Glenn Morton's Evidence Examined

I'm no expert and no more than a layman at geology and geography, but the way I see it, the dendritic pattern is a natural consequence of water flowing down from the hills into a river. It makes sense for rainwater flowing over a surface, from the high points down to the low.Underground, water is still going to try to flow down, through a path of least resistance - and that means flowing through cracks in the rock. And it is not very likely to appear at multiple unconnected points, either. Even assuming the reverse direction is unhelpful, since you would need the cracks to follow the dendritic pattern, - I see no reason why they should - and raise the issue of where the water went.Now Faith's scenario complicates things a bit by assuming that we don't have rock yet. But that is not going to help the pattern and it is going to make any channel collapse much more easily.

quote:

---

Oh you are wrong. If it is true that there is a natural end to evolution as I've argued many times, your dating methods are therefore wrong and your fossil order an illusion

---

Since Old Earth Creationism would still be viable that would not be true even if you had proven your case. But since you have not - and that is a fact - it is rather pointless even to bring it up. A failed argument cannot stand against solid evidence.

quote:

---

If it is true that the strata were laid down rapidly which many of my arguments and standard creationist arguments have shown, again goodbye to the supposed fossil order and to the supposed ancient dates

---

It has not been shown - and I would point out that YECs cannot even agree on which strata were laid down by the Flood. But such a demonstration should clearly be able to distinguish Flood strata from those laid down by more gradual processes.

quote:

---

I believe these things have been proved. You don't of course but if they are proved then they are proved then they do falsify the fossil order and the OE dates.

---

The order of the fossil record is a fact. It could only be completely disproved by finding large numbers of out-of-order fossils which is unlikely to say the least.Your anti-evolution argument cannot disprove the dates - even if it worked.If you could establish that most of the strata were laid down in a short period you could disprove the dates - but you would need better evidence than the dating evidence to do it and you certainly do not.So, as a matter of fact your belief is incorrect.Edited by PaulK, : No reason given.