Evidence for the Flood

Please explain, because I’m not sure how to read these particular sentences another way. :upside_down_face:

It doesn’t mean I’m necessarily disagreeing with your larger point. I just can’t understand how you can say narrative is prose not poetry–then I give examples of narrative poetry that include historical narrative poetry–then you say that I’m wrong. Lol. I don’t even know what to say.

No. I’m saying that the culture before the flood was wiped out and it probably included domestication of the ostrich, then yes, perhaps descendants of Noah’s kids settled in Egypt and China and continued that cultural tradition.

You do realize that if we adjust dating for the flood - EVERY single piece of archaeological evidence of humans doing anything is by definition after the flood. A YEC time scale is not the evolutionary time scale just compressed a lot.

With no apparent break in civilization for those areas… (not to mention the civilizations in the Americas)

Where have you demonstrated a) that the existing geological timescale with multiple independent dating methods that correlate with each other are all wrong, and b) any evidence to support a 6000 year old earth (and universe) while also explaining all of the above correlating dating methods?


Yes it is, mostly. Now this gets into “creation science”, which is to real science as Malibu Barbie’s Dream House is to a real house. But you’re going to have to decide where in the geological record the flood ends, and then you’re going to have to decide what causes whatever rocks you think are post-flood. Let me know when you figure out when the Eocene happened.

But even given all that, why should all archeological evidence be post-flood? After all, Cain built a city long before the flood. Why is there no archeological or paleontological evidence of pre-flood humans? Seems like a hole in your scenario.

There are no kinds, no creation, no flood. Your bible fantasy keeps you from learning anything; it keeps you from wanting to learn anything; it keeps you wanting never to learn anything.



Shouldn’t be obvious by now that, at minimum, various extinction and catastrophic events that scientists are aware of is evidence of a global flood for some Christians? Of course no archaeological or paleontological evidence or pre-flood humans is going to survive that unless it was aboard and brought off the ark.

Unlike you, I don’t believe there are long stretches of time of human activity where we have no idea what was going on. I think humans have been littering the ground with evidence of what they’ve been doing all the time.

This is obviously not true or I wouldn’t be here discussing this with you.

So I’d love to be able to explain and interpret all of science, but I can’t :slight_smile:

You may have missed where I’ve been posting about my views on the universe for months. As far as a 6000 year old earth goes, it is supported by mtDNA molecular clock.

Sure, some Christians think it’s evidence. But are they correct? Is it really evidence of a global flood? You certainly aren’t capable of defending that position.

Why wouldn’t it survive? Why wouldn’t paleontological evidence of humans survive along with all the paleontological evidence of other species? Why wouldn’t evidence of cities survive along with all the various other intact structures, like in situ root systems and tree stumps?

Then why isn’t there any pre-flood?

You aren’t discussing. You’re not listening, just repeating assertions based on nothing.

It isn’t. That’s another thing you refuse to learn. What x-chromosome molecular clock are you referring to?


I guess I find it odd that people can’t imagine this, and I wouldn’t be good at explaining it in my own words, so this may be helpful.

This violent catastrophe would have buried billions of creatures. Due to the marine nature of the judgment, we would expect marine fossils to dominate most of the fossil record. And that is precisely what we see. In the fossil record

  • approximately 95% of all fossils are shallow marine organisms, such as corals and shellfish;
  • 95% of the remaining 5% are algae, plants, and invertebrates, including insects;
  • the remaining 0.25% are vertebrates, mostly fish;
  • 99% of that 0.25% vertebrate fossil specimens consist of only one bone;
  • most mammal fossils are likely from after the flood.2

[t]he hydraulic forces that simultaneously deposited sediments and dead animals were typically strong enough to be highly destructive. Muddy sediments moving at great speeds generate powerful shear forces. Few animal [and human] bodies would have remained intact.”4

Some have suggested that a large percentage of the bones of humans and other vertebrates (made up of calcium phosphate) swept away by the flood waters were dissolved because of the acidity of the water’s volcanic components. They were then subsequently precipitated in the phosphate-rich (limestone) beds found near the base of the flood’s fossil record.6

By contrast, much of the post-flood (and ice age) fossil record is of land animals and is rich in mammal fossils. During the early post-flood period, there was no universal and worldwide marine catastrophe but a series of local floods; treacherous tar pits, bogs and quagmires; sudden dust storms; and other catastrophes. In other words, fossilization occurred in places where mammals congregated and were caught up in some local catastrophe that quickly buried or preserved them in anoxic conditions.

Haven’t missed it at all. I just haven’t seen any actual scientific evidence put forward as of yet, especially evidence that ties together all the data we have.

The x-chromosome molecular clock doesn’t have anything to do with the geological time scale. Mutation rates in humans doesn’t affect the age of rocks, trees, stars, the universe…

But I did Google that term and found this paper as the top result, and it says the molecular clock brings the estimate of human/chimp divergence down from 10 million years ago to 6 million years ago. That’s a far cry from 6000 years.

