Recent Rapid Uplift of Today's Mountains (Flood Evidence)

Institute for Creation Research ^ | 02/16/05 | John Baumgardner

[DannyTN]

Ping

[Chiapet]

This is the most awesomely hilarious thing I've read in the past week. What a nutter! The repetition of the "uniformitarian" alone had me laughing myself silly. Thanks!

[Wacka]

Run on tinfoil at the supermarket!

[Strategerist]

Wow.....


Entire thing is an example of spectacular idiocy.

The really rugged mountains of the world are, in fact, relatively "young" in geological terms...only tens of millions of years.

However, they're only the latest in many sets of young, rugged mountains; the Appalachians have had several extending back hundreds of millions of years.

It's fairly routine for these mountains to be eventually eroded down, and for things to go fairly "quiet" tectonically for a long time....and then when another continent or Island Arc hits, for yet another range to be built.

Article also displays a nice creation of a uniformitarian strawman, too.

[DannyTN]

Here's what I found interesting...

"Geomorphologists who focus on this topic, on the other hand, confident their observations correspond to reality, tend to dismiss the explanations of the theorists as hopelessly out of touch with the real world."

"This disconnect between the uniformitarian theorists and uniformitarian observationalists on the issue of mountains is nicely documented in a recent book by Cliff Ollier and Colin Pain entitled, The Origin of Mountains.1 The authors are geo-morphologists who focus on field data relating to the processes such as faulting, uplift, volcanism, and erosion that sculpt mountains. In their book they repeatedly relate how geological features they and other fellow geomorphologists observe in the field fail to match the explanations of their theorist colleagues. Yet in the end they offer no suggestion as to how the disparity between the existing uniformitarian theories and their observational data can be resolved, or where the errors in the theoretical framework might lie. "

How common are these geomorphologists, and how severe is the disconnect?

I'm not surprised taht they "offer no suggestion". That can get them fired, if they aren't careful.

[DallasMike]

...while Biblical creationists interpret all but the topmost of these fossil-bearing rocks to represent the destructive work of a year-long global cataclysm that took place less than 5000 years ago.

Not this creationist nor any other creationist that I know. This is fringe thinking, if you can even call it thinking.

The current theory of evolution has plenty of problems but garbage like this makes Christians and Jews look really, really stupid in the eyes of nonbelievers.

All of the evidence points to a universe that is approximately 14 billion years old and an earth that is approximately 4.5 billion years old. These ages do not conflict in any way with the Bible. Period. The end.

[DannyTN]

I'm already aware of your compromised position on evolution. I wouldn't expect you to say anything else.

But I don't think you represent most Creationists. You certainly don't represent this one.

[balrog666]

BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHA!

Quite an amazing denial of reality!

[Strategerist]

There's a divide in the field of Geology between people out in the field banging on rocks, and people in labs and in front of computers running simulations and theorizing. The numbers of the former have been dropping, and the latter have been receiving most of the funding and taking most of the power in Geology departments. Some of the office geologists are beginning to recognize that field work needs to survive, and that those contributions are invaluable.

However, basically ALL of both groups believe the earth to be 4+ billion years old. There's a lot of argument over a lot of things at the moment, Geology is an exciting field; Plate Tectonics in general is essentially pretty much universally accepted, but a lot of the details are fiercely debated. The origin of the Rockies, so called "Hot Spots", the exact mechanism that causes plates to move....all the subjects of fierce debate.

[DannyTN]

I expect anything that supports the flood will get a certain amount of ridicule. That's ok.

I'm more interested to see if there are legitimate criticisms of what they are saying. And if there are corroborating reports.

[Strategerist]

There's no evidence whatsoever of a simultaneous worldwide flood of all land, ever, really, much less in the last 10,000 years.

Sorry.

[Publius6961]

In a nutshell, the catastrophic processes unleashed in the Flood not only deposited thousands of feet of fossil-bearing sediments on all the continents and moved North and South America some 3000 miles westward relative to Europe and Africa, but also increased the thickness of the buoyant crustal rock in the belts where high mountains now exist. When the catastrophic driving processes shut down, the zones with the thickened crust promptly moved toward a state of what is called isostatic equilibrium, resulting in many thousands of feet of vertical uplift of the surface.

Reminds me of a book report I tried to fake once as a freshman at my Catholic high school.

My Jesuit teacher's comments began with "Holy cow, man! what a specatacularly brief attempt at summarizing 3/4 of the novel!"

What "catastrophic driving forces"? It would be truly educational to know how the details of a flood can account for them.

[DallasMike]

The repetition of the "uniformitarian" alone had me laughing myself silly.

I used to be a Uniformitarian but now I'm a Baptist.

Seriously, only a tiny minority of Christians swallow this "young earth" stuff. The Bible doesn't say how old the earth is but in several places describes things as ancient or age-old using the Hebrew word olam,

Gen 49:26 Your father’s blessings are greater than the blessings of the ancient mountains, than the bounty of the age-old hills." NIV

Strong's defines the word olam as:

"properly concealed, that is, the vanishing point; generally time out of mind (past or future), that is, (practically) eternity; frequentative adverbially (especially with prepositional prefix) always:—always (-s), ancient (time), any more, continuance, eternal, (for, [n-]) ever (-lasting, -more, of old), lasting, long (time), (of) old (time), perpetual, at any time, (beginning of the) world (+ without end)"James Strong, Strong’s Hebrew and Greek Dictionaries, Electronic Edition STEP Files Copyright © 1998, Parsons Technology, Inc

If the hills were old beyond old, then how could they be only several thousand years old when these passages were written?

The Young-Earth Creationists really don't know the Bible very well at all.

[Tacis]

I might be wrong, but I'm pretty sure it's Bush's fault!

[Dog Gone]

There's no way Noah's Flood explains geology. I mean, give it up. It only becomes more apparent and more ridiculous every year.

It really is an absurd concept.

Was there a really big flooding incident in early civilization? Probably. The ancients passed it down in oral legend. Was it local? Undoubtedly. Did it almost become allegorical after generations of telling? Almost certainly.

Noah's Flood makes no sense given what we know about science today. It's a good checkpoint to see who bases reality on some fundamental faith and who uses the brain God gave them.

[DallasMike]

I'm already aware of your compromised position on evolution. I wouldn't expect you to say anything else.

Sorry, but I serve a God of reality and truth, not a God who faked the age of the universe to make it look billions of years old instead of 6,000 years old. God left evidence of his handiwork in his creation. Look at it.

[WildTurkey]

I am still confused why the Chinese writings don't mention them all being wiped out by the Flood?

[mikrofon]

My sediments exactly...

[RadioAstronomer]

The origin of the Rockies, so called "Hot Spots",

My brother followed in my father's footsteps as a geologist. This is what exactly what his thesis addressed.

OTHO, My father's PhD thesis was about uranium in the New Mexico region.