up so neatly positioned like this?
TB:
I have seen it before. It is very strong evidence against the YEC flood. What geo-col era does fossil grove come from?Fossilized tree stumps and snags are found across the "geo-col" since the mid-Paleozoic.The oldest known tree is "Methuselah", which is 4,789 years old.You seem to be unaware that multiple rings can form in some years?However, dendrochronologists are aware of such complications -- such unusual behavior would give itself away with other ring features.Also, if trees produce large numbers of extra rings per year, then it's curious that they produce them in such precise synchrony, because otherwise, there would be serious discrepancies between one tree and another.Then it should also be remembered the tree ring record based on these trees with over laps in rings patterns of over a hundred years between trees, extends unbroken into the past for over 10,000 years.Doubt has been cast over such linked tree-ring records by non-creationists.Like who?I have no problem with tree ring dating, the potential problems are small and the science is simple.Much of the seminal work was done by one researcher whose mainly excellent work has been questioned in terms of absolute demonstration of continuity.And where has this continuity been questioned?And I'm sure that any errors in that original researcher's work have been corrected by now. There is a big community of tree-ring researchers; are they all dummies?The multiple ring per year theory has also been an YEC favorite, and is equally absurd since it requires at the very least, large scale occurrence of extreme weather patterns repeated for large scales of time that no one living in those times mentioned or where effected by or shows up in any other way. But multiple rings have been observed! And in our scenario the climate might have taken decades/centuries to settle down post flood.Making every species of tree grow extra rings in exact synchrony, of course.(Biblical-chronology stuff snipped)To tell the truth, I find trees much more interesting than the details of Biblical chronologies.