And you say you can’t interpret all of science. I don’t expect you to. But I do expect you to get your scientific information from sources that DO take into account the rest of science via peer review. A book written for a layperson audience is not evidence, no matter how sciencey it sounds.

And I’ve seen the actual working biologists here (including Christians) tear down your molecular clock arguments, so I don’t think you’ve demonstrated that man is 6000 years old with that, let alone Earth or the universe.


Sorry I meant mtDNA. My brain isn’t working this morning. https://creation.com/images/pdfs/tj/j29_2/j29_2_3-5.pdf

I’ll look through the paper and see how they explain it. But they typically assume the timeline of common ancestor with chimps. And they assume autosomal differences are the results of mutations instead of designed diversity. I’m curious how this paper explains “life history” effects.

I don’t see how a meteor impact crater in the Yucatan peninsula is evidence for a global flood, nor do I understand how a flood would create tektites. A meteor impact melts bedrock and hurls it far into the sky where it solidifies while falling back to the Earth. They form large raindrop shaped rocks by the time they come back down to Earth. There are tektite deposits many feet thick that are associated with the K/T impact event, to name one.


Floods don’t make those types of rocks, so why would they think this is evidence for a flood?

Based on what evidence? What dating methods have been used to date the periods between human artefacts?


I am regularly reminded that scientists and at least some of the general public can have very different definitions of what constitutes evidence. In recent months I’ve had conversations with YEC friends who told me that the following kinds of “evidence” (?) led them to confident conclusions:

“Human males have one less rib than human females. That evidence inevitably leads to the conclusion that the Genesis account of the creation of Eve is true and literal.”

“The fact that people are born with a natural aversion to snakes is powerful evidence that the Genesis story of the serpent tempting Eve is true.”

“The peace I feel in my heart when I prayed about it is all the evidence I need that the Bible’s description of a 6,000 year old creation is true.”


Problem is they are all local floods which happened at widely different times in widely different locations. There are also numerous geologic formations which are physically impossible to form in a one year one time flood. Sorry but Christian geologists well over two centuries ago concluded there was no global Flood. Sadly there are always some poor mooks out there who just didn’t get the word. :slightly_smiling_face:


There’s a good article about that!


It wasn’t. It’s nonsense. What, for example, does “the marine nature of the judgment” even mean? Very little in those quotes is true, and what is true doesn’t support a flood over the standard explanation. You can probably figure out why it’s all nonsense if you think about it. Would you like to try? For example, the explanation for the absence of human fossils is that, apparently, they were dissolved by acidic waters. Quite aside from the fact that this notion is absurd both chemically and geologically, consider that it should apply to dinosaurs as much as to people. And yet dinosaur fossils are found in terrestrial deposits worldwide. Go figure.


And why are you assuming the dinosaur fossils were deposited in the flood? That’s like 1980s creationism. You gotta keep up with the times. :slight_smile:

I’m blessed. :joy: My pastor corrected our high school bible study once when someone asked the question if men had one less rib or it came up in a discussion. So no need for a poor science professor to send students counting bones.

I’m not sure I can go with that. I think that Barbie’s house and the real house are closer than creation science is to real science. :smiley:

1 Like

So now suddenly you can’t even decide on what you think was or was not killed in the flood, and can’t tell us how you could possibly even tell how or when something died?

You’re making it all up as you go. You have no coherent theory to guide your views on when or where or under what circumstance any particular organism died. You’re just rationalizing it all on the spot, and changing stuff around as you please depending on whether someone points out a flaw or inconsistency. It’s all just “flood happened, stuff died, dunno what, dunno when, dunno where, unless you ask a difficult question then I’ll mindlessly link some creationist bs without having thought about it at all”.

So were any Dinosaurs killed in the flood or not? If they were, why weren’t they dissolved in the acid that magically made human corpses be absent from the flood? How can you possibly even take that complete and utter dreck seriously?


No. Some Christians, like you, simply ignore most of the evidence.

What people say isn’t the evidence. Why do you recoil from real evidence?


Your emojis are so reflexive that by this point nobody can tell what you intend to convey by them. So what was deposited by the flood? And if the dinosaurs come after the flood, why are there no human remains associated with them?


And why are you assuming the dinosaur fossils were deposited in the flood? That’s like 1980s creationism. You gotta keep up with the times. :slight_smile:

Val, no offense, but Tim Clarey is the leading geologist at ICR and he thinks post-flood deposits start at the Pleistocene, and Pre-flood stop at the Precambrian. AiG doesn’t agree, but even they think Mesozoic is flood rock.

Similarly, Michael Oard from CMI made the BEDS (briefly exposed diluvial sediments) scenario to explain dinosaur fossil patterns during the flood.

All major YEC organizations accept the Mesozoic rocks are flood rock.