By dating fossils of pollen and beetles

6854933580_2c8b688306_z

He then calculates that this would increase the total animal mass by 2-3% and decides that this amount is small enough that he can ignore it completely. It is important to take the size of animals into account when considering how much space they would occupy because the greatest number of species occurs in the smallest animals. Vermicomposting could reduce the rate of waste accumulation, but it requires maintenance of its own. The biology of spiders, 2nd ed., Oxford University Press, New York. The following objections are covered in more detail by Brown. Walt Brown's model proposes that the Flood waters came from a layer of water about ten miles underground, which was released by a catastrophic rupture of the earth's crust, shot above the atmosphere, and fell as rain. Kent Hovind proposed that the Flood water came from a comet which broke up and fell on the earth. [Johnsen et al, 1992,; Alley et al, 1993] A worldwide flood would be expected to leave a layer of sediments, noticeable changes in salinity and oxygen isotope ratios, fractures from buoyancy and thermal stresses, a hiatus in trapped air bubbles, and probably other evidence. Why did the Flood not leave traces on the sea floors? [Twenhofel, 1961] In a year of the Flood, they could have settled about half a meter. Such layers are sometimes meters in width, interbedded with sediments containing marine fossils.

However, even Jewish sources admit that this contradicts the unambiguous word of the Bible. 187] The number and size of clean birds is small enough to disregard entirely, but the Bible at one point (Gen. Woodmorappe performed such an analysis and came to the conclusion that the animals would take up 47% of the ark. How did such a small crew dispose of so much waste? The animals aboard the ark would have been in very poor shape unless they got regular exercise. Again, this has the problem of the heat from the gravitational potential energy. A year long flood should be recognizable in sea bottom cores by (1) an uncharacteristic amount of terrestrial detritus, (2) different grain size distributions in the sediment, (3) a shift in oxygen isotope ratios (rain has a different isotopic composition from seawater), (4) a massive extinction, and (n) other characters. Why is there no evidence of a flood in tree ring dating? This apparently occurs when a body of salt water has its fresh-water intake cut off, and then evaporates.

According to the Bible, Noah took samples of all animals alive at the time of the Flood. For thousands of plant species (perhaps even most plants), there is at least one animal that eats only that one kind of plant. Aside from losing its atmosphere, Earth can only get rid of heat by radiating it to space, and it can't radiate significantly more heat than it gets from the sun unless it is a great deal hotter than it is now.

If, as creationists claim, all fossil-bearing strata were deposited by the Flood, then all the animals which became fossils were alive then. How did Noah gather all those plants aboard, and where did he put them? (It is very nearly at thermal equilibrium now.) If there weren't many millions of years to radiate the heat from the above processes, the earth would still be unlivably hot.

Logical, Philosophical, and Theological Points Acknowledgements reationist models are often criticized for being too vague to have any predictive value. Genesis 6-8 can be interpreted as a homiletic story such that the "world" that was flooded was just the area that Noah knew. A stable-isotope tree-ring timescale of the late glacial Holocene boundary. [For example, see Donohoe & Grantham, 1989, for locations of contact between the South Mountain Batholith and the Meugma Group of sediments, as well as some angular unconformities.] How can a single flood be responsible for such extensively detailed layering? Eolian sandstones in Upper Triassic-Lower Jurassic red beds of the Fundy Basin, Nova Scotia.

However, many other animals, particularly land arthropods, must also have been on the ark for two reasons: Were dinosaurs and other extinct animals on the ark? Institute for Creation Research, Santee, California. Koalas, for example, require eucalyptus leaves, and silkworms eat nothing but mulberry leaves. At these temperatures, much of the atmosphere would boil off the Earth.

It defines clean animals essentially as ruminants, a suborder which includes about 69 recent genera, 192 recent species [Wilson & Reeder, 1993], and probably a comparable number of extinct genera and species. However, the ark was divided into separate rooms and decks (Gen. How was fresh air circulated throughout the structure? The ungulates alone would have produced tons of manure a day. Several people have proposed answers to these questions, but none which consider all the implications of their models. Why is there no evidence of a flood in ice core series? [Poldervaart, 1955] A deposition rate ten times as high for 5000 years before the Flood would still only account for less than 0.02% of limestone deposits. Chalk is largely made up of the bodies of plankton 700 to 1000 angstroms in diameter [Bignot, 1985]. "Creationism: Please Don't Call It Science" Creation/Evolution, 13:1 (Summer 1993), 45-49. Geology of the Himalayas, John Wiley and Sons, Ltd., New York. A., 1990, Early Pennsylvanian swamp forests in the Mary Lee coal zone, Warrior Basin, Alabama.

by dating fossils of pollen and beetles-19by dating fossils of pollen and beetles-27by dating fossils of pollen and beetles-8

They thus seem to require at least two periods of deposition (more, where there is more than one unconformity) with long periods of time in between to account for the deformation, erosion, and weathering observed. Many very tall mountains are composed of sedimentary rocks.

Thus, increasing the quantity of animals by more than about 5% would overload the ark. Here are a few things he didn't take into account: Batten, R. All the original lithosphere became subducted; the rising magma which replaced it raised the ocean floor, causing sea levels to rise and boiling off enough of the ocean to cause 150 days of rain. The imparative of non-stationary natural law in relation to Noah's Flood. Proceedings of the third international conference on creationism, technical symposium sessions, pp. Reports of the National Center for Science Education 17(3): 29-32. I suspect that both will prove insuperable difficulties for a theory of flood deposition of the geologic column and its fossils.

However, Woodmorappe makes several questionable and invalid assumptions. When it cooled, the ocean floor lowered again, and the Flood waters receded. [Jackson et al, 1990] How were sedimentary deposits recrystallized and plastically deformed in the short time since the Flood?

(Minor arithmetic errors in totals are corrected.) Woodmorappe treats many animals as juveniles; "yearling" masses are masses of those animals after one year of growth. Most flood models (including those above, possibly excepting Hovind's) deal with the water after the flood by proposing that it became our present oceans. Proceedings of the third international conference on creationism, technical symposium sessions, pp. In an oxygen-rich regime, they would almost certainly be impossible. Mineralization is the replacement of the original material with a different mineral.

"Total mass after one year" is the maximum load which Woodmorappe allows for. The earth's terrain, according to this model, was much, much flatter during the Flood, and through cataclysms, the mountains were pushed up and the ocean basins lowered. How are these observations explained by a sorted deposition of remains in a single episode of global flooding?

But even if such stories are true, what's the point? It is not enough that a ship be built to hold together; it must also be sturdy enough that the changing stresses don't open gaps in its hull. Bringing all kinds of animals together in the vicinity of the ark presents significant problems. If the animals traveled from other parts of the world, many of them would have faced extreme difficulties. Some creationists suggest that the animals need not have traveled far to reach the Ark; a moderate climate could have made it possible for all of them to live nearby all along. The last point above would have applied not only to island species, but to almost all species. How does such a neat sorting process occur in the violent context of a universal flood dropping 15 meters of sediment per day?

You must have an account to comment. Please register or login here!