Young Earth Creationism Vs. Science (Statler Waldorf Contd)

[Sam]

I think I will make a brief attempt to answer some of the points about subject areas I'm (relatively) informed in. Obviously this doesn't mean I accept the other points, I just don't have the time right now to do the reading to form a coherent opinion.

6. Large amounts of strata are tightly bent but unbroken, indicating they were laid down in short periods of time like we observed with Mt. St. Helens, rather than millions of years.

This simply shows a fundamental misunderstanding of geology. As well as depositional features such as stratification, graded bedding etc ... we also see post-depositonal features which are the result of processes operating after lithification has occured.

Folding sequences such as those you describe occur over long periods of time under high temperatures and/or pressures. This is usally regional in scale and often associated with orogenic activity or other large tectonic events.

You're comparison with Mt St Helens strata is flawed simply because of the difference in depositional environment and style. One can easily distinguish volcanic sedimentation from other forms based on lithology, texture and structure.

For your hypothesis to have any weight you would have to propose a valid mechaqnism by which beds of almost every known lithology could be both deposited and deformed in this way as we can do with the current one.

7. Polystratic fossils. Fossilized trees spanning layers of strata that are supposedly millions of years old, yet there is not more decay in the areas of the tree that would have remained unburied for all that time indicating the trees were buried quickly not slowly.

I'm pretty sure this is a non-issue, to be sure I'd need the specific example but;

These features have been well known to conventional geologists since around 1800. They don't really pose any problem to the conventional interpretation system or in sequence stratigraphy.

The problem here is that people often interpret a depositional time as; ammount of accumulation/time = rate per annum. Unfortunately this is not the case and deposition can occur in rapid events such as we see today on flood plains or in can occur very slowly.

I'm actually surprised to see you cite this as evidence. Even early 'creationist' geologists established this same conclusion; see John William Dawson etc ...

9. Complete lack of bioturbation in layers of strata that are supposedly millions of years old.

I fail to see how this is an issue?

Some beds are deposited in areas conducive to burrowing animals, some are not. We don't find bioturbation in all areas regardless of the time periods involved.

11. Horizontal and vertical erosion on coast lines happens far to quickly for the continents to be very old.

This assumes that coastal erosion has always occured at the same rates and a number of other things for which there is no evidence. You'd have to be a lot more specific about that before it could even be considered as a valid point.

15. Also, even ignoring the affects of a global flood, the accumulation rates of sediments on the ocean floors indicates they are very young.

Source?

Sediment input into the ocean basins varies based on a number of factors; primarily sea-level and the availability of sediment so again there is a false assumption of continous rates here. Also most areas of sea floor are constantly being replaced by subduction-and implacement.

18. The amounts of helium in zircon crystals indicate only 6000 years of radioactive decay has actually occurred.

This claim by the RATE group has been widely criticised for severely defficient methodology and has never been repeated.

Pretty simple model, Creation occurred around 6000 years ago. A global flood occurred around 4,500 years ago. This model is completely confirmed by the evidence. You just won’t accept it because you interpret the evidence using a worldview that already assumes this model is false.

In your opinion and based on the unsupported belief that the Bible is the inerrant word of God you mean?

Cheers

Sam