Glenn Morton's Evidence Examined

So, ammonites were reproductively isolated?How do you know this?Seems kind of odd for marine species ...

So, the evidence is missing ...Imagine that! So, these creatures hated it so much there that they burrowed into the sediment and waited to die. And lions roamed out looking for gazelles to eat and left footprints before returning to the savannah. And dinosaurs reproduced leaving behind nests of unhatched eggs.Do you like stories? Which produces a problem. How did trilobite wander so many miles out onto this sediment and then return to their 'livable' habitat so as to come back in the Devonian time? Right.And we see all kinds of tracks where nothing lives even today. Not a very efficient flood, was it? Trilobites lived for at least half of the Phanerozoic record and dinosaurs don't even show up until near the end.Sure. That makes sense. Whatever that means. Well, they must'a been there, right?So, where are the tracks?

I believe Faith's story is that those canyon were carved by underground rivers.Never mind that it's geomechanically impossible and that we have no known underground rivers that create dendritic drainage patterns.That's just how it is.Take it or leave it.

Before we go any farther, that would be 'Oklo'.

I would call that a dismissal.Typically, that would be the end of a conversation.

Hyperskepticism is seldom applied to one's own viewpoint.In fact, probably never.

A little google search turned up this diagram that shows different burrow types related to position in various water depths and various shoreline types. Just a little more support for the idea that there are no truly 'unlivable landscapes'. The lower part of the diagram shows water depth (the water colored blue) and the upper part of the diagram shows a coastline with different types of shorelines (sandy, rocky, etc.).

Here is an article to reinforce your point:Creation Science Articles, We've Done Rivers, Let's Do Canyons, Glenn MortonIt provides this seismic image of a dendritic drainage pattern formed and buried in the early Paleozoic in China, now situated 5000 meters below the modern surface. I believe that Glennn had referenced this article at some point in the past. The argument is pretty compelling for anyone who has worked in the field. Mainly, it states that to carve such a valley in limestone would take an inordinate amount of time for the YEC viewpoint.The other main point is that these patterns are recognized ONLY in subaerial environments. We do not see them in marine environments nor in karst (cave) systems.You are correct that groundwater flow is normally exceedingly slow compared to the surface. There are karst systems that can move a lot of water quickly, but they are entirely controlled by fracture systems that can be mapped and look more like a trellis pattern.My last point is that if a supposed underground river valley widens upward (which seismic data shows), it would ultimately be impossible to support a roof. Ergo, the valley has to be formed under the sky and then filled in later to form part of the geological record.This is, of course, in opposition to Faith's suggested origin of buried valleys. Edited by edge, : No reason given.

Well, first, it's fairly intuitive that streams erode slowly from our own lifetimes of observation; and it's pretty certain that this was a stream based on the morphology of the valley. But if you want an actual calculation of a downcutting rate, this reference has an example that derives a rate of for the Eel River in California: http://www2.humboldt.edu/...uts/erosion_rate_calculation.pdf They are not found anywhere. If someone has an example, we could look at it. In the meantime, we actually do see these patterns existing on the modern surface. The statement tells you.The dissolution of limestone occurs along fractures, therefor the conduits tend to follow fracture directions in the rock and not a dendritic or meandering pattern that we see in the seismic data presented earlier.Here is a map of an underground 'river' This is Lechugilla Cave in New Mexico.In the next image I have presented some preferred directions for dissolution caused by a fracture system. This is not a dendritic pattern, but a trellis pattern. That would be obvious to most people, but I'm sure that there will be some dissent on this forum.So, the conclusion is that, if we see a dendritic or meandering drainage pattern it was not formed underground as per the YEC scenario that we are discussing.

Yes, this is a dendritic drainage pattern. The fact that it is dendritic indicates that it was formed subaerially, as per my previous post.We simply do not see this pattern developed underground. The other points apply as well.In fact, this is a clearer example of a dendritic drainage pattern, younger than the earlier one, IIRC; but still buried under later sediments.ABE: Do you understand what I mean by 'dendritic'?Edited by edge, : No reason given.

Mmmm, no.We do not see such patterns that formed underground. We see them underground, but not necessarily formed underground.If you find one that is formed underground we should look at the data.

Sure.If you have a canyon, it is usually eroding downward and widening laterally. This is not sustainable underground because you have to have a roof which will eventually collapse and it won't be underground any more. No problems.Edited by edge, : No reason given.

Sure, they may look like river valleys, but they are still controlled by fractures and I know of no fracture pattern that is dendritic in morphology. Now if you had a trellis pattern, possibly, but you still have the problem of getting a roof to stand.The other factor is time, of course, because these things don't just happen over night. Not sure how that would happen unless you are no longer talking about forming a valley/canyon.

Just from the images, the size of the valleys (no supportable roof, therefore, not underground) and the apparent lack of control by fractures (as cave systems are ,,, remember the Lechuguilla Cave diagram).Beyond that there is probably other evidence available in the geological logs such as evidence for mechanical erosion (as opposed to chemical solution of limestone), Oxidation effects on a paleosurface, certain fossil data (I imagine), etc.One thing that I have avoided for purposes of this discussion is the observation that dendritic patters evolve on surfaces with little geometric anisotropy. In other words, no fractures, folds, intrusions, etc. Such things would cause an anisotropic gradient that would be reflected in stream patterns.For instance, this diagram shows various geometries imposed by geological structure on a stream pattern. The upper left is a dendritic pattern for comparison. As you can see these patterns are visually distinct. ETA: I should probably add that the more structurally controlled patterns can form underground. The dendritic pattern, however, would be hard to visualize happening.However, what we are looking at in the Glennn Morton example is dendritic. Edited by edge, : No reason given.

Yeah, there aren't too many large sandstone caves.