Noah’s Flood

If there was a world wide flood, then evolution logically cannot be possible.

This is such an important point because of the overwhelming evidence that there was a global flood. It is really quite interesting that both evolutionists and creationists would expect the same general features that we see in the geologic column. This is the many sediment layers and the order of fossils with increasingly complex life forms at the top. The process that creates this in the flood will be described soon. First though, is the all important point that if a global flood would produce the layers and evolution would produce the layers, then either the flood produced them or evolution produced them, but not both.

Let’s explore this more. This is the reason they both cannot be true. If evolution happens first that would make the layers and the fossils. A global flood happening after evolution could disrupt all this and then have the earth resettle to make the same layers. But then evolution would have to happen all over again a second time. This would have to make a second set of layers, again with the order of the fossils which is not what is now in the geologic column so this cannot be true. Of course, no one believes there was evolution, a global flood, and then a second evolution, but we are logically looking at every possibility.

Now lets think about a global flood first and then evolution. The global flood would make layers with no fossils since there was no life before evolution (in the evolutionary model), and then more layers with fossils during evolution. But this is not what is seen in the geologic column, so we know this also cannot be true. So this means that the geologic column was created either by a global flood, or by evolution (but both cannot be true). This then logically leads to:

If there was a world wide flood, then evolution logically cannot be possible.

This is just a fact. Evolutionists cannot believe there was a global flood. However, because of the evidence they have to believe there were floods, they just say they were many, many local floods but not a global flood. We will soon look at how a global flood would create exactly what we see in the geologic column if creation is true. There are also discrepancies in the geologic column and other geologic features that contradict evolution and supports creation. But first let’s look at other evidence that there was a global flood. There is the scientific evidence from archeology and geology, but there is also very interesting evidence from social science. Social science is the academic discipline concerned with society and the relationships among individuals within a society. If there was a global flood what would we expect to find in the records of human history? 

Global Flood Stories

If the flood stories of every culture on earth are correct, then evolution logically cannot be possible.

The story of a global flood that annihilates all of humankind and leaves only a few who will become the origin of all ethnic groups is a common feature of virtually every society on earth. This is the result of extensive research in the social sciences and was published in the Journal of American Folklore. This article reviewed the recorded history of mankind and focused on the Asian continent and found at least one written text of this in every Southeast Asian ethnic group. These stories were found to have a “global distribution” and could “not be traced to a single source”. This published research documented that the recorded human history from around the globe in every language, in every culture, from every continent, all has a global flood story.

If mankind had in human history a global flood we would expect this to be recorded in our written history over all of time. This is exactly what we do find. This is not just one story. It is not just a group of stories. It is not just from one area. It is not just from one continent. It is not from just one language. It is not just from one religion. It is not just from one culture. It is not just from one ethnic group. This is a universal story recorded as true in every group, from every continent, from every language, from every religion, from every culture, and from every ethnic group. Mankind has felt that this story is so important for everyone to know in every time and for all time, that we have written records from everyone, from everywhere, that it is true. This evidence is that there was a global flood. Evolutionists now must convince us why there was not, because:

If there was a world wide flood, then evolution logically cannot be possible.

We will next continue to look at other scientific evidence to determine if there was a global flood or not. Then we will look at how a global flood would create exactly what we see in the geologic column. Finally, I will tell you about discrepancies in the geologic column and other geologic features that contradict evolution and supports creation.

THE GEOLOGIC COLUMN EXPLAINED BY NOAH’S FLOOD

Creationists believe that all of the plants and animals lived at the same time. We believe that a global food created the geologic column. The Biblical account of Noah’s flood is consistent with what we see in the world and is also scientifically consistent with the expected results of a global flood. Noah’s flood was a catastrophic event much larger than is commonly known or envisioned. It did not just rain for 40 days and 40 nights to cover the face of the earth with water. The waters continued to flood the earth for 150 days. There was so much water it was 20 feet above the highest mountain peak. It took so long for the waters to recede that Noah was on the ark for more than a year, a total of 371 days.

