Evidence for the Flood Part 2 - SC2520

SPEAKER 1 Welcome to Science Conversations. I'm Kaysie Vokurka. Is there any geological evidence of a catastrophic global flood? Joining me to discuss part two of this topic is Dr. John Ashton. Welcome to the program, Dr. John. Hello, Kaysie. Dr. John has written a book entitled Evolution Impossible: 12 Reasons why Evolution Cannot Explain the Origin of Life on Earth. We're referring to chapter seven of this book in this program. And In the part one, we had a little bit of discussion about how erosion we would expect to see erosion between the layers of rocks if there was hundreds of millions of years in between when these layers were laid down. But we don't find evidence of that. And what's more, there's even some places where we find complete layers missing. Tell us a little bit more about that. SPEAKER 2 Yes, that's right. And this is again another challenge for geologists to explain. It's a classic example where you've got something like 100 million years of layers actually missing when we look at the sequences, for example, in parts of the Grand Canyon. And yet there's no signs of erosion occurring between these layers. You'd expect gullies and and so forth in between. I think there's another section about 14 million years. This is a major problem. And it's clearly seen in part of the wall of the Grand Canyon, where you've got, I think it's about a kilometer high, where you look and you've got all these layers, more or less parallel layers, sitting conformably on top of one another, spanning whatever it is, about 300 million years. and yet there's no erosion in between the layers. You know, it's just, you know, it's just inconsistent. And of course, if we look at that with our modern data that we get from geographers at the rate of erosion, of course, the entire, you know, Grand Canyon would erode away, you know, in about 10 million years or the continents would erode away in about 10 million years anyway. and so, you know, there's all these major inconsistencies with this long age earth model with this so uniformitarian deposition of the sediments over huge areas. It just doesn't work. There's no mechanism to spread the sediments over such large areas. We've got these evidences of whole sections representing, you know, as you mentioned, 100 million years or 10 million years. missing in places, but again, no signs of erosion. Why are the layers still conformable on top of one another? And so this is certainly a major problem if we stick to the conventional understanding of geology in these matters. SPEAKER 1 Now, another very interesting phenomenon that has been observed amongst different rock formations and layers is something which has been termed overthrusts. Can you explain what they are and the significance of them? SPEAKER 2 Yeah, sure. Okay, so not only do we have missing, you know, vast areas of time missing in the geological column without signs of erosion, we also find instances where older rocks, according to the geologic column, are found on top of younger rocks. And so, for example, a classic example is [proudly] some rocks, Jurassic rocks, that's right, in an area in Queensland that are claimed to be 180 million years old, lying conformably over the top of some younger rocks that are dated about 60 million years old. So, you know, echocaine rocks, yes. So here you've got these rocks that are 120 million years older, supposedly the rocks underneath them lying conformably on top of these younger rocks. Now, how do you get that situation? So geologists have come up with the explanation, okay, so these older rocks must have been laid down nearby, and then somehow they've been pushed up over the top. So you've got this big slab of rock that's 120 million years older, pushed up over the top of these younger rocks. The problem is, again, the layers sit conformably on top of one another, as if they've just been laid down in that sequence, not pushed over. Again, we would see expect massive signs of erosion in between the layers, because remember, these layers are supposed to have been laid down underwater, under massive flood conditions of rapid moving water, right? So you'd expect disturbances and evidences of erosion and everything if there's been left in between for a long period of time. And then the other thing is, of course, that these rocks have been pushed for quite a distance now. And I forget what the distance is. I obviously talk about in my, in my book, but. what happens is if rocks are pushed like that, then one part of a rock will slide up over the other and you'll get the effect that it'll look like tiles, you know, one section. So in other words, the rock will break up. Yeah. Also, once you're sliding rocks like this, and I know some people have said that, well, maybe they were lubricated and, you know, were able to slide that way because one of the another issue is where the energy come from to move all those rocks. SPEAKER 1 That's a lot of ground. SPEAKER 2 And they say, well, you know, maybe the Rocks slid over on, you know, under water and this sort of thing. And that is possible during the global flood that that sort of situation could happen. But it's not going to happen under a normal sort of situation because otherwise you'd have, say, massive movement of the earth crust. You would need lubrication for it to happen, otherwise you're going to get imbrication. There's whole problems where the heat energy came from. And also because enormous amount of heat would be generated from friction, and so forth. So there are massive problems, but this occurs just not in one spot like the glarus formation in Switzerland I've just talked about, but occurs in a number of areas and some of them are quite spectacular. For example, just reading from chapter seven in my book, in Arizona, the Permian rocks of the Empire Mountain, which date greater than 200 million years, overlie the Cretaceous sediments stating around 100 million years. And in this particular case, the Permian depository in deep grooves eroded in the underlying Cretaceous material. However, there are no projections planed off, and there's no gouge marks, circumsides or brecciation. And so, in fact, the deposits are