Global Flood Evidence: A Place For Faith to Present Some

This thread is NOT about the modern geological interpretation or how crazy it does or does not sound. This is about how a recent, global flood can explain what we see.Sounds crazy to me, Faith, I'll agree with you.This message has been edited by AdminNosy, 03-06-2006 06:11 PM

The topic is evidence for the Noahdic flood. It is not about the history of geology. All that we need here is this evidence and the logic that shows how it supports a recent, global flood. Could you please provide evidence to back up this claim?This message has been edited by AdminNosy, 03-06-2006 06:08 PM

I think the following paragraph addressed it pretty well: As for the fossils, i don't see what the problem is. Terrestrial fossils are found in rocks that appear to have been formed on the surface or near-surface (lithified sand dunes, beach sands, lake beds, swamps, stream/river systems, etc.) and marine fossils are found in marine rocks. Depending on the depth of the water or the depositional environment (beach, near-shore, deep water), the fossils are consistent from one location to another - so consistency of fossil occurrences is expected in mainstream geology.also I think it would be a good idea if you responded to this: Maybe you should explain why you don't think fossils should be consistent in the absence of a flood or why sediments should not be laid down slowly - as they are today. I have to admit I'm responding here without having read a whole lot of this thread, so there could be something I've missed.