When the flood waters receded, where did they go ?

In the YEC flood model plate tectonic events instigated the flood, set the continents moving, generated much of the mountain ranges and caused the cessation of the flood.The scenario is of course designed to match mainstream observations. Before the flood the mountains were much lower so the water in the oceans/ice-caps today would have been sufficient.It is evident from mainstream science that most of the land surface of the earth (if not all of it) has been underwater! The geological column on land is primarily marine! So we explain the coming and goings of the waters the same way you do. We just claim it happened much, much more quickly than you giuys predict.In detail neither mainstream or flood geolgoists have the complete answer but it is essentially due to the plate movings and sea-floor spreading that changed the ocean basin sizes etc and the continental plate heights.

​

[This message has been edited by Tranquility Base, 07-05-2002]

Edge'Mountain ranges in various stages of erosion' could easily be due to the varying 3D topology. We got erosion of soft sediments. On top of that is 4500 years of non-flood erosion.My matter of fact pronouncement that the earth could be covered by the current amounts of water essentially comes from the fact that mainstream science has much of the earth covered at various times. If you want to quible over the last 10 or 20% that discussion will anount to predicting the exact 3D topography of the past. You can embark on that futile task if you wish. If most of the earth's surface has been covered I will simply argue the plausibility of all of it being coverable.I suspect that most vulcanism occurred during the flood but I am very uneducated on the Precambrian.Why don't you tell us which parts of the earth have no marine strata (I think someone else below has given some examples)?

JohnThe water came from the same place it did for the mainstream transgressions - the ocean! The 40 days of rain was presumably tectonically heated condensed steam. Your scenario has the same water problem and almost the same soluiton!Mainstream sceince does have the continents flat before the flood (for us Precambiran).The mainstream global sea-level curves over geological time show 1000 feet of rises.Tectonic events caused the innundations and regressions - this is the mainstream view. We just have the whole thing as quicker.What is your point about the mid-ocean ridges? I see that TC addresses the issue.

Andor.See my point to Edge - given that there exists marine strata over most of the earth's surface I will argue extremely good plausibility on this.Your Spanish example is suggestive for your POV of course. However, as you mentioned it is Precambrian and I very, very much doubt that the erosion of the entire Mesozoic and Cenozoic materials can be fully tracked.

JoeYour problem with our scenario is it's rapidity and whether it covered the entire earth.I apologize for making that statement about the Precambrian - I know very little about it except that many of the modern ranges are post that time. I will accept that there were mountains then and our argeument would probably have to be that they were upthrust during the flood.Given that there are about 6 main 1000 foot type innundations It is probably the last but that is simply a prediction. I would love to be able to study marine vs non-marine local geological columns - I plan to get around to it.Of course in our scenario it is natural to not expect this last covering to be visible everywhere. It essentially represents the post-flood surface of the earth and will have been eroded in the highlands. Lowland basins would be expected to reocrd this last covering but it will be absent in the highlands. We clearly will not expect to find worldwide strata everywhere. It will be represented in basins and shelves.So what is the mainstream view of innundaitons/regressions if they are not tectonic? Glaciers are only a minor component of the sea-level curves. I have actually read extensively on the issue and there is actually no clear consensus. But it's got to be tectonic surely?PS - I'll read your technical web site ASAP but at this stage I will simply point out that Baumgardner didn't even include accelerated radioheating in his model at that point.

​

[This message has been edited by Tranquility Base, 07-07-2002]

JohnGo have a look at the Grand Canyon. The majority of the rocks were laid by marine transgressions. There were huge epeiric seas that covered much of North America. Many mountain ranges have sea shell fossils in them.If XX% of North America was covered then the chances are that XX% of Asia was too. Water maintains a level.So it is a non-issue. Whether 90% or 100% of the earth was covered does not change the method used to do it. You are simply trying to say you know the exact 3D topography of the pre-flood world!

​

[This message has been edited by Tranquility Base, 07-07-2002]

JoeI'm quite happy to concede that the data is compatible with local flooding. However that doens't explain the lack of birds in the palezoic etc. To explain that data we need globality. Of course the data is compatible with the mainstream view too. The question is which view is the total data most compartible with?Your points do not address my point that the ultimate covering strata would be the most heavily eroded. And what does Setterfield put the mesozoic/cenozoic down to?I explain the alck of Gondwana Paleozic marine strata the same way you do - it was more elevated than North America etc! How about the Gondwana Mesozoic (at least the continents that used to be Gondwana)?

​

[This message has been edited by Tranquility Base, 07-07-2002]

JohnWhatever the final analysis, there is plenty of water to cover most of the earth as empirically observed. It is only highlands where there will be diffuiculty and many of these do have marine strata! The ones that don't could have had theirs washed away. None of us knows the exact % becasue it's probably not an issue considered most of the time. Andor cited a Spanish example earlier toady. If you don't think I've argued plausibly that's fine with me.

EdgeThe exact amount of land depends on the depth of the ocean basins and the heights of the continents given the amount of water. This amount of land has been variable due to tectonics. Why argue on the subset of issues we actually agree on?

EdgeYou'll have to tell me about syntectonic conglomerates.With a catastrophic flood I wouldn't be surprised if we don't need your relief and if we still get conglomerates.Who is arguing that the volcanic activity occurred in the last 4000 years? I put it primarily during the flood itself. It wasn't pretty. The nuclear winter cuased the ice ages post flood in our scenario.

PeterThe flood waters innundated the land b the same mechanism that it did for mainstream science. Tectonic shaping of the ocean basins and continent levels. It's a mainstream fact that our continents have been largely covered by water. No miracuous water tricks by either of us. Can you imagine continents moving around the planet and the creation of large swags of ocean floors without sea-level changes?

JohnWe all know empirically (ie fromthe strata) what happened. It's just an issue of when.

​

[This message has been edited by Tranquility Base, 07-08-2002]

EdgeYour syntectonic conglomerates could quite easily be tectonic pre-flood phenomena - we had truly rapid uplift. The flood occurred in stages, the early ones of course with the land out of water.We know that the flood if it occurred was a tectonic event. We know that the lava flows intersperse with the water laid strata. Of course most of the earth's vulcanism happened during the flood for us. It wasn't pretty.

JoeThe ark may have been sealed for more reason than one.Water and fire represent the washing and refining of the Holy Spirit. The flood itself represents baptism. It all has a purpose. The volcanic ash provides minerals for future growth just as the action of the Holy Spirit is one of fruitfullnes in the life of a Christian. What a wonderful picture of God's redeptive actions you have painted for us Joe. Our God truly is one that 'fleshes' things out in us and our land which is a picture of the 'holy ground'.

JohnThe data tells a story of marine innundations - whetehr it covered 80% or 100% of the land surface. After that it is an issue of when.