described as being like the meshing of gears. So it's extremely hard to imagine how this gear-like structure could form as a result of older layers being pushed up over the other. The obvious explanation is that all these layers were laid down at the same time. And this goes for other classic example, like in the Glacier National Park of southern Alberta and Chief Mountain Mortana, which extends about 800 kilometers along the Rocky Mountains. There's an area of several thousand square kilometers where the fossil order is very difficult, different, and does not follow the conventional evolutionary pattern. In this area we find Precambrian limestone dated greater than 600 million years old, and Cambrian rock dated around 500 million years old, lying conformably over Cretaceous shales containing dinosaur fossils dated 100 million years old. And so again, geologists attempt to explain this by having massive overthrusts over a distance of 50 to 100 kilometers. But again, yeah, like how would you. SPEAKER 1 Get one slab conformably spreading over 50 to 100 kilometers? Like without breaking up, as you said, without disintegrating, without having all this friction and massive surface, like the layers in between, the surface disruption from that sort of movement. SPEAKER 2 So the obvious solution is that these were all laid down at the same time during a catastrophic global flood. It's the only explanation of this conformability between the layers like this. But this explains that the sort of extent and unreasonableness that geologists have to go to to try and explain these out of order situations, massively out of order situations. But if we have a global flood situation, where everything is mixed up anyway in different areas. It really it really fits, you know, quite quite well. SPEAKER 1 Yeah, because you would expect, you know, if there could be some variations if the whole world is like a melting pot of water that's all going in all sorts of places that you would expect there would be variation. And so that's the point. SPEAKER 2 Is that these are huge areas that are completely out of order. And they're, you you know, I've just listed three or four in the book here, but there are a number of ones that occur all around the place, as well as the missing strata in different places with, again, the rocks lying conformably over the top as if they've been laid down in that sequence. SPEAKER 1 And it strikes me that, you know, these kind of issues with what we find that, I mean, issues relating to the geologic column model and the sequencing and the timeframes and everything, It strikes me that these kind of issues are not really talked about that much. I mean, I don't hear them talked about regularly. I mean, obviously I'm not a geologist or anything, but like just the general public's perception is not really informed about some of these challenges that much. Would that be correct? SPEAKER 2 Well, that's true. And this applies to a whole, a lot of the area of origins. We've got our standard models that have been set up. And there are major problems. There's major problems with the biological evolution model. There's major problems with the dating model, which we'll talk about. There's major problems again when we look at the stratigraphy that we see in the rocks around us. And it just doesn't fit this millions of years. If we take into account erosion rates, A massive erosion occurred. I've seen just massive erosion over the past 30 years or so on the coastline near where I live, just in my short lifetime. We've seen the collapse of a number of the rock formations called the 12 Apostles off the Victorian coastline on the Great Ocean Road, Scenic Drive, that have occurred again during my lifetime. We see these massive effects of erosion occurring. And, you know, just the other day I went to the area where my daughter was married on the beach, right, next to some cliffs, a lovely setting. When I go there now, that whole area is under several metres of sand now. SPEAKER 1 Really? SPEAKER 2 It's a sand dune. SPEAKER 1 Wow. SPEAKER 2 Yeah. So it's totally changed and that, you know, she's been married 22 years, so in 22 years, that that whole coastal area has changed. It doesn't look anything like it looked when we took the wedding photos. So that's just in that short period of time. And I think this is something that people, again, don't realize. The amount of erosion that occurs and how rapidly that this can occur. The major problem that we have that we have so-called millions of years of layers lying conformably over the top of one another, without these layers in between. The fact that we have massive areas that have been covered by massive water movements, which would be associated with all sorts of types of erosion in between as well. So the model just doesn't fit this so long age model, doesn't fit what we observe in reality. People cling to radiometric dating, we'll talk about that later on. But that's the only thing they can cling to. If we didn't have that, all the evidence points to a very short time frame and a massive global flood occurring where all these extinction, all these flooding layers that spread these sediments instead occurring as five global sedimentary extinction events with water was one massive global extinction event. SPEAKER 1 Very, very interesting. And I guess if you're going to take one model, and of course, if we're taking the uniformitarian model and you're expecting just normal standard processes are involved, well, that does include erosion as well. So as you're mentioning that, that's something we can't overlook amongst all of the other evidence when we're talking about this kind of event. SPEAKER 2 And the bottom line is that the uniformitarian model doesn't work. It absolutely doesn't work. And scientists admit that, yeah, there was a catastrophe, but they don't take that into account when they're doing their timelines and working out the time. Yeah, they want a uniformitarian model to get these very long ages. Yeah. SPEAKER 1 Fascinating. We've got more to discuss in part three. So next time we're gonna continue looking at the question, is there any geological evidence of a catastrophic global flood? Be sure to join us.