Hydrologic Evidence for an Old Earth

Lack of evidence is not proof but it IS evidence.
If there are no symptoms that I am ill, it is evidence that I am healthy, but not proof, because maybe I have cancer and just don't have any symptoms. But unless I am a hypochondriac I am going to assume I am healthy.Lack of evidence for a cataclysmic event means it is safe to assume that the event did not occur. This is an even safer assumption then me assuming I am healthy because cataclysmic events leave evidence. That is sort of the definition of cataclysmic.

Ok, that is good, Faith, this gives us something to address. I know a little about confined aquifers. Normally the confining layers are either a dense rock or some kind of clay layer. It is difficult for me to envision any kind of catyclysmic event that is going to producing a confining layer where one did not exist before without also having a drastic impact on the aquifer layer - essentially destroying it - at least at that particular location, which amounts to the same thing. The aquifer still might exist in other locations, but it would now be interrupted so it would not be one aquifer any more and it's ability to transport water from the original recharge area to the "end point" would be destroyed. Regardless, there should be plenty of evidence of the cataclysm. For example a magma intrusion is one thing that might create a confining layer from below but that certainly leaves evidence. Maybe someone else has some thoughts.

No, you took my quote WAY out of context. I was discussing evidence FOR a cataclysmic event. Lack of evidence FOR a cataclysmic event is evidence AGAINST that event. You can't parlay that logic into "Lack of evidence FOR a cataclysmic event IS evidence FOR a cataclysmic event." Talk about a lack of common sense! You know that leaping on my quote like that makes me wonder if deep down you know there is no evidence for the Flood. Sorry but that is how it looks to me.

Off topic but you are clearly goading me so I will address it. There is no evidence that it has ever snowed in the MidAtlantic on July 4. That is pretty good evidence that it is safe to assume that it will not snow July 4, 2006 in the MidAtlantic.

This is a science forum so your book of revelation is irrelevant.On edit: I see CK has already addressed this.Edited by deerbreh, : To give credit to CK

This is not the proper place to argue the scientific validity of the Bible.on Edit: Admin Percy has addressed all of this several posts up. Time to get back on topic.Edited by deerbreh, : Acknowledging Admin comments

In post 137 I discussed the question of what might constitute evidence for a cataclysmic event that would change the properties of a confined aquifer from what it had been in the past. This was in response to Faith's suggestion that we can't extrapolate today's flow rates to the past. Does anyone have any more insight on that?

But that would leave evidence that could be clearly identified. And many confined aquifers do not have a confining layer formed by magma. So either way there will be evidence of what happened in the past and how water flow was affected. I don't see that your position of no evidence of the past hydrology is supported in any way.