Posted on 05/17/2009 6:24:41 PM PDT by GodGunsGuts
Recently the Brits have found out what really separated them from mainland Europe: catastrophic flooding!...
(Excerpt) Read more at creation.com ...
For more, plus stunning images, also see The mega-flood that made Britain an island
* * * * * * *
Ping!
It’s more than just a story about the cataclysmic flood that cut out the English Channel. Click excerpt link for more...
Ooops...I put the wrong link in. I sent a message to the mods to get it fixed. In the meantime, here’s the correct link:
http://creation.com/images/pdfs/tj/j22_1/j22_1_12-14.pdf
If the whole of England was underwater from rainfall, and the floodwaters all receded at that same time, would it have produced the same result - all of the erosing concentrated in one place?
So it happened 444,000 years before the Creation?
Why do you assume the Evo/uniformitarian dates are correct?
It should be noted that for years, they thought the Scab-lands in the US were formed in a single flood.
Turns out there were dozens, maybe hundreds or more floods over the years.
Mega-Floods are a common pattern of very large glacial environments. We’re learning that glacial environments are nasty, unstable places, not just pretty snow and polar bears.
EXACTLY ... what happened to the "new earth".
It appears the poster only displays “facts” that are convenient to whatever “theory” he is discussing at the time ... even if those “facts” contradict what he had posted on other threads
And just think of how many uniformitarian assumptions will have to be thrown out the window based on this knowledge!
Hey, if you ever feel like exploring the circular reasoning and uniformitarian assumptions that form the foundation of the Temple of Darwin dating schemes, feel free to give me a ping.
The flooding discharged an estimated 1×106 m3 s–1 of meltwater from a pro-glacial lake located where the North Sea is today. Within the evolutionary (long-age) timeframe, the first flooding event is believed to have occurred about 425,000 years ago during the Ice Age. In my view, however, the first erosional event was the receding water of Noah’s Flood3 (~4,500 years ago, Genesis 8) cutting a deep canyon through the landbridge that then connected Europe and the British Isles, a structural ridge known as the Weald-Artois anticline made almost entirely of chalk. Then, at the end of the last episode of intense freezing (believed by evolutionary scientists to have taken place 20,000 years ago) an even larger meltwater lake formed north of the canyon which is believed to have been dammed by moraines or some other obstacle. At some point the dam breached and a flood which they claim was even greater than the previous one4 scoured away all that remained of the structural ridge, creating the English Channel as we know it today.*eyeroll* Why do scientists think the Earth is four billion years old? For the same reason that Adam had a pituitary gland: The Earth really does LOOK old. It's not a conspiracy among scientists to lie. The objective evidence from empirical, observational science alone is that the Earth is old.
But there are a billion billion billion billion billion planets, all undergoing continuing processes of development. The Earth is one of them. It looks old because planets are undergoing the same sort of development that the Earth looks like it went through at each stage of its apparent development.
If you looked at Adam's long bones, do you think they wouldn't have the same signs of having grown that people who grew from birth did? Do you think he would have a pituitary gland? Do you think his brain, nerves, blood vessles, fingerprints, ossified growth patterns would all look vaguely similar to the way ours do because ours grow? But they didn't grow that way. He was created as an adult.
I suspect that Adam looked like you or I, because he was human. It's human nature to look like people who grew to become our current sizes, who developed from infancy, whose bodily systems bear the mark of development and growth. I suspect he had nipples, as if he was at some point sexually ambiguous, just as all males are... even though he never passed through that stage of fetal development. He did because he was human, and humans do that. In other words, God created him to look AS IF he had grown from a zygote, even though he had been created as an adult.
So why shouldn't the Earth be created to look like it had developed, even though it hadn't? Some planet now looks like Earth did at 4.999998 billion years ago will look in 1000 years like Earth did at 4.999997 billion years ago. And there's a planet that looks now like Earth did 4.999997 billion years ago that will look like Earth did 4.999996 billion years ago.
I’ve seen your cut and paste crap for a while now ... mama told me never argue with an idiot they bring you down to their level and then beat you with experience ... but she went on to say that idiots were a lot smarter than religious fanatics ... oh and BTW my degree in Geophysics is from UCSC .. yours’?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.