a.snelling - flood geology

7/18/2019 A.Snelling - Flood Geology

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/asnelling-flood-geology 1/149



Dr. Andrew A. Snelling

Education

PhD, Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia, 1982

BSc, Applied Geology, The University of New South Wales, Sydney,

Australia, First Class Honours, 19!

Professional Experience

• Field, "ine, and resear#h $eolo$ist, various mining companies,

Australia

• , Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation

%ANST&', Consultant resear#her and writer , Australia, 198()1992

• *eolo$i#al #onsultant, Koongarra uranium project, +enison Australia -, 198()1992

• Colla.orative resear#her and writer, ommon!ealth Scienti"ic and #ndustrial Organisation

%CS/0&', Australia, 1981)198

• rofessor of $eolo$y, #nstitute "or reation $esearch, San +ie$o, CA, 1998)2

• Staff "e".er, reation Science %oundation %later Answers in *enesis)Australia', Australia, 198()

1998

• Foundin$ editor, Creation E& Nihilo Technical 'ournal %now ournal of Creation', 1983)1998

• $esearcher and editor, $adioisotopes and the Age o" The Earth ($ATE), 199)2!

• 4ditor5in5#hief, Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference on Creationism, 28

• +ire#tor of 0esear#h, Answers in *enesis, eters.ur$, 67, 2)resent

Pro"essional A""iliations

Geological Society o" Australia *eolo$i#al So#iety of A"eri#a Geological Association o" anada*

:ineralo$i#al So#iety of A"eri#a Society o" Economic Geologists So#iety for *eolo$y Alied to :ineral

+eosits reation $esearch Society Creation *eolo$y So#iety

Dr. Andrew A. Snelling is perhaps one of the world's leading researchers in flood geology.He worked for anumber of years in the mining industry throughout Australia undertaking mineral exploration surveys and fieldresearch. He has also been a consultant research geologist for more than a decade to the Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organization and the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission for internationallyfunded research on the geology and geochemistry of uranium ore deposits as analogues of nuclear wastedisposal sites..His primary research interests include radioisotopic methods for the dating of rocks, formation of igneous and metamorphic rocks, and ore deposits. He is one of a controlled number permitted to take rocksamples from the Grand Canyon.He was also a founding member of the RATE group !adioisotopes and the

Age of "he #arth$. Andrew completed a %achelor of &cience degree in Applied Geology with irst Class Honours at "he (niversityof )ew &outh *ales in &ydney, and graduated a +octor of hilosophy in geology$ at "he (niversity of &ydney,for his thesis entitled A geochemical study of the Koongarra uranium deposit, Northern Territory, Australia. %etween studies and since, Andrew worked or si! years in the e!"loration and miningindustries in "asmania, )ew &outh *ales, -ictoria, *estern Australia and the )orthern "erritory variously as afield, mine and research geologist. ulltime with the Australian creation ministry from /012 to /001, he wasduring this time also called upon as a geological consultant to the 3oongarra uranium pro4ect /0125/006$.Conse7uently, he was involved in research pro4ects with various C&8!9 Commonwealth Scientiic and#ndustrial Research Organisation$, A)&"9 Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation$and (niversity scientists across Australia, and with scientists from the (&A, %ritain, :apan, &weden and the#nternational Atomic Energy Agency. As a result of this research, Andrew was involved in writing scientificpapers that were published in international scientiic $ournals. Andrew has been involved in extensive

creationist research in Australia and overseas, including the formation of all types of mineral deposits,radioactivity in rocks and radioisotopic dating, and the formation of metamorphic and igneous rocks,sedimentary strata and landscape features e.g. Grand Canyon, (&A, and Ayers !ock, Australia$ within thecreation framework for earth history. As well as writing regularly and extensively in international creationistpublications, Andrew has travelled around Australia and widely overseas (&A, (3, )ew ;ealand, &outh Africa,3orea, 8ndonesia, Hong 3ong, China$ speaking in schools, churches, colleges and universities, particularly onthe overwhelming scientific evidence consistent with the Global lood and the Creation.

https://answersingenesis.org/bios/andrew-snelling/#undefined








%EST &'OOD E(#DENCES

• High < +ry &ea Creatures lood #vidence )umber 9ne =========================.>

• "he *orld?s a Graveyard lood #vidence )umber "wo==========================@

• "ranscontinental !ock ayers lood #vidence )umber "hree=======================.B

• &and "ransported Cross Country lood #vidence )umber our======================.0

• )o &low and Gradual #rosion lood #vidence )umber ive =======================//

• !ock ayers olded, )ot ractured lood #vidence )umber &ix =====================./6

DEE) UNDERSTAND#N* O& &'OOD *EO'O*+

•

Can lood Geology #xplain "hick Chalk %eds ============================../>• A +eeper (nderstanding of the loodDA Complex Geologic uEEle ===================../B

• +id Feteors "rigger the lood................................................................................................................................./1

• )oahs ost *orld =========================================.6

• !apid 9pals in the 9utback =====================================.66

• Iosemite -alleyDColossal 8ce Carving Geology ============================6>

• Hoodoos of %ryce Canyon %ryce Canyon, (tah============================...6>

• #meraldsD"reasures from Catastrophe Geology ===========================...6J

• "he Geology of 8srael *ithin the Creationlood ramework of HistoryK /. "he relood !ocks/. "he prelood!ocks ==============================================..6B

• "he Geology of 8srael within the Creationlood ramework of HistoryK 6. "he lood !ocks =========.>2

• 8celand?s !ecent LFegaloodM An 8llustration of the ower of the lood =================.B/

• (luru and 3ata "4utaK A "estimony to the lood ============================..B6

• &tartling #vidence for Global loo+ ootprints and &and N+unes? in a Grand Canyon &andstoneO..........................B@

)'ATE TECTON#CS

• A Catastrophic %reakup A &cientific ook at Catastrophic late "ectonics =================B1

• Can Catastrophic late "ectonics #xplain lood Geology......................................................................................1

• Catastrophic late "ectonicsK A Global lood Fodel of #arth History ===================.12

SED#,ENTS

• &edimentation #xperimentsK )ature inally Catches (pO ========================...10

• !egional Fetamorphism within a Creation rameworkK *hat Garnet Compositions !eveal =========..0

• "hirty Files of +irt in a +ay =====================================..0J

•

"he Case of the NFissing? Geologic "ime ===============================..0B• "he irst AtmosphereDGeological #vidences and "heir 8mplications===================..00

T-E &OSS#' RECORD

• +oesn?t the 9rder of ossils in the !ock !ecord avor ong Ages ===================.//

• CincinnatiD%uilt on a ossil Graveyard ===============================../@

• Criteria to +etermine the %iogenicity of ossil &tromatolites ======================.../B

• 9rder in the ossil !ecord =====================================./6/

• ossiliEed ootprintsDA +inosaur +ilemma =============================/62

• +ating +ilemmaK ossil *ood in LAncientM &andstone =========================/6>

• "hundering %urial ========================================.../6@

• A L/J@ Fillion IearM &urprise ====================================/6B

•

N8nstant? etrified *ood ======================================./61• Iet Another 'Fissing ink' ails to Pualify ==============================./60

• *here Are All the Human ossils =================================./26

COA'

• How +id *e Get All "his Coal ===================================/2>

• orked &eams &abotage &wamp "heory ==============================.../2@

• Coal %eds and Global lood====================================../2J

• Coal, -olcanism and lood=====================================/2B

• "he 9rigin of 9il =========================================../>@

• How ast Can 9il orm........................................................................................................................................./>J



