Hydrologic Evidence for an Old Earth

Well, you did bring up the Magical Mythical Biggie-sized Flood in Message 5 which was your first post in this thread and you do keep saying that there was some Magical Mythical Biggie-sized Flood, but so far have never presented a model that would show that there was a Magical Mythical Biggie-sized Flood or how a Magical Mythical Biggie-sized Flood could create aquifers.Do you have a model that explains aquifers other than long periods or time and normal geological and hydrological processes?

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

I've given your views on Geology about as much thought as you have put into them.None.I've given your views on Geology about about much time as you have spent studying the subject.None.I've given your views on Geology about about much time as you have spent out in the field or teaching students.None.Repeat after me:
I. Am. Not. A. Geologist.

Actually that is the only way that it could have happened and that is why it is strong evidence against a world wide flood being the source of different layers of sediment. Oh it can't. Iridium falling from the atmosphere or settling out in water is not going to stop until it falls/settles on something solid. And what does that do to the YEC hypothesis of a world wide flood?

What do you mean we can't see it!?!?!?! What do you think scientists do all day, sit around in air conditioned buildings thinking up crazy ideas? The mechanisms for sedimentation are developed by what we see ACTUALLY HAPPENING TODAY. The crazy unbelievable stuff you are so incredulous about we can actually go outside and watch and do watch.Show me a practicing geologist who does not have a good tan.

---

Of course, biblical creationists are committed to belief in God's written Word, the Bible, which forbids bearing false witness; --AIG (lest they forget)

Do you fail to see the irony here?

Please, everyone, stop the off-topic back-and-forth.Let's see both sides discuss the evidence.If there are posts in this thread describing hydrologic evidence for an old earth, someone please post links to the most relevant two or three.If there are no such posts, then someone please post one.

---

--	Percy
	EvC Forum Director

No problem. Wherever you want to go repeating the nonsense from other threads where you were refuted I'll be there to remind you.A thread had been setup in the past especially for you to come chime in on Limestone. Limestone Layers and the FloodSo until you go support your claim that the flood could produce limestone we can consider the point, how would you say, "wild speculation."

---

Of course, biblical creationists are committed to belief in God's written Word, the Bible, which forbids bearing false witness; --AIG (lest they forget)

That's what I figured. You don't want even to bother to exercise your mind to grasp what I'm trying to say.

Nothing. It just means that the iridium was laid down on top of one of the many layers deposited by waves and currents of the flood. it's not impossible at all. But I believe Percy is trying to get this thread back to the topic. .

I believe that the geologists have pointed out to you that this is not a fact. Repeatedly in fact.

grand canyon - Google SearchHere is a link to images of the Grand Canyon. The Grand Canyon is hydrological evidence of an old earth. First the rock was formed. Then it weathered and eroded and was deposited as sediment in layers (usually with the help of water). Each layer lithified into rock. Sometimes layers were eroded away before new layers were deposited and lithified. All this in and of itself is evidence for an old earth. It takes a long time to erode, deposit, lithify, erode some more, deposit some more, lithify some more. For water to do all that requires time, lots of it. If we had not a single fossil in all of the geologic layers we would know the earth was very much older than 10,000 years just based on what we know about how water borne sediment is formed and is deposited.

Unless it occurred in a worldwide flood.And remember, there ARE fossils in the layers, and at the rate of deposition required by the Old Earth model, there's no way any of them would have been able to fossilize.

I would also argue that the presence of angular unconformaties is hydrological evidence for an old earth. By the way, this also explains why confined (artesian )aquifers have recharge areas sometimes hundreds of miles away. The recharge area is where the aquifer layer meets the angular unconformity.GEOLOGICAL TIME

No.
Many years are needed to form rock, erode rock, and deposit sediment to form successive ROCK layers.If you were somehow to get successive layers, you would not have features like angular unconformaties. Angular unconformaties can only be explained by deposition of one or more layers followed by tilting of the layers followed by erosion followed by another deposition sequence of one or more layers. One flood cannot do that. I excluded discussion of fossils because the OP was to provide hydrological evidence only. You are taking it off topic again by talking about fossilization times (I disagree anyway that this is a problem. Fossil formation is BASIC geology. Only YECs think it is a problem, not geologists.)

No, but conditions after the flood can. The idea is that all the buckling and shifting went on after the layers were settled, but maybe not completely dry. A N-S cross section of the greater Grand Canyon area (from the Grand Staircase to below the Grand Canyon) shows that the layers maintained parallel formation even when following steep slopes, which couldn't happen if the sediments were hardened {edit: before the slope formed}, or had been laid down increment by increment over a period of millions of years {edit: after the slope had formed}.{edit: Judging from this}, the magma intrusions beneath the canyon {edit: that caused the slope in question} clearly happened after the layers were all in place, and account for the unconformity at the base of the canyon. From this it appears that a block of lower layers can shift, tilt or buckle while leaving upper layers more or less horizontally intact, extreme pressure from above plus a slippery interface facilitating the differential shifting.Edited by Faith, : indicated in text