Yes there are good simple answers. Nobody watched it. so any option is viable for the volcanoes or ice sheets. All one has to do is speed up, or magnify, the event. i see no problem.
just better investigation and thinking.
Define “better”.
1 Like
I see the polar ice sheets, including the now gone Nortao on the land. All within a years time about 2 or 3 centuries after the flood. enough time for flora/fauna to have migrated.
Layering is entirely a issue of mechanism. there is no way to match events with these layers except in recent special cases. Recent can be the last few thousand years or when the ice sheets etc had stopped being created by the original mechanism.
Always remember there is no evidence for glaciers to have been moving across the land. Instead all is accounted for by seeing everything created by melting ice sheets. melt quickly and created quickly.
Define investigation and thinking. All of the narrative with which you disagree IS investigation and thinking. But you dismiss it all with a mention of the YEC silver bullet “no one saw it, so it could have happened any way”…
And then you follow up with a suggestion of “investigating and thinking”… That’s what was done. Explain why what’s been done (prior investigation) is wrong.
(image source: http://www.nationalgeographic.org/photo/dome-half/)
2 Likes
Relative to the claims of glaciers having carved up the landscapr of the northern regions there is no evidence. Its not about modern glaciers under gravity moving down mountains.
Tsk. You failed to remember.
1 Like
Should have always remembered.
1 Like
Greetings, @r_speir!
If, at some point, you are in the mood to share your rebuttal, I (at least) will be in the mood to hear it. 
If you want, you could even send me a private message.
Thanks!
2 Likes
At this point, a rebuttal is easy because of the scant evidence @Joel_Duff gives. In the article he implies that YECs must accept this event as post-Flood but does not tell why. Thus the easy response is, “Well, until you offer evidence as to why, then YECs can simply claim this as a post-Creation, pre-Flood event.”
Now, later in the comments section, @Joel_Duff makes the remark, “This ash layer sits on top of 10,000 or more feet of layers of sedimentary rock. If all that rock was put down by the flood before the ash layer then the ash had to have occurred after the Flood.” But again, he does not offer evidence of this, just talk.
So here we sit. @Joel_Duff thinks he has made his case against YECs, when in fact, his case is sorely lacking and without evidence. In the meantime, this event is not a problem for YECs just because he says so.
Thus, we wait.
LOL! So your “rebuttal” is to ignore the fact the ash sits on top of 10,000’ of claimed Flood deposited sediment and go NUH-UH!
Another brilliant piece of YEC logic.
3 Likes
And if YECs must accept this as a post-Flood event? So what? Duff has already made our case for us in the article itself:
“The first people to reach India would have been descendants of the people at Babel. Therefore, these stone tools could not have been dropped at this location in India until after people had dispersed there from Babel. This sets the minimum age of this catastrophe at no more than 4000 years ago in the YEC chronology. This volcano could not have destroyed Sumatra until well after the dispersal of peoples from Babel.”
So to that we say, Thank you.
In short, there is no YEC problem here. As usual, it is only in the imagination of skeptics.
INCREDIBLE (NONBIBLICAL) EVENTS REQUIRED FOR MOUNT ARARAT
Mount Ararat is an ancient volcano, with fossil-bearing sedimentary rock on its flanks interspersed between layers of lava. Consider the sequence of events required by flood geology this form during a single flood: (1) sediments and dead animals were deposited from floodwaters; (2) the sediments turned into fossil-rich rock; (3) magma was extruded into and up through the sedimentary rock (which was miraculously shielded from significant alteration by the heat) to create an entire volcanic mountain range up to 17,000 feet in height; (4) this huge, once-melted rock mass cooled at a miraculous rate; (5) Noah’s ark landed on it – all in 150 days!
From The Grand Canyon, Monument to an Ancient Earth, p.24.
(A beautiful book with eleven contributing authors, nine of whom are evangelical Christians, and one of those is @Joel_Duff.)
4 Likes
This refutes the YEC argument about the Kaibab uplift and the Grand Canyon in 11 seconds:
1 Like
And yet somehow you think that I have made no case for the Toba event to be post flood? I am bewildered. Are you suggesting the stone tools were products of pre-flood people? That 10,000 feet of sedimentary rock were laid down by a Flood and then on top of all that sediment a cache of stone tools were laid in a single layer of sediment just below a layer of ash which was laid down in flood waters? Really?
And you also don’t seem to get the point of what I say above either. When do you think Babel took place? How does the timing of Babel fit with the YEC Ice Age?
6 Likes
r_speir Also see follow-up for additional challenges of Toba. https://thenaturalhistorian.com/2019/11/11/the-lake-malawi-sediment-chronometer-and-thetoba-super-eruption/
3 Likes
I can’t believe I’m saying this, but AIG is far more honest than you about the great difficulty ALL the ancient eruptions pose for any YEC model, including Mt Ararat.
3 Likes