-igh Dry Sea Creatures&lood E/idence Num0er One

by +r. Andrew A. &nelling on +ecember B, 6BQ last featured &eptember /, 61

&hop )ow8f the Global lood really occurred,what evidence would we expect to

find "he previous article in this seriesgave an overview of the six maingeologic evidences for the lood. )owlet?s take a closer look at evidencenumber one.*ouldn?t we expect tofind rock layers all over the earth thatare filled with billions of dead animals

and plants that were rapidly buried and fossiliEed in sand, mud, and lime 9f course, and that?s exactly what we find.,arine &ossils -igh a0o/e Sea 'e/el8t is beyond dispute among geologists that on every continent we find fossils of sea creatures in rock layers which today arehigh above sea level. or example, we find marine fossils in most of the rock layers in Grand Canyon. "his includes the

topmost layer in the se7uence, the 3aibab imestone exposed at the rimof the canyon, which today is approximately B,51, feet 6,/256,>> m$ above sea level./"hough at the top of the se7uence, this

limestone must have been deposited beneath ocean waters loaded withlime sediment that swept over northern AriEona and beyond$.9ther rocklayers exposed in Grand Canyon also contain large numbers of marinefossils. "he best example is the !edwall imestone, which commonlycontains fossil brachiopods a clamlike organism$, corals, bryoEoanslace corals$, crinoids sea lilies$, bivalves types of clams$, gastropodsmarine snails$, trilobites, cephalopods, and even fish teeth.6"hesemarine fossils are found haphaEardly preserved in this limestone bed."he crinoids, for example, are found with their columnals disks$ totallyseparated from one another, while in life they are stacked on top of oneanother to make up their Lstems.M "hus, these marine creatures werecatastrophically destroyed and buried in this lime sediment.ossilammonites coiled marine cephalopods$ like this one are found inlimestone beds high in the Himalayas of )epal. How did marine fossilsget thousands of feet above sea levelFarine fossils are also found high

in the Himalayas, the world?s tallest mountain range, reaching up to60,60 feet 1,1>1 m$ above sea level.2 or example, fossil ammonitescoiled marine cephalopods$ are found in limestone beds in the

Himalayas of )epal. All geologists agree that ocean waters must have buried these marine fossils in these limestone beds.&o how did these marine limestone beds get high up in the Himalayas*e must remember that the rock layers in theHimalayas and other mountain ranges around the globe were deposited during the lood, well before these mountains wereformed. 8n fact, many of these mountain ranges were pushed up by earth movements to their present high elevations at theend of the lood.

The E!"lanation"here is only one possible explanation for this phenomenonDthe ocean waters at some time in the past flooded over thecontinents.Could the continents have then sunk below today?s sea level, so that the ocean waters flooded over them)oO "he continents are made up of lighter rocks that are less dense than the rocks on the ocean floor and rocks in the

mantle beneath the continents. "he continents, in fact, have an automatic tendency to rise, and thus LfloatM on the mantlerocks beneath, well above the ocean floor rocks.> "his explains why the continents today have such high elevationscompared to the deep ocean floor, and why the ocean basins can hold so much water.&o there must be another way toexplain how the oceans covered the continents. "he sea level had to rise, so that the ocean waters then flooded up ontoDand overDthe continents. *hat would have caused that to happenThere had to 0e1 in act1 two mechanisms.irst, if water were added to the ocean, then the sea level would rise.&cientists are currently monitoring the melting of the polar ice caps because the extra water would cause the sea level torise and flood coastal communities. "he creation model suggests a source of the extra water."he earth?s crust was splitopen all around the globe and water apparently burst forth as fountains from inside the earth and these fountains were openfor /@ days. )o wonder the ocean volume increased so much that the ocean waters flooded over the continents.&econd, if the ocean floor itself rose, it would then have effectively LpushedM up the sea level.Genesis suggests a source of this rising sea floorK molten rock."he catastrophic breakup of the earth?s crust, , would not only have released huge volumes of water from inside the earth,but much molten rock.@ "he ocean floors would have been effectively replaced by hot lavas. %eing less dense than theoriginal ocean floors, these hot lavas would have had an expanded thickness, so the new ocean floors would haveeffectively risen, raising the sea level by more than 2,@ feet /,JB m$. %ecause today?s mountains had not yet formed,and it is likely the prelood hills and mountains were nowhere near as high as today?s mountains, a sea level rise of over 2,@ feet would have been sufficient to inundate the prelood continental land surfaces."oward the end of the lood, whenthe molten rock cooled and the ocean floors sank, the sea level would have fallen and the waters would have drained off thecontinents into new, deeper ocean basins. As indicated earlier the mountains being raised at the end of the lood and the

https://answersingenesis.org/bios/andrew-snelling/

https://answersingenesis.org/store/product/awesome-science-volumes-1-10/?sku=90-7-745

https://answersingenesis.org/fossils/fossil-record/high-dry-sea-creatures/#fn_1

















lood waters draining down valleys and off the emerging new land surfaces. "his is consistent with much evidence thattoday?s mountains only very recently rose to their present incredible heights."he 9cean loor !ises

,arine 'ie Originally 'i/es in theOcean top$Farine creatures obviously live in theocean A$. or these creatures to bedeposited on the continents, the sealevel had to rise.The Ocean Crust #s -eated andE!"ands middle$

/$+uring the lood molten rock wasreleased from inside the earth and beganreplacing the original ocean crust. "heocean crust was effectively replaced byhot lavas. 6$%ecause of the hot moltenrock, the ocean crust became less denseand expanded. 2$"he molten rockdisplaced and pushed the original oceancrust below the continent. A$"he sealevel rose more than 2,@ feet /,JBm$ and marine creatures were carriedonto the continent, buried in sediments,and fossiliEed.,arine 'ie Remains on the

Continent bottom$"oward the end of the lood, the oceancrust cooled and the ocean floor sank. Asthe waters drained off the continents, thesea level would have fallen, leavingmarine fossils A$ above sea level on thecontinents.Conclusion"he fossiliEed sea creatures and plantsfound in rock layers thousands of feetabove sea level are thus silenttestimonies to the ocean waters thatflooded over the continents, carrying

billions of sea creatures, which were then buried in the sediments these ocean waters deposited. "his is how billions of deadmarine creatures were buried in rock layers all over the earth.

The 2orld3s a *ra/eyard&lood E/idence Num0er Two

by +r. Andrew A. &nelling on ebruary /6, 61Q last featured Farch @, 61

&hop )ow

8f the lood, as really occurred, what evidence would we expect to find "he first article in this series overviewed the sixmain geologic evidences that testify to the lood, while the second article discussed evidence number one see the listbelow$. )ow let?s take a closer look at evidence number two.After noting in Genesis B that all the high hills and themountains were covered by water and all airbreathing life on the land was swept away and perished, it should be obviouswhat evidence we would expect to find.*ouldn?t we expect to find rock layers all over the earth filled with billions of deadanimals and plants that were buried rapidly and fossiliEed in sand, mud, and lime 9f course, and that?s exactly what wefind. urthermore, even though the catastrophic geologic activity of the lood would have waned in the immediate postlood period, ongoing minicatastrophes would still have produced localiEed fossil deposits.