Consider the effects and results on the earth’s geology if this is true. Consider the cataclysmic events on the world. Rain is pouring down endlessly. The earth’s crust is bursting and erupting with water all over the planet. There are huge land movements, earthquakes, release of magma from the earth’s mantle, landslides, storms and explosions. The soil would be eroded away. Trees and plants would lose their roots and be swept away with rushing currents. There would be massive landslides with flows of mud and rock capturing and trapping animals and carrying them away. The ocean turbulence would be extreme. All of the sliding debris, plants and animals would cause rapid changes in the chemistry of the ocean. The geologic events at the ocean floor with erupting volcanoes, earthquakes, and tsunamis would mix and churn the contents of the entire ocean. There would be rapid changes in temperature. The seas would be turbid, turbulent, and violent. The material from the land would be mixed with the sea. There would be extreme, violent and rapid changes in the conditions that affect sedimentation.

All of this material would be mixing, swirling and churning in the ocean for the 5 months that the waters continued to flood the earth. The undersea volcanoes would continue to disturb, disrupt, and disintegrate all of the material that will become the sediments. The streams and rivers would be busting over the banks. All of the grasses, plants and trees would be swept way in the torrential flooding. The rivers all over the planet pouring into the oceans would add to the chaos in the oceans. The absolute raw power of water and of erosion would be displayed like has never been seen. There was total annihilation.

Eventually during the remainder of the year all of this will settle out in sediments. This process would take months. There will be layers of sediments as the conditions slowly change. The depth of the sediment layers will vary, and will be all over the planet. The world has been destroyed. It has been reorganized. There will be lasting effects that can be seen and studied. This is how the layers were formed. A world wide cataclysmic event of proportions and intensity that is difficult to comprehend or imagine. It was extreme, far reaching, extensive and comprehensive. The destruction occurred not in 40 days but continued for months.

This extreme global massive and totally inclusive destruction changed forever the face of the earth. This would account for all the features in the geologic column. There would be multiple layers of sediments. The sediments were laid down by moving water. Interfaces between layers are seen resulting from slight changes in sedimentary conditions. All the layers were created from the same event. Noah’s global flood explains all of the geologic evidence. There are no contradictions. There are no unexpected findings. The geologic column is what we would expect to see if there was a global flood.

The flood also created all the fossils with the global scale of death. The fossils in the layers are an expected finding based on a global flood. This is what is not well understood. There is a general order of the fossils in the geologic column with less complex life at the bottom and more complex life at the top. We all know this is interpreted by evolutionists as things living and dying as they evolve into more complex forms. Let’s consider the alternative. How is this explained by a global flood?

In the flood there would be vastly more simple marine life forms buried in the sediments than any other life form. This is because they are by far the most abundant, they are not very mobile, and they live at the ocean floor. As the turbulent oceans slowly settle they would fall to the bottom. They are spherically shaped with less drag and will fall first and fast. The material of the shells being composed of calcium compounds makes them denser so they will settle first and be found at the bottom. The marine vertebrates are a more advanced life form and would be expected to be in the next higher layers since they are not bottom dwellers. They live higher in the ocean and would escape burial longer. Next we would find amphibians and reptiles. These would be in the sediments from the land sliding into the sea as they became mixed together. There would not be many, if any land based plants or animals in the lower layers, and this is what we find. The first layer that would be expected to have land plants would be in the layers with the amphibians and reptiles and this is what is seen. These layers were brought to the sea from overflowing rushing rivers.

Mammals would be higher in the layers than the amphibians and reptiles because they live at higher elevations on the land. They are also more mobile and could escape burial longer. There would be nearly no birds seen. They can escape burial the longest and only a few that became exhausted would drown and be buried in sediments. This is also confirmed in the fossil record. The herding animals that live in communities would be found in large numbers together and this is again what is seen. The more complex and mobile animals would move away from rushing water and seek higher ground. Their mobility would prolong their life. In the layers that have land animals there is a progression with the more complex on top. This documents the order of survival ability, not the order of evolution. Very few humans would be seen. They would escape death by far the longest. As the last to die they would be on top, if seen at all. They would not be buried in sediments. They would drown, begin to bloat and decompose, and as the waters receded the remainders of their bodies would complete the decomposition process on the surface of the ground.

