Geological Stratigraphy was created by the Biblical Flood
Debate Rounds (4)
Accept the debate and post your opening argument! I'm looking forward to it!
My opponent is trying to postulate that the layers of the earth were formed via the Biblically described flood. I will clearly show, through just three of countless examples, that this is an impossibility.
The three argumets are as follows:
1. The perplection of Lungfish burrows
2. The problem of clay-pollen couplets
3. Challenge of sorted fossils
1) Lungfish burrows
Yes, yes I know the first question you have it: what the hell is a lungfish burrow and what does it have to do with anything? Well! I'm glad you asked!
Well look here! A lungfish burrow!
Basically, these fish made burrows in the ground during extremely dry periods to keep themselves from dying and drying out. Cool story, but does it have anything to do with the topic at hand?
Here's the scoop. Lungfish burrows appear all over the geological strata. Here's a peak at one such example from the Chinle Canyon:
Look at those beautiful strata with several occurrences of lungfish burrows! So, let me be clear. Lungfish need time in dry environments to make their burrows... so how on earth did they do that in the middle of a raging flood rapidly laying down layers?
They didn't. It's impossible. Moving on.
2) Clay-pollen couplets
Again, what the hell is this? Also called varved deposits, this is when seasonal layers are found in strata. In this case, pollen for spring and clay for winter in areas like river deltas. Long story short, we can find tens of thousands of these in single spots. The flood was only a couple thousand years ago, so this is an impossibility... especially when these layers are UNDER other flat layers of sediment, meaning they would have to have been laid down during the flood. How on earth did this happen?
It didn't. It's an impossibility.
3) Challenge to my opponent.
Find me a single mammal in a pre-Cambrian layer. If this flood was as massive and chaotic as described, there shouldn't be any order. Yet there is. A great deal in fact. And it points to evolution by means of natural selection, but that is an debate for a different date.
All I ask is that my opponent find me a paper describing a mammal in the pre-Cambrian layers.
2.) Clay-Pollen couplets --- I had trouble finding any scientific papers specifically talking about Clay/pollen deposits. Could you help me out and post one, I'd like to read more in depth. However, I am not disagreeing that streams (among other geological processes) still effected earth both before and after the flood. The fact that clay has been built up shouldn't be a surprise. You said "we can find tens of thousands of these in single spots." What does that mean? You make is seem as if they were deposited only every year but then they are all seen at once? This would be evidence of the flood because objects of similar densities would come together and would not be able to permeate throughout other layers of rock. Could you get a little more specific on this or post a good article that I could read? Thanks
3.) 88% of all fossils are found AFTER the precambrian. The precambrian is extremely dense, metamorphic rock that would not be lifted or separated the way sedimentary rocks can. I would only expect to see very small invertebrates in our basement rock.
Here is my challenge to you:
Why do we see dinosaur footprints preserved on layers presently exposed above ground? Did the earth just stop depositing sediment to preserve the footprints?
To be perfectly honest, not rude, I don't think my opponent understands basic geology concepts, so let me explain a little more.
Canyons were not always canyons. During times where the area is covered with water, sediments are laid down. We see this even today.
When it's dry, disconformities in the geologic record, it is eroded away. So, streams erode things (as can be clearly seen... well, anywhere). So, when lungfish are in areas of water that are not oceans (marshes, swamps, etc), but it comes to the dry season, they protect themselves by creating burrows. Sometimes these fish die in their burrows and are left there to fossilize in the mud. There was no hopping. No canyon, in fact. It was at one point a flat, water covered area.
These fish can ONLY create these burrows in muddy areas with a little time to make them. And they appear at very different times in the fossil record. My opponent is postulating these layers were made by the flood described in the Bible...
But does it make sense that these fish:
a) Were in any stable state to be able to make these burrows IN A FLOOD?
b) Had solid, yet muddy, ground ABOVE WATER to make these burrows?
c) Did this multiple times over a 40 day period, despite the fact they could never have survived it?
No. It doesn't.
Moving on back to varved layers and clay-pollen couplets
Basically, as a reiteration, if there was any confusion, there are bi-annual layers that result from seasons during the year. Pollen during springs, clay-silt deposits in the winter. There are tens of thousands of these layers in single spots. It is unlikely a global flood laid all these layers down in a few months
Unless of course the seasons changed underwater dozens of times a day.
Here's a bit more reading material
Despite the fact that my opponent did not offer me a single fossil, I will still answer his objection.
"Why do we see dinosaur footprints preserved on layers presently exposed above ground? Did the earth just stop depositing sediment to preserve the footprints?"
Sadly, my opponent gave me no specific examples, but I believe this betrays his lack of knowledge on sedimentary layer deposition and erosion.
Basically, long ago these tracks were made in the mud by dinosaurs, and they were quickly filled in by other sediments. These sediments were buried. As were those that buried those. As were those that buried those that buried those.... etc.
But then! Erosion happened! And the layers began to be carved away until... dinosaur tracks appeared! They're not at the top layer, but at bottom layers exposed by erosion.
Here's a good example if you want to read more
Done with this round.
brill301 forfeited this round.
brill301 forfeited this round.
Well... vote for Con?
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by dsjpk5 11 months ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||0||1|
Reasons for voting decision: Pro ff many times, so conduct to Con.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.