*ra/eyards Around the 2orldCountless billions of plant and animal fossils are found in extensive LgraveyardsM where they had to be buried rapidly on amassive scale. 9ften the fine details of the creatures are ex7uisitely preserved.




https://answersingenesis.org/store/product/gods-design-science-curriculum/?sku=40-1-323

http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/am/v2/n4/geologic-evidences-part-one

http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/am/v3/n1/high-dry-sea-creatures



http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/am/v2/n4/geologic-evidences-part-one

http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/am/v3/n1/high-dry-sea-creatures



or example, billions of straightshelled, chambered nautiloids figure 6$ are found fossiliEed with other marine creatures in aB foot 6 m$ thick layer within the !edwall imestone of Grand Canyon figure /$./ "his fossil graveyard stretches for /1miles 60 km$ across northern AriEona and into southern )evada, covering an area of at least /,@ s7uare miles 2,km6$. "hese s7uidlike fossils are all different siEes, from small, young nautiloids to their bigger, older relatives.

hotos courtesy of +r. Andrew &nelling"o form such a vast fossil graveyardre7uired 6> cubic miles / km2$ of limesand and silt, flowing in a thick, souplikeslurry at more than /J feet @ m$ per second more than // mph R/1 kmShT$ tocatastrophically overwhelm and bury this

huge, living population of nautiloids.Hundreds of thousands of marinecreatures were buried with amphibians,spiders, scorpions, millipedes, insects,and reptiles in a fossil graveyard atFontceaulesFines, rance.6 Fore than/, fossil specimens, representingmore than > species, have beenrecovered from a shale layer associatedwith coal beds in the FaEon Creek areanear Chicago.2 "his spectacular fossilgraveyard includes ferns, insects,scorpions, and tetrapods buried with

4ellyfish, mollusks, crustaceans, and fish,

often with soft parts ex7uisitely preserved. At lorissant, Colorado, a wide variety of insects, freshwater mollusks, fish, birds,and several hundred plant speciesincluding nuts and blossoms$ are buriedtogether.> %ees and birds have to beburied rapidly in order to be so wellpreserved.

Alligator, fish including sunfish, deep seabass, chubs, pickerel, herring, and garpike25B feet R/56 mT long$, birds, turtles,mammals, mollusks, crustaceans, manyvarieties of insects, and palm leaves B50feet R656.@ mT long$ were buried together in the vast Green !iver ormation of

*yoming.@)otice in many of theseexamples how marine and landdwellingcreatures are found buried together. Howcould this have happened unless theocean waters rose and swept over thecontinents in a global, catastrophic lood

At ossil %luff on the north coast of Australia?s island state of "asmania figure2$, many thousands of marine creaturescorals, bryoEoans Rlace coralsT, bivalvesRclamsT, and gastropods RsnailsT$ wereburied together in a broken state, alongwith a toothed whale figure >$ and amarsupial possum figure @$.J *hales and

possums don?t live together, so only awatery catastrophe would have buriedthem togetherO 8n order for such large

ammonites figure 1$ and other marine creatures to be buried in the chalk beds of %ritain figure J$, many trillions of microscopic marine creatures figure B$ had to bury them catastrophically.B "hese same beds also stretch right across#urope to the Fiddle #ast, as well as into the Fidwest of the (&A, forming a globalscale fossil graveyard. 8n addition, morethan B trillion tons of vegetation are buried in the world?s coal beds found across every continent, including Antarctica.E!4uisite )reser/ation

&uch was the speed at which many creatures were buried and fossiliEedDunder catastrophic flood conditionsDthat they were ex7uisitely preserved. Fany fish wereburied so rapidly, virtually alive, that even fine details of fins and eye sockets havebeen preserved figure 0$. Fany trilobites figure /$ have been so ex7uisitelypreserved that even the compound lens systems in their eyes are still available for detailed study.

igure 0D&ome fish are buried so rapidlythat fine details of fins and eye sockets havebeen preserved. hoto courtesy of +r.

Andrew &nelling.

https://answersingenesis.org/fossils/fossil-record/the-worlds-a-graveyard/#fn_1



















igure /D"his trilobite has been so ex7uisitely preserved that even the compound lens systems in their eyes are stillavailable for detailed study. hoto courtesy of +r. Andrew &nelling.Mawsonites spriggi , when discovered, was identified as a fossiliEed 4ellyfish figure //$. 8t was found in a sandstone bed thatcovers more than > s7uare miles /,> km6$ of outback &outh Australia.1 Fillions of such softbodied marine creaturesare ex7uisitely preserved in this sandstone bed.

igure //D&oftbodied marine creatures, such as this fossiliEed 4ellyfish Mawsonites spriggi $, are finely preserved in asandstone bed. hoto courtesy of +r. Andrew &nelling.Consider what happens to softbodiedcreatures like 4ellyfish when washed up on a beach today. %ecause they consist only of soft L4elly,Mthey melt in the sun and are also destroyed by waves crashing onto the beach. %ased on thisreality, the discoverer of these ex7uisitely preserved softbodied marine creatures concluded thatall of them had to be buried in less than a dayO&ome fish were buried alive and fossiliEed so

7uickly in the geologic record that they were Lcaught in the actM of eating their last meal figure/6$. "hen there is the classic example of a female marine reptile, an ichthyosaur, about J feet 6m$ long, found fossiliEed at the moment of giving birth to her baby figure /2$O 9ne minute thishuge creature was giving birth, then seconds later, without time to escape, mother and baby wereburied and Lsnap froEenM in a catastrophic LavalancheM of lime mud.

igure /6DFany fish were buried alive andfossiliEed 7uickly, such as this fish Lcaught in the actMof eating its last meal. hoto courtesy of +r. Andrew&nelling.

igure /2D"his female ichthyosaur, a marine reptile,was found fossiliEed at the moment of giving birth toher baby. hoto courtesy of +r. Andrew

&nelling. Conclusions"hese are but a few examples of the many hundreds of fossilgraveyards found all over the globe that are now welldocumented inthe geological literature.0 "he countless billions and billions of fossilsin these graveyards, in many cases ex7uisitely preserved, testify tothe rapid burial of onceliving plants and animals on a global scale ina watery cataclysm and its immediate aftermath. 9ften these fossilgraveyards consist of mixtures of marine and landdwelling creatures,indicating that the waters of this global cataclysm swept over both the

oceans and the continents.*hen we again examine the lood and ask ourselves what evidence we should expect, theanswer is obviousDbillions of dead plants and animals buried in rock layers laid down by water all over the world. And that?sexactly what we find. "he global, cataclysmic lood and its aftermath was an actual event in history."he next article in thisspecial geology series will examine in more detail the geologic evidence of rapidly deposited sediment layers spread acrossvast areas, caused by the lood waters .

Transcontinental Rock 'ayers&lood E/idence Num0er Three

by +r. Andrew A. &nelling on Fay B, 61

*hat evidence do we have that thelood, really occurred "his articleis the next installment in a series of the six main geologic evidences thattestify to the lood listed to theright $.Genesis B explains that water covered all the high hills and themountains, and that all airbreathinglife on the land was swept away and

perished. As part of the evidence of the lood, we would expect to find

rock layers all over the earth filled with billions of dead animals and plants that were rapidly buried and fossiliEed in sand,mud, and lime. And that?s exactly what we find.Ra"idly De"osited Sediment 'ayers S"read Across (ast Areas9n every continent are found layers of sedimentary rocks over vast areas. Fany of these sediment layers can be traced allthe way across continents, and even between continents. urthermore, when geologists look closely at these rocks, theyfind evidence that the sediments were deposited rapidly.Consider the sedimentary rock layers exposed in the walls of theGrand Canyon in northern AriEona igure 6$. "his se7uence of layers is not uni7ue to that region of the (&A. or more than@ years geologists have recogniEed that these strata belong to six megase7uences very thick, distinctive se7uences of sedimentary rock layers$ that can be traced right across )orth America./"he lowermost sedimentary layers in GrandCanyon are the "apeats &andstone, belonging to the &auk Fegase7uence. 8t and its e7uivalents those layers comprised of the same materials$ cover much of the (&A igure 2$. *e can hardly imagine what forces were necessary to deposit sucha vast, continent wide series of deposits. Iet at the base of this se7uence are huge boulders igure >$ and sand bedsdeposited by storms igure @$. %oth are evidence that massive forces deposited these sediment layers rapidly and violentlyright across the entire (&A. &lowandgradual presentday uniformitarian$ processes cannot account for this evidence, butthe global catastrophic lood surely can.