There is a general order of the fossils in the geologic column from simple to more complex. Evolutionists use this as one of their main evidences that evolution is true. However creationists expect the same result from a global flood!

Consider these facts of the fossil record. Ninety five percent of all fossils are the lowest life forms of marine invertebrates as expected. Four and three quarter’s percent of the remaining five percent of all the fossils are plant and algae fossils. Only one quarter of one percent of all of the fossils on the planet are anything other than marine invertebrates, plants or algae. Ninety five percent of this one quarter of one percent is other invertebrates. This leaves only 0.0125% of the entire and complete fossil record to include all of the more advance life forms with a vertebral skeleton, which are the vertebrates. Nearly all of these are fish and only a very few land animals ever became fossils. These facts of the fossil record support creation. The fossils were all created in the flood. They are almost all things that lived in the sea and had rapid burial. Everything that died but was not rapidly buried would not become a fossil. This rapid burial is a requirement of the fossilization process. Fossils are formed when life is buried in sediments under moving water. All of the sediments in the churning ocean buried the life in the ocean. These percentages of the types of fossils is expected if all these life forms lived at the same time and died in the same event, the flood. Evolution would not explain why nearly all the fossils are marine invertebrates, plants and algae. If the layers were formed over millions of years we would expect to see all kinds and types of life forms in the layers of the earth, not just ocean life.

The progression of complexity in the geologic column displays the ability to survive. The life forms most able to escape death and survive the longest are on top and the things living on the sea floor were buried first and are on the bottom. This progression is consistent with both the flood and evolution. It does not provide greater support to either possibility.

However, it is the distribution of the fossils and the types of fossils found that support creation and contradict evolution. Evolution cannot explain 99.75% of all the fossils being only marine invertebrates, plants and algae. This however is expected if a global flood was the source of all the fossils. The general order of the geologic column does not let us know if it was the flood or creation that made the geologic column, but it is from the details of the geologic column that we get the answer. We know:

If the details of the geologic column cannot be the result of evolution, then there was a global flood and evolution logically cannot be possible. It is a necessary condition.

We also know that the geologic column was created either by a global flood, or by evolution (but both cannot be true).

It is a published fact in peer reviewed scientific journals that recorded human history from around the globe in every language, in every culture, from every continent, all have a global flood story.

Social science and human history support a global flood and the details of the geologic column also support a global flood. You do not need to be social scientist, a world historian, or a flood geologist to be flooded with emotion thinking about:

If there was a world wide flood, then evolution logically cannot be possible.

41. EXCEPTIONS TO THE GEOLOGIC COLUMN

Evolution or creation must be able to explain everything that we see in the world for either of them to be true. The general order of the geologic column is consistent with both evolution and creation. However, there are exceptions to the usual order in the geologic column that confirm creation and contradict evolution. It is these exceptions that evolution cannot explain, yet must explain for evolution to be true.

There are two general types of exceptions to the usual order seen in the geologic column. One of these exceptions is places where layers that are ‘older’ are on top of ones that are ‘younger.’  There are many places where this type of exception is found. This can only be explained by evolutionists by the older layers sliding over the younger layers to end up on top, or the younger layers sliding under the older layers to end up on the bottom. Let’s look at each of these possibilities to see if either makes any sense (They don’t).

First, you need to know how massive these ‘out of sequence’ sections are. One example is The Lewis Overthrust which runs from Canada to Montana and is 135 miles long and 15 miles wide. Another is The Heart Mountain Thrust of Wyoming which has a corner in Yellowstone Park which is 60 miles long and 30 miles wide. The layers seen here are supposed to be 250 million years apart according to evolutionists, but the ‘older’ layer is on top of the ‘younger’ layer. Similar massive sections that are out of order are found in the Jura Mountains of Switzerland and France and others in the Swiss Alps, including the famous Matterhorn which inspired the rollercoaster in Disneyland.

