Potential Evidence for a Global Flood

Hi Jzyehoshua,It seemed a bit late for me to join the previous thread, with all the posts there to read, so I thought I'd dip into some of the posts you cited in your OP. I haven't read them all, but this bit from Message 332 stood out for me: (bold my emphasis)Congratulations for finding a source that agrees that the Coconino sandstone is most probably a dune, or aeolian, layer. Most creationists insist that it had to have been deposited by water (which is problematic for a number of reasons).What I don't get is where this claim is going next. If you've got animal prints in dry sand dunes, then when your Biblical deluge comes along it's simply going to obliterate the tracks and stir everything up hugely. I would then have to assume that since your source thinks the tracks were made by creatures running away from the flood (I can't comment on the uphill patterns since I personally don't have any evidence one way or the other), he/she must be thinking that the tracks were made in the already-lithified sandstone underneath. (?)One more thing: they are not "footprints," as your source calls them. The tracks were made by arthropods (think spiders and crustaceans). There are no skeletal fossils. Since the age of the sandstone is about 260 million years, this is not surprising -- no humans, camels or dinosaurs were crossing that desert.You will, however, also find fossilised worm burrows in the sandstone . . . and preserved raindrop impressions.This doesn't look to me like potential evidence for a global flood. Your thoughts are welcome.

The problem is that there are no layers of mud and debris in the Coconino sandstone. Just . . . sand dunes. My idea of what the authors were thinking is not very flattering, but there you go. I think they expect you to believe that a worldwide deluge that included fountains of the deep and whatever else creationists like throw in (i.e. catastrophic volcanoes, runaway plate tectonics) would be capable of preserving animal tracks in sand. And raindrop imprints, and worm burrows, and ripple marks on the dunes (which I forgot to mention) -- all of which do not appear in your source material, strangely. I had not come across this before when researching, so thank you. The arthropods seem to be mentioned much more frequently than the vertebrate tracks for some reason, but I have managed to find a bit of info about them. Apparently they are believed to be reptilian: Source
I've learned something new -- cool.I'd also like to say that it's a refreshing change to see a creationist say the following: You seem to be an open-minded, reasonable chap. I look forward to reading more of your posts.Edited by Kitsune, : No reason given.

These are old creationist tropes. Uniformitarianism and so on, yawn. How much actual science have you studied? It sounds to me like you've soaked up PRATTS (points refuted a thousand times) without checking to see whether the facts back them up. I am guessing, judging from your last post to me, that you might now be willing to do this? For example, there's a big sub-forum here called Dates and Dating. The people who talk there are not all scientists, so you'll note that this rather disproves your point about laymen accepting what they are told with no understanding. I'm sure you'd find many of the discussions accessible and educational. You would probably also find this article very helpful: Radiometric Dating: A Christian Perspective.Also, you might want to bear in mind that some of the people talking here are the ones who actually go out in the field and find evidence themselves. Coyote is an archaeologist. You come on here knowing very little about what you're saying, and essentially telling him he's wrong. Maybe it's worth listening to what he says about lack of evidence for a flood-?Edited by Kitsune, : Added link

I added a link to my previous post that I think would help dispel some of your misconceptions about dating; it addresses every point about it that you have mentioned here. But as he's told you, that's not the point. Ancient cultures who thought the world was only as big as their local area could mistakenly think that a flood covered the world. To them, it did. And this isn't the thread to discuss dating methods, but your comments show such a bald ignorance of this topic that I can understand why Coyote asked you to learn a bit more before attempting to discuss it elsewhere.Even 10,000 years back there is evidence in various places for human settlement. There were no mass extinction events at that time. The most recent ice age was ending. Can you tell us where the flood layer is? What do we look for, where will we find it? Maybe doing some research or opening a science book would help you evaluate these issues?

I will answer this question at the end of this post, which I will keep as short and simple as possible.When I think about plate tectonics, I think about paleomagnetism. This is one important way we can tell that the plates are shifting, and that some of them have moved a very long way from where they originated.Scientists have data on the time and duration of geomagnetic reversals (periods when the earth's magnetic poles flip-flopped) up to about 4 billion years ago.Here is a table for such reversals during the last 160 million years: Pangaea started to break up about 170 million years ago. I estimate that there are 100 or more reversals showing on this table.So to get back to answering your question. What would I expect to find in my search for a global flood, if all the continents had been joined at that time, and only broke up after the flood?I would expect to see evidence that the earth's magnetic field had flip-flopped over 100 times in the past 4,000 years or so. That's a reversal about every 40 years. Since that doesn't describe what is happening in the real world, you may want to go re-think your runaway plate tectonics model. There are other problems with it but we can focus on this bit for now.(ABE) The last geomagnetic reversal was 780,000 years ago. This one event took place over "several thousand years." In fact, the possibility of whether we are undergoing one now, and the effects this would have on the earth and on us, is a popular topic.Edited by Kitsune, : No reason given.Edited by Kitsune, : No reason given.Edited by Kitsune, : No reason given.