Another layer in Grand Canyon is the ower Carboniferous Fississippian$ !edwall imestone. "his belongs to the3askaskia Fegase7uence of )orth America. &o the same limestones appear in many places across )orth America, as far as "ennessee and ennsylvania. "hese limestones also appear in the exact same position in the strata se7uences, andthey have the exact same fossils and other features in them.(nfortunately, these limestones have been given differentnames in other locations because the geologists saw only what they were working on locally and didn?t realiEe that other




https://answersingenesis.org/geology/rock-layers/transcontinental-rock-layers/#fn_1







geologists were studying essentially the same limestone beds in other places. #ven more remarkable, the sameCarboniferous limestone beds also appear thousands of miles east in #ngland, containing the same fossils and other features.

igure /. "he chalk beds of southern #ngland above$ can be traced across rance,Germany, and oland, all the way to the Fiddle #ast.Chalk %edsK"he Cretaceous chalk beds of southern #ngland are well known because theyappear as spectacular white cliffs along the coast igure /$. "hese chalk beds canbe traced westward across #ngland and appear again in )orthern 8reland. 8n theopposite direction, these same chalk beds can be traced across rance, the)etherlands, Germany, oland, southern &candinavia, and other parts of #urope to"urkey, then to 8srael and #gypt in the Fiddle #ast, and even as far as

3aEakhstan.6!emarkably, the same chalk beds with the same fossils and the samedistinctive strata above andbelow them are also foundin the Fidwest (&A, from)ebraska in the north to"exas in the south. "heyalso appear in the erth%asin of *estern Australia.

Click to enlarge.Coal %edsKConsider another featureDcoal beds. 8n the northernhemisphere, the (pper

Carboniferousennsylvanian$ coal bedsof the eastern and Fidwest(&A are the same coalbeds, with the same plantfossils, as those in %ritainand #urope. "hey stretchhalfway around the globe,

from "exas to the +onetE %asin north of the Caspian &ea in the former (&&!. 28n the southern hemisphere, the sameermian coal beds are found in Australia, Antarctica, 8ndia, &outh Africa, and even &outh AmericaO "hese beds share thesame kind of plant fossils across the region but they are different from those in the ennsylvanian coal beds$.#vidence of !apid +epositionSlo"ed %eds o Sandstone

igure J. "he Coconino &andstone layer in Grand Canyon contains sloped layers of

sandstone called cross beds. "hese beds are remnants of the sand wavesproduced by water currents during the lood."he buffcolored Coconino &andstoneis very distinctive in the walls of Grand Canyon. 8t has an average thickness of 2/@feet 0J m$ and covers an area of at least 6, s7uare miles @/1, km6$eastward across ad4oining states.> &o the volume of sand in the Coconino&andstone layer is at least /, cubic miles >/,J16 km2$."his layer also contains physical features called cross beds. *hile the overall layer of sandstone is horiEontal, these cross beds are clearly visible as sloped beds

igure J$. "hese beds are remnants of thesand waves produced by the water currentsthat deposited the sand like sand dunes, butunderwater$ igure B$. &o it can bedemonstrated that water, flowing at 25@miles per hour >.151 kmSh$, deposited the

Coconino &andstone as massive sheets of sand, with sand waves up to J feet /1 m$high.@ At this rate, the whole Coconino

&andstone layer all /, cubic miles of sand$ would have been deposited in 4ust a few daysO&trong, fastflowing water currents move sands across the ocean floor as sandwaves or dunes igure Ba$. As the sand grains areswept over the dune crests, they fall on the advancingdune faces to produce sloping sand beds, and on topof the trailing edges of the dunes in front. "he dunesthus advance over one another, resulting in stackedsand layers igure Bb$ with internal sloping bedscross beds$.

Ayers !ock or (luru$ in central Australia consists of coarsegrained sandstone beds that are almost vertical, tilted at about 1U igure 1$. "he total thickness of these sandstonebeds, outcropping in Ayers !ock and found under the surrounding desert sands, is /1,56, feet @,@5J,/m$.J "he minerals in the sand grains are distinctive, and the closest source of them is at least J2 miles // km$ away.(nder the microscope the sand grains appear 4agged and are of different siEes igure 0$. 9ne of the minerals is calledfeldspar, and it appears to be still unusually fresh in the sandstone. "hese features imply rapid transport and deposition of allthis sand, before the feldspar grains could disintegrate or the sand grains could be worn down into round pebbles or sortedby siEe.B+istinctive < :agged Finerals within &andstone



https://cdn-assets.answersingenesis.org/img/articles/am/v3/n3/figures-2-5.jpg












https://cdn-assets.answersingenesis.org/img/articles/am/v3/n3/figures-2-5.jpg








Ayers !ock in central Australia igure 1 above$ consists of coarsegrained sandstone beds that are almost vertical, tilted at about 1V. "hedistinctive minerals in the sand grains appear 4agged and are differentsiEes igure 0 below$ when viewed under the microscope. "hesefeatures imply rapid transportation and deposition of all this sand beforeit had time to be worn smooth.

&o souplike slurries of sediment, known as turbidity currents, whichtravel at speeds of up to B miles per hour //2 kmSh$, must havetransported all this sand, /1,56, feet thick, a distance of atleast J2 miles and deposited it as the (luru &andstone beds in a matter of hoursO "his defies evolution ideology but fits with the CreationSlood

history of.&ediment layers that spread across vast continents areevidence that water covered the continents in the past. #ven more dramatic are thefossilbearing sediment layers that were deposited rapidly right across many or mostof the continents at the same time. "o catastrophically deposit such extensivesediment layers implies global flooding of the continents. "his brief article describes

4ust a few of the many examples of rapidly deposited sediment layers spread acrossvast areas.1 As the lood catastrophically swept over all the continents to form aglobal ocean we would expect the waters to deposit fossilbearing sediment layersrapidly across vast areas around the globe. And that is exactly what we findDfurther evidence that the global cataclysmic lood was an actual event in history.

Sand Trans"orted Cross Country&lood E/idence Num0er &our

by +r. Andrew A. &nelling on August 6@, 61Q last featured Fay /0, 6/

We find layers of thick sandstone around theearth. Where did the sand come from?Evidence indicates it was carried acrossentire continents by water circling the globe.Genesis 7 says that all the high hills and themountains were covered by water, and all airbreathing life on the land was swept awayand perished. After reading this passage,wouldn?t we expect to find rock layers all over the earth filled with billions of dead animals

and plants that were rapidly buried and fossiliEed in sand, mud, and lime Ies, and that?s exactly what we find.Sediment Trans"orted 'ong Distances8n previous articles we have already seen the evidence that rapidly deposited sediment layers containing rapidly buried plant

and animal fossils are found spread across vast areas, often high above sea level. )o known slowandgradual geologicprocesses in the present world are currently producing such fossiliferous sediment layers spread across continents. "houghevolutionary geologists are loath to admit it, only a global flood in which the ocean waters flooded over the continents couldhave done this.)ow it logically follows that, when the lood waters swept over the continents and rapidly depositedsediment layers across vast areas, these sediments had to have been transported long distances. 8n other words, thesediments in the strata had to come from distant sources. And that?s exactly the evidence we find.or example, in theprevious issue we discussed the Coconino &andstone, seen spectacularly in the walls of the Grand Canyon igure /$. 8thas an average thickness of 2/@ feet 0J m$, covers an area of at least 6, s7uare miles @/1, km 6$, and thuscontains at least /, cubic miles >/,B km2$ of sand./ *here did this sand come from, and how do we know"he sandgrains are pure 7uartE a natural glass mineral$, which is why the Coconino &andstone is such a distinctive buff color.+irectly underneath it is the strikingly different redbrown Hermit ormation, consisting of siltstone and shale. &and for theCoconino &andstone could not have come from the underlying Hermit ormation.





