Could Erratic Blocks give Flood Plausibility?

I'd just like to get some thoughts on this article. Many will claim there is absolutely no evidence of a flood, i'd just like to know why Erratic Blocks are not evidence of a great flood...*the article does initially say that diluvial flooding is the likely cause, but later researchers claim glaciers as the cause, it shows that there are different schools of thought and opinions from one person to another...If some of these erratic blocks have sea shells embedded into them, and have been found at hundreds of feet 'above' their original positions, does that not indicate that they could have been moved there by flooding? The Ice Age and Its Work I. Erratic Blocks and Ice-Sheets, by Alfred Russel Wallacea few quotes state" In the last century, Swedenborg, Linnæus, Pallas, De Luc, and many other eminent writers took notice of the remarkable fact that in Scandinavia, Russia, Germany, and Switzerland detached rocks or boulders were found, often in great abundance and of immense size, and of a kind that did not exist in situ in the same district, but which were often only to be discovered in remote localities, sometimes hundreds of miles away. ""The case of the boulders in the Isle of Man, which have been carried nearly 800 feet above their source...a granite block on the top of Cronebane, a slate hill in Ireland, and several hundred feet higher than any place where similar granite was to be found in situ; and he also noticed several deposits of limestone gravel in places from 300 to 400 feet higher than the beds of limestone rock which are from two to ten miles off. ""in the other localities ...the same ice-sheets which have distributed foreign erratics so widely over our country, and which in doing so must have passed over the sea-bottom, have in a few cases carried with them a portion of that sea-bottom, and deposited it with the erratics in the places where both are now found."and no, this has not come from a creationist website!Edited by Peg, : No reason given.Edited by Peg, : fixed url Edited by Peg, : fixed url again Edited by Peg, : non erratic block quotes removed

Hi Peg, two requests:

1. If you'd like to discuss erratic blocks, your excerpts from the Wallace article should only touch on erratic blocks. Please remove the excerpts that don't address the issue of erratic blocks.
   ​
2. Though written over a hundred years ago, the article is a lengthy, detailed and rather strong argument for recent ice ages, and at one point in the portion on erratic blocks he argues specifically and with evidence against a diluvial origin, so you need to explain why you think it supports your position.

Please post a note when you're done and I'll take another look.

---

--	Percy
	EvC Forum Director

1. excerpts removed2. About the Diluvial origin, the earlier researchers went for the diluvial to explain the movement, but the latter researchers chose the glacial explaination.personally i dont think either can write the other off if evidence for both explanations is available? So, could these erratic blocks make the flood plausible?Edited by Peg, : question re arranged.

Thread copied to the Could Erratic Blocks give Flood Plausibility? thread in the Geology and the Great Flood forum, this copy of the thread has been closed.