So what is your position then? He also does a good job of falsifying the common YEC claim that all of these flood legends are just tattered versions of Noah’s story.
I didn’t think he did a good job of falsifying the Noah’s flood explanation for the fossil record, that’s why I feel confident showing his video because the counter point will be equally difficult to deal with. He attacked a 1961 version of YEC – that’s like 58 years ago!
The YEC geology has also progressed since then, and the following 33-minute video argues from basic physics (such as rotational inertia) plus actual experiments that the strata are the result of fast processes, not slow ones.
There is are also geomorphological issues that Montgomery doesn’t deal with which YECs geologists (and there are at least 3 YEC universities with geology departments – Cedarville, Loma Linda GRI, Liberty). This is from a medical doctor at Loma Linda who is very sharp in making the arguments accessible:
http://www.detectingdesign.org/?page_id=203
They are found at multiple levels supposedly separated by millions of years of time. And, some of them even have central cores of clay arising from a layer of shale. How can a layer be preventing liquid water from getting through from underlying layers if it is itself still unconsolidated? What is so special about these areas that layer after layer of sediment retains the ability to squirt up into overlying layers? – to include those layers made out of silt as well as sand?Really now, it seems that a much easier explanation would be that the layers were in fact formed rapidly, one on top of the other, while they were all still soft. The pressure of the overlying wet sediments caused many of the underlying soft layers to squirt up all over the place through various weak points in the overlying soft sediments.
and then this:
obvious that the contact zones, between the various layers, are generally very flat and smooth relative to each other (though the layers may be tilted relative to what is currently horizontal or even warped since their original “flat” formation). Many of the layers extend over hundreds of thousands of square miles and yet their contact zones remain as smooth and parallel with each other as if sheets of glass were laid on top of one another (before they were warped). And yet, each layer is supposed to have formed over thousands if not millions of years? Wouldn’t it be logical to assume that there should be a fair amount of weathering of each of these layers over that amount of time? But this expected uneven weathering is generally lacking (see illustration).1 Just about all the layers have un-weathered or at best very rapidly weathered parallel and smooth contact zones. Long term erosion always results in uneven surfaces and this unevenness is only accentuated over time.
For this and other reasons, I find it way too hard to think this happened over millions of years. It doesn’t seem mechanically feasible at all for the millions of years explanation.