https://answersingenesis.org/geology/sedimentation/sand-transported-cross-country/#fn_1






"he sloping remnants of sand LwavesM in the Coconino &andstone point to the south, indicating the water that deposited thesand flowed from the north.6 Another clue is that the Coconino &andstone thins to Eero to the north in (tah, but the Hermitormation spreads farther into (tah and beyond. &o the Coconino?s pure 7uartE sand had to come from a source evenfarther north, above and beyond the redbrown Hermit.Grand Canyon has another set of layers with sand that must have

come from far awayDthe sandstone beds within the &upai Group strata between the Hermit ormation and the !edwallimestone. 8n this case, the sand LwaveM remnants point to the southeast, so the sand grains had to have been deposited bywater flowing from a source in the north and west. However, to the north and west of Grand Canyon we find only !edwallimestone underneath the &upai Group, so there is no nearby source of 7uartE sand for these sandstone beds. 2 "hus anincredibly long distance must be postulated for the source of &upai Group sand grains .>Other Sediment E/en Trans"orted Across the Continent

A third layer of sandstone higher in the strata se7uence gives us a clue. "he )ava4o &andstone of southern (tah, best seenin the spectacular mesas and cliffs in and around ;ion )ational ark igure 6$, is well above the 3aibab imestone, whichforms the rim rock of the Grand Canyon. ike the Grand Canyon sandstones, this sandstone also consists of very pure7uartE sand, giving it a distinctly brilliant white color, and it also contains remnants of sand Lwaves.M*ithin this sandstone,we find grains of the mineral Eircon, which is relatively easy to trace to its source because Eircon usually contains radioactive

uranium. %y LdatingM these Eircon grains, using theuraniumlead (b$ radioactive method, it has beenpostulated that the sand grains in the )ava4o &andstonecame from the Appalachians of ennsylvania and )ewIork, and from former mountains further north inCanada. 8f this is true, the sand grains were transportedat least /,1 miles 2 km$ right across )orth

America.@"his LdiscoveryM poses somewhat of adilemma for conventional uniformitarian slowandgradual$ geologists, because no known sedimenttransport system is capable of carrying sand across theentire )orth American continent during the re7uiredmillions of years. 8t must have been water over an areaeven bigger than the continent. All they can do is

postulate that some unknown transcontinental river system must have done the 4ob. %ut even in their scientific belief systemof earth history, it is impossible for such a river to have persisted for millions of years.Iet the evidence is overwhelming thatthe water was flowing in one direction. Fore than half a million measurements have been collected from /@,J/@ )orth

American localities, recording water current direction indicators throughout the geologic record. "he evidence indicates thatwater moved sediments across the entire continent, from the east and northeast to the west and southwest throughout thesocalled aleoEoic.J "his general pattern continued on up into the FesoEoic, when the )ava4o &andstone was deposited.How could water be flowing across the )orth American continent consistently for hundreds of millions of years AbsolutelyimpossibleO"he only logical and viable explanation is the global cataclysmic lood. 9nly the water currents of a globalocean, lasting a few months, could have transported such huge volumes of sediments right across the )orth Americancontinent to deposit the thick strata se7uences which blanket the continent.B"he geologic record has many examples of sediments that did not come from erosion of local, underlying rocks. !ather, the sediments had to have been transportedlong distances, in some cases even across continents. "his is confirmed by water current direction indicators in thesesedimentary layers, which show a consistent unidirectional flow. However, con4ectured transcontinental river systems couldnot have operated like that for hundreds of millions of years. 8nstead, only catastrophic global flooding of the continents over

a few months can explain the huge volumes of sediments transported across the continents. *e would expect to find that these global waters eroded sediments and transported them across whole continents to bedeposited in layers covering vast areas. *e have now seen that this is exactly what we find across )orth America, so thereis no excuse for claiming there is no evidence of a global flood. "he global cataclysmic lood actually happened in theearth?s history.






















No Slow and *radual Erosion&lood E/idence Num0er &i/e

by +r. Andrew A. &nelling on )ovember /6, 61Q last featured :uly 6/, 6/

8f the violent global lood, described reallyoccurred, what evidence would we expect tofind *ouldn?t we expect to find rock layersall over the earth that are filled with billions of dead animals and plants that were rapidlyburied and fossiliEed in sand, mud, and

lime Ies, and that?s exactly what we find."his article covers the fifth of six maingeologic evidences that testify to the lood.*e?ll look more closely at a feature that is

often overlookedDthe boundaries between rock layers. *hat should they look like, if laid down during a single, globallood"he dominant view today is that slow and gradual uniformitarian$ processes, similar to the processes we observe inthe present, explain the thick, fossilbearing sedimentary rock layers all over the earth. "hese slow geologic processeswould re7uire hundreds of millions of years to deposit all the successive sediment layers. urthermore, this popular viewholds that slow weathering and erosion gradually wore away the earth?s surface to produce its relief features, such as hillsand valleys."his view has a problem, however. 8f the fossilbearing layers took hundreds of millions of years to accumulate,then we would expect to find many examples of weathering and erosion after successive layers were deposited. "heboundaries between many sedimentary strata should be broken by lots of topographic relief with weathered surfaces. After

all, shouldn?t millions of years worth of weathering and erosion follow each

deposition9n the other hand, thecataclysmic global lood would lead us toexpect something much different. Fost of the fossilbearing layers would haveaccumulated in 4ust over one year. (nder such catastrophic conditions, even if landsurfaces were briefly exposed to erosion,such erosion called sheet erosion$ wouldhave been rapid and widespread, leavingbehind flat and smooth surfaces. "heerosion would not create the localiEedtopographic relief hills and valleys$ we seeforming at today?s snail?s pace. &o, if thelood caused the fossilbearing geologic

record, then we would only expect evidenceof rapid or no erosion at the boundariesbetween sedimentary strata.&o whatevidence do we find At the boundariesbetween some sedimentary layers we findevidence of only rapid erosion. 8n mostother cases, the boundaries are flat,featureless, and knifeedge, with absolutelyno evidence of any erosion, which isconsistent with no long periods of elapsedtime, as would be expected during theglobal, cataclysmic lood.E!am"les in *rand CanyonGrand Canyon in the southwestern (nited&tates offers numerous examples of strata

boundaries that are consistent withdeposition during the lood./ However, wewill focus here on 4ust four, which are typicalof all the others. "hese boundaries appear at the bases of the "apeats &andstone,!edwall imestone, Hermit ormation, andCoconino &andstone igure !$.%elow Ta"eats Sandstone"he strata below the "apeats &andstonehas been rapidly eroded and thenextensively scraped flat planed off$. *eknow that this erosion occurred on a largescale because we see its effects from oneend of the Grand Canyon to the other. "his

massive erosion affected many differentunderlying rock layersDgranites andmetamorphic rocks, and tilted sedimentarystrata.

hotos courtesy +r. Andrew &nelling"here are two evidences that this largescale erosion was rapid. irst, we don?t see



https://answersingenesis.org/geology/grand-canyon-facts/no-slow-and-gradual-erosion/#fn_1







any evidence of weathering below the boundary6 igure " $. 8f there were weathering, we would expect to see soils, but wedon?t. &econd, we find boulders and features known as Lstorm bedsM in the "apeats &andstone above the boundary2 igure#$. &torm beds are sheets of sand with uni7ue internal features produced only by storms, such as hurricanes. %oulders andstorm beds aren?t deposited slowly.%elow Redwall 'imestone%elow the base of the !edwall imestone the underlying Fuav imestone has been rapidly eroded in a few localiEed placesto form channels igure $$. "hese channels were later filled with lime sand to form the "emple %utte imestone. Apart fromthese rare exceptions, the boundary between the Fuav and !edwall imestones, as well as the boundary between the"emple %utte and !edwall imestones, are flat and featureless, hallmarks of continuous deposition.8ndeed, in somelocations the boundary between the Fuav and !edwall imestones is impossible to find because the Fuav imestonecontinued to be deposited after the !edwall imestone began.> "his feature presents profound problems for uniformitariangeology. "he Fuav imestone was supposedly deposited @5@6 million years ago, @ the "emple %utte imestone was

supposedly deposited about / million years later 2@5> million years ago$,J and then the !edwall imestonedeposited several million years later 2252> million years ago$.B %ased on the evidence, it is much more logical to believethat these limestones were deposited continuously, without any intervening millions of years.%elow the -ermit &ormation