Think about what is needed for these enormous sections of what is thought to be older sedimentary rocks to be lifted up and to slide over what is thought to be younger sections. The tremendous forces that would be required for this to happen cannot be explained by geophysicists. Because of the massive sizes of these sections this could not have happened from earthquakes or volcanoes. No earthquake can make a layer the size of 135 miles long and 15 miles wide slide as an isolated and single unit. A massive earthquake can make a hug crack, but never slide sections of this size over or under each other. No volcanic eruption could do it either. Even if you think this could happen, they would leave evidence of debris after the grinding and breaking and this is not seen.

The other possibility that the ‘younger’ layer slides under the ‘older’ layer has the same problems and is equally poorly explained, highly controversial, and without convincing evidence. In fact, have you ever even heard of these problems with evolution? Typically evolution is it taught as fact and the physical evidence that we see in the world that contradicts evolution is never presented. However the fact is that there are more questions than answers and so much that is unexplained by evolution.

However, these exceptions to the usual order seen in the geologic column are easily explained by creationists, and in fact are expected with a global flood. The chaos in the ocean and the settling of the sediments would have a typical pattern and arrangement, but such a global catastrophe with total annihilation would certainly be an imperfect process and exceptions to usual order would invariably occur. Creation can explain the general order and all of the details and exceptions. Evolution can only explain the general order and not the details or exceptions. Remember, creation or evolution has to be able to explain everything that is seen in the earth. This is a necessary condition.

These are some of the exceptions to the general order in the geologic column however, there are no exceptions to truth, and the truth is that you do not need to be a geophysicist or geochemist to know that:

If the exceptions in the geologic column layers are not be the result of evolution, then evolution logically cannot possible.

FURTHER STUDY

The Journal of Structural Geology addressed some of the unexplained aspects of the Lewis Thrust of Canada, which is one of these massive out of order sequences seen in the earth. The terminology is highly technical and is in the fields of geophysics and geochemistry. This research focused on what they called “Our most striking example of fault diagenesis-deformation is a profle …..in shales beneath the Lewis Thrust, Canada”

When geologists look at these problems there are more questions than answers. Here are some of the questions they have in this article after their research:

1. Is the solution to this dilemma found in the isotopic data that suggest that illites continue to recrystallize during deformation and/ or that the bulk microfabric shows lesser grain alignment in high strain regions?
2. Does recrystallization enable strain localization in illite-rich intervals, even when weaker smectite-rich horizons are only meters away?
3. Do clay minerals fracture and break and become more susceptible to reaction during faulting?
4. Does faulting induce crystal defects in the smallest phyllosilicates and leave them more susceptible to reaction?
5. Is syntectonic fluid flow required?
6. Does incorporating syndeformational clay reactions make a difference?
7. Do syntectonic reactions alter the failure properties of the sample?
8. Does a fault undergoing certain types of mineral reactions support lower shear stresses than a mineralogically static fault?
9. Thirdly, we need to understand the physical geometry of mineral constituents (microfabric) in gouge, raising questions about the relative importance for strength of individual minerals vs monomineralic aggregates.
10. Do clay minerals fracture and break and become more susceptible to reaction during faulting?
11. Does faulting induce crystal defects in the smallest phyllosilicates and leave them more susceptible to reaction?
12. Is syntectonic fluid flow required?
13. Does incorporating syndeformational clay reactions make a difference?
14. Finally, an unresolved question in our discussion is why mineral reactions occur in faults that are prohibited by kinetic barriers in adjacent rocks.

These are all direct quotes and confirm and document that there are more questions than answers, and how much is unexplained.

It is a published fact in peer reviewed scientific journals that there are unresolved questions with the exceptions to the geologic column in the earth.