Another boundary at Grand CanyonDthe boundary between the Hermit ormation and the #splanade &andstoneDis oftencited as evidence of erosion that occurred over millions of years after sediments had stopped building up .1"here is aproblem, however. "he evidence indicates that water was still depositing material, even as erosion occurred. 8n places theHermit ormation silty shales are intermingled intertongued$ with the #splanade &andstone igures % $, indicating that acontinuous flow of water carried both silty mud and 7uartE sand into place. "hus there were no millions of years betweenthese sedimentary layers.0%elow the Coconino Sandstoneinally, the boundary between the Coconino &andstone and the Hermit ormation is flat, featureless, and knifeedge fromone end of the Grand Canyon to the other. "here is absolutely no evidence of any erosion on the Hermit ormation beforethe Coconino &andstone was deposited. "hat alone is amaEing.Iet somehow a whole extra layer of sediment was dumped

on top of the Hermit ormation before the Coconino &andstone, without time for erosion. 8n places in central and eastern AriEona, almost 6, feet J/ m$ of sandstone, shale, and limestone the &chnebly Hill ormation$ sits on top of theHermit ormation, supposedly representing millions of years of deposition before the Coconino &andstone was depositedon top of them./%ut where is the evidence of the supposed millions of years of erosion at this boundary in the GrandCanyon area while this deposition was occurring elsewhere igure & $ "here is noneO &o there were no millions of yearsbetween the Coconino &andstone and Hermit ormation, 4ust continuous deposition.Conclusion"he fossilbearing portion of the geologic record consists of tens of thousands of feet of sedimentary layers, of which about>,@ feet /,2B6 m$ are exposed in the walls of Grand Canyon. 8f this enormous thickness of sediments was deposited over @ or more million years, as conventionally believed, then some boundaries between layers should show evidence of millions of years of slow erosion, when deposition was not occurring, 4ust as erosion is occurring on some land surfacestoday.9n the other hand, if this enormous thickness of sediments was all deposited in 4ust over a year during the lood, thenthe boundaries between the layers should show evidence of continuous rapid deposition, with only occasional rapid erosionor no erosion at all. And that?s exactly what we find, as illustrated by strata boundaries in the Grand Canyon."he account of the lood describes the waters sweeping over the continents to cover the whole earth. "he waters flowing right around the

earth would have catastrophically eroded sediments from some locations, transported them long distances, and then rapidlydeposited them. %ecause the waters flowed LcontinuallyM ,erosion, transport, and deposition of sediments would have beencontinually rapid."hus billions of dead plants and animals were rapidly buried and fossiliEed in sediment layers that rapidlyaccumulated, with only rapid or no erosion at their boundaries because they were deposited 4ust hours, days, or weeksapart. &o the evidence declares that the lood actually happened, being a ma4or event in the earth?s history.

Rock 'ayers &olded1 Not &ractured&lood E/idence Num0er Si!

by +r. Andrew A. &nelling on April /, 60

8f the global lood, reallyoccurred, what evidence wouldwe expect to find *ouldn?t weexpect to find rock layers all

over the earth that are filled withbillions of dead animals andplants that were rapidly buriedand fossiliEed in sand, mud,and lime Ies, and that?sexactly what we find."his articleconcludes a series on the sixmain geologic evidences that

testify to the lood."he fossilbearing geologic record consists of tens of thousands of feet of sedimentary layers, thoughnot all these layers are found everywhere around the globe, and their thickness varies from place to place. At most locationsonly a small portion is available to view, such as about >,@ feet /2B/ m$ of strata in the walls of the GrandCanyon.(niformitarian longage$ geologists believe that these sedimentary layers were deposited and deformed over thepast @ million years. 8f it really did take millions of years, then individual sediment layers would have been depositedslowly and the se7uences would have been laid down sporadically. 8n contrast, if the global cataclysmic lood deposited allthese strata in a little more than a year, then the individual layers would have been deposited in rapid succession, one ontop of the other.+o we see evidence in the walls of the Grand Canyon that the sedimentary layers were all laid down in 7uicksuccession Ies, absolutelyO"he previous article in this series documented the lack of evidence for slow and gradualerosion at the boundaries between the sediment layers. "his article explores evidence that the entire se7uence of sedimentary strata was still soft during subse7uent folding, and the strata experienced only limited fracturing. "hese rocklayers should have broken and shattered during the folding, unless the sediment was still relatively soft and pliable.





























Solid Rock %reaks 2hen %ent

&olid !ock %reaks not %ends igure /$*hen solid,hard rock is bent or folded$ it invariably fractures andbreaks because it is brittle. !ock will bend only if it is stillsoft and pliable, like modeling clay. 8f clay is allowed todry out, it is no longer pliable but hard and brittle, so anyattempt to bend it wil l cause it to break andshatter.*hen solid, hard rock is bent or folded$ itinvariably fractures and breaks because it is brittle

igure /$./ !ock will bend only if it is still soft andpliableDLplasticM like modeling clay or children?slaydough. 8f such modeling clay is allowed to dry out, itis no longer pliable but hard and brittle, so any attemptto bend it will cause it to break and shatter.*hen water deposits sediments in a layer, some water is left behind,trapped between the sediment grains. Clay particlesmay also be among the sediment grains. As other sedimentary layers are laid on top of the deposits, the

pressure s7ueeEes the sedimentaryparticles closer together and forces outmuch of the water. "he earth?s internalheat may also remove water from thesediment. As the sediment layer dries out,

the chemicals that were in the water andbetween the clay particles convert into anatural cement. "his cement transformsthe originally soft and wet sediment layer into a hard, brittle rock layer."his process,known technically as diagenesis, can beexceedingly rapid.68t is known to occur within hours but generally takes days or months, depending on the prevailingconditions. 8t doesn?t take millions of years, even under today?s slowandgradual geologic conditions.olding a *hole &trata &e7uence *ithout

racturing A+-#!"8&#F#)"&

#xamples of %ent !ock ayers igures 65>$igure 6. "he boundary between the 3aibab lateau and the less uplifted eastern canyons is marked by a large steplikefold, called the #ast 3aibab Fonocline above$.

igure 2 and >. 8t is possible to see these folded sedimentarylayers in several side canyons. All these layers had to be softand pliable at the same time in order for these layers to befolded without fracturing. "he folded "apeats &andstone canbe seen in Carbon Canyon top$ and the folded Fauv and!edwall imestone layers can be seen along 3wagunt Creekbottom$."he >,@foot se7uence of sedimentary layers in the wallsof the Grand Canyon stands well above today?s sea level.#arth movements in the past pushed up this sedimentary

se7uence to form the 3aibab lateau. However, the easternportion of the se7uence in the eastern Grand Canyon andFarble Canyon areas in northern AriEona$ was not pushedup as much and is about 6,@ feet BJ6 m$ lower than theheight of the 3aibab lateau. "he boundary between the3aibab lateau and the less uplifted eastern canyons ismarked by a large steplike fold, called the #ast 3aibabFonocline igure 6$.8t?s possible to see these foldedsedimentary layers in several side canyons. or example,the folded "apeats &andstone can be seen in CarbonCanyon igure 2$. )otice that these sandstone layers werebent 0V a right angle$, yet the rock was not fractured or broken at the hinge of the fold. &imilarly, the folded Fuavand !edwall imestone layers can be seen along nearby3wagunt Creek igure >$. "he folding of these limestonesdid not cause them to fracture and break, either, as wouldbe expected with ancient brittle rocks. "he obviousconclusion is that these sandstone and limestone layerswere all folded and bent while the sediments were still soft

and pliable, very soon after they were deposited.Herein lies an insurmountable dilemma for uniformitarian geologists. "heymaintain that the "apeats &andstone and Fuav imestone were deposited @5@6 million years ago2Q the !edwallimestone, 2252> million years ago>Q then the 3aibab imestone at the top of the se7uence igure 6$, 6J million years

https://answersingenesis.org/geology/rock-layers/rock-layers-folded-not-fractured/#fn_1













ago.@ astly, the 3aibab lateau was uplifted about J million years ago$, causing the folding. J "hat?s a time span of about>> million years between the first deposit and the folding. How could the "apeats &andstone and Fuav imestone still besoft and pliable, as though they had 4ust been deposited *ouldn?t they fracture and shatter if folded >> million years after deposition"he conventional explanation is that under the pressure and heat of burial, the hardened sandstone andlimestone layers were bent so slowly they behaved as though they were plastic and thus did not break. BHowever, pressureand heat would have caused detectable changes in the minerals of these rocks, telltale signs of metamorphism.1 %ut suchmetamorphic minerals or recrystalliEation due to such plastic behavior 0is not observed in these rocks. "he sandstone andlimestone in the folds are identical to sedimentary layers elsewhere."he only logical conclusion is that the >>millionyear delay between deposition and folding never happenedO 8nstead, the "apeats3aibab strata se7uence was laid down in rapidsuccession early during the year of the global cataclysmic lood, followed by uplift of the 3aibab lateau within the lastmonths of the lood. "his alone explains the folding of the whole strata se7uence without appreciable fracturing.Conclusion

(niformitarian geologists claim that tens of thousands of feet of fossiliferous sedimentary layers have been deposited over more than @ million years. 8n contrast, the global cataclysmic lood leads creation geologists to believe that most of these layers were deposited in 4ust over one year. "hus, during the lood many different strata would have been laid downin rapid succession.8n the walls of the Grand Canyon, we can see that the whole horiEontal sedimentary strata se7uencewas folded without fracturing, supposedly >> million years after the "apeats &andstone and Fuav imestone weredeposited, and 6 million years after the 3aibab imestone was deposited. "he only way to explain how these sandstoneand limestone beds could be folded, as though still pliable, is to conclude they were deposited during the lood, 4ust monthsbefore they were folded.8n this special geology series we have documented that, when we accept the lood as an actualevent in earth history, then we find that the geologic evidence is absolutely in harmony with the creation model. As the oceanwaters flooded over the continents, they must have buried plants and animals in rapid succession. "hese rapidly depositedsediment layers were spread across vast areas, preserving fossils of sea creatures in layers that are high above the currentreceded$ sea level. "he sand and other sediments in these layers were transported long distances from their originalsources. *e know that many of these sedimentary strata were laid down in rapid succession because we don?t findevidence of slow erosion between the strata.

DEE) UNDERSTAND#N* O& &'OOD *EO'O*+

Can &lood *eology E!"lain Thick Chalk %eds5by +r. Andrew A. &nelling on April /, /00>

'riginally published in (ournal of Creation )* no ! +,pril !--$/ !!0!%.A0stract1y working from what is known to occur today* even if rare and catastrophic by today2s standards* we can realistically calculate production of thick chalk beds within the conditions of the lood.Fost people would have heard of, or seen whether in person or in photographs$, the famous *hite Cliffs of +over insouthern #ngland. "he same beds of chalk are also found along the coast of rance on the other side of the #nglishChannel. "he chalk beds extend inland across #ngland and northern rance, being found as far north and west as the

Antrim Coast and ad4oining areas of )orthern 8reland. #xtensive chalk beds are also found in )orth America, through Alabama, Fississippi and "ennessee the &elma Chalk$, in )ebraska and ad4oining states the )iobrara Chalk$, and in3ansas the ort Hayes Chalk$./"he atin word for chalk is creta. "hose familiar with the geological column and its

evolutionary timescale will recogniEe this as the name for one of its periodsDthe Cretaceous. %ecause most geologistsbelieve in the geological evolution of the earth?s strata and features over millions of years, they have linked all thesescattered chalk beds across the world into this socalled Nchalk age?, that is, a supposedly great period of millions of years of chalk bed formation.So 2hat #s Chalk5orous, relatively soft, finetextured and somewhat friable, chalk normally is white and consists almost wholly of calciumcarbonate as the common mineral calcite. 8t is thus a type of limestone, and a very pure one at that. "he calcium carbonatecontent of rench chalk varies between 0 and 01W, and the 3ansas chalk is 11501W calcium carbonate average0>W$.6 (nder the microscope, chalk consists of the tiny shells called tests$ of countless billions of microorganismscomposed of clear calcite set in a structureless matrix of finegrained calcium carbonate microcrystalline calcite$. "he twoma4or microorganisms whose remains are thus fossilised in chalk are foraminifera and the spikes and cells of calcareousalgX known as coccoliths and rhabdoliths.How then does chalk form Fost geologists believe that Nthe present is the key tothe past? and so look to see where such microorganisms live today, and how and where their remains accumulate. "heforaminifera found fossilised in chalk are of a type called the planktonic foraminifera, because they live floating in the upper

/56 metres of the open seas. "he brown algX that produce tiny washershaped coccoliths are known ascoccolithophores, and these also float in the upper section of the open seas."he oceans today cover almost B/W of theearth?s surface. About 6W of the oceans lie over the shallower continental margins, while the rest covers the deeper oceanfloor, which is blanketed by a variety of sediments. Amongst these are what are known as ooEes, socalled because more

than 2W of the sediment consists of the shells of microorganisms such as foraminifera andcoccolithophores.2 8ndeed, about half of the deep oceanfloor is covered by lightcoloured calcareous calciumcarbonaterich$ ooEe generally down to depths of >,@5@, metres. %elow these depths the calciumcarbonate shells are dissolved. #ven so, this still meansthat about one 7uarter of the surface of the earth iscovered by these shell D rich deposits produced bythese microscopic plants and animals living near thesurface of the ocean.Geologists believe that theseooEes form as a result of these microorganisms dying,with the calcium carbonate shells and coccoliths fallingslowly down to accumulate on the ocean floor. 8t hasbeen estimated that a large /@ micron ./@mm or .J inch$ wide shell of a foraminifer may take as longas / days to sink to the bottom of the ocean, whereas

smaller ones would probably take much longer. At the same time, many such shells may dissolve before they even reach





















the ocean floor. )evertheless, it is via this slow accumulation of calcareous ooEe on the deep ocean floor that geologistsbelieve chalk beds originally formed.

Ficrofossils and microcrystalline calciteDCretaceous chalk, %allintoy Harbour, Antrim Coast, )orthern 8reland under themicroscope Jx$ photoK +r. Andrew &nelling$

The 6)ro0lems3 &or &lood *eology"his is the point where critics, and not only those in the evolutionist camp, have said that it is 4ust not possible to explain theformation of the chalk beds in the *hite Cliffs of +over via the geological action of the lood lood geology$. "he deepseasediments on the ocean floor today average a thickness of about >@ metres almost /,@ feet$, but this can vary fromocean to ocean and also depends on proximity to land.> "he sediment covering the acific 9cean %asin ranges from 2 toJ metres thick, and that in the Atlantic is about /, metres thick. 8n the midacific the sediment cover may be less than

/ metres thick. "hese differences in thicknesses of course reflect differences in accumulation rates, owing to variations inthe sediments brought in by rivers and airborne dust, and the production of organic debris within the ocean surface waters."he latter is in turn affected by factors such as productivity rates for the microorganisms in 7uestion, the nutrient supply andthe ocean water concentrations of calcium carbonate. )evertheless, it is on the deep ocean floor, well away from land, thatthe purest calcareous ooEe has accumulated which would be regarded as the presentday forerunner to a chalk bed, andreported accumulation rates there range from /51cm per /, years for calcareous ooEe dominated by foraminifera and 65/ cm per /, years for ooEes dominated by coccoliths. @)ow the chalk beds of southern #ngland are estimated to bearound >@ metres about /,260 feet$ thick and are said to span the complete duration of the socalled ate Cretaceousgeological period,J estimated by evolutionists to account for between 2 and 2@ million years of evolutionary time. A simplecalculation reveals that the average rate of chalk accumulation therefore over this time period is between /./J and /.2@cmper l, years, right at the lower end of today?s accumulation rates 7uoted above. "hus the evolutionary geologists feelvindicated, and the critics insist that there is too much chalk to have been originally deposited as calcareous ooEe by thelood.%ut that is not the only challenge creationists face concerning deposition of chalk beds during the lood. &chadewaldhas insisted that if all of the fossilised animals, including the foraminifera and coccolithophores whose remains are found in

chalk, could be resurrected, then they would cover the entire planet to a depth of at least >@cm /1 inches$, and what couldthey all possibly have eatenB He states that the laws of thermodynamics prohibit the earth from supporting that muchanimal biomass, and with so many animals trying to get their energy from the sun the available solar energy would notnearly be sufficient. ongage creationist Hayward agrees with all these problems.1#ven creationist Glenn Forton has posedsimilar problems, suggesting that even though the Austin Chalk upon which the city of +allas "exas$ is built is little morethan several hundred feet upwards of / metres$ of dead microscopic animals, when all the other chalk beds around theworld are also taken into account, the number of microorganisms involved could not possibly have all lived on the earth atthe same time to thus be buried during the lood.0urthermore, he insists that even apart from the organic problem, there isthe 7uantity of carbon dioxide C96$ necessary to have enabled the production of all the calcium carbonate by themicroorganisms whose calcareous remains are now entombed in the chalk beds. Considering all the other limestones too,he says, there 4ust couldn?t have been enough C9 6 in the atmosphere at the time of the lood to account for all thesecalcium carbonate deposits.Creationist Res"onses

"wo creationists have done much to provide asatisfactory response to these ob4ections

against lood geologyDgeologists +r Ariel!oth of the Geoscience !esearch 8nstituteoma inda, California$ and :ohn*oodmorappe. %oth agree that biologicalproductivity does not appear to be the limitingfactor. !oth/ suggests that in the surfacelayers of the ocean these carbonatesecretingorganisms at optimum production rates couldproduce all the calcareous ooEe on the oceanfloor today in probably less than /, or 6,years. He argues that, if a high concentrationof foraminifera of / per litre of ocean water were assumed,// a doubling time of 2.J@ days,and an average of /, foraminifera per

gram of carbonate,/6

the top 6 metres of theocean would produce 6 grams of calciumcarbonate per s7uare centimetre per year, or at

an average sediment density of 6 grams per cubic centimetre, / metres in /, years. &ome of this calcium carbonatewould be dissolved at depth so the time factor would probably need to be increased to compensate for this, but if there wasincreased carbonate input to the ocean waters from other sources then this would cancel out. Also, reproduction of foraminifera below the top 6 metres of ocean water would likewise tend to shorten the time re7uired.Coccolithophores onthe other hand reproduce faster than foraminifera and are amongst the fastest growing planktonic algX, /2 sometimesmultiplying at the rate of 6.6@ divisions per day. !oth suggests that if we assume an average coccolith has a volume of 66 x/ 5/6 cubic centimetres, an average weight of J x / /6 grams per coccolith,/>6 coccoliths produced per coccolithophore,/2 x /J coccolithophores per litre of ocean water,/@ a dividing rate of two times per day and a density of 6 grams per cubiccentimetre for the sediments produced, one gets a potential production rate of @>cm over 6/ inches$ of calcium carbonateper year from the top / metres 2@ feet$ of the ocean. At this rate it is possible to produce an average / metre 2@feet$ thickness of coccoliths as calcareous ooEe on the ocean floor in less than 6 years. Again, other factors could bebrought into the calculations to either lengthen or shorten the time, including dissolving of the carbonate, light reduction dueto the heavy concentration of these microorganisms, and reproducing coccoliths below the top / metres of ocean surface,but the net result again is to essentially affirm the rate 4ust calculated.*oodmorappe/J approached the matter in a differentway. Assuming that all limestones in the (pper Cretaceous and "ertiary divisions of the geological column are all chalks, hefound that these accounted for /B.@ million cubic kilometres of rock. 9f course, not all these limestones are chalks, but heused this figure to make the Nproblem? more difficult, so as to get the most conservative calculation results.$ "hen using!oth?s calculation of a / metre thickness of coccoliths produced every 6 years, *oodmorappe found that one wouldonly need 6/./ million s7uare kilometres or >./W of the earth ?s surface to be coccolithproducing seas to supply the /B.@



million cubic kilometres of coccoliths in /,J/,B years, that is, in the prelood era. He also made further calculations bystarting again from the basic parameters re7uired, and found that he could reduce that figure to only /6.@ million s7uarekilometres of ocean area or 6.@W of the earth?s surface to produce the necessary exaggerated estimate of /B.@ million cubickilometres of coccoliths.

&canning electron microscope &#F$ image of coccoliths in the Cretaceous chalk, %righton, #ngland photoK +r :oachim&cheven$6%looms3 During The &lood

As helpful as they are, these calculations overlook one ma4or relevant issue D these chalk beds were de"osited duringthe &lood. Creationist geologists may have different views as to where the preloodSlood boundary is in the geologicalrecord, but the ma4ority would regard these (pper Cretaceous chalks as having been deposited very late in the lood. "hatbeing the case, the coccoliths and foraminiferal shells that are now in the chalk beds would have to have been produced

during the lood itself, not in the /,J5/,B years of the prelood era as calculated by *oodmorappe, for surely if therewere that many around at the outset of the lood these chalk beds should have been deposited sooner rather than later during the lood event. &imilarly, !oth?s calculations of the re7uired 7uantities potentially being produced in up to /,years may well show that the 7uantities of calcareous ooEes on today?s ocean floors are easily producible in the timespansince the lood, but these calculations are insufficient to show how these chalk beds could be produced during the looditself.)evertheless, both *oodmorappe and !oth recogniEe that even today coccolith accumulation is not steadystate buthighly episodic, for under the right conditions significant increases in the concentrations of these marine microorganisms canoccur, as in plankton Nblooms? and red tides. or example, there are intense blooms of coccoliths that cause Nwhite water?situations because of the coccolith concentrations,// and during bloom periods in the waters near :amaica microorganismnumbers have been reported as increasing from /, per litre to / million per litre of ocean water. /1 "he reasons for these blooms are poorly understood, but suggestions include turbulence of the sea, wind, /0 decaying fish,6 nutrients fromfreshwater inflow and upwelling, and temperature.6/*ithout a doubt, all of these stated conditions would have beengenerated during the catastrophic global upheaval of the lood, and thus rapid production of carbonate skeletons byforaminifera and coccolithophores would be possible. "hermodynamic considerations would definitely not prevent a much

larger biomass such as this being produced, since &chadewald who raised this as a Nproblem? is clearly wrong. 8t has beenreported that oceanic productivity @5/ times greater than the present could be supported by the available sunlight, and it isnutrient availability especially nitrogen$ that is the limiting factor. 66 urthermore, present levels of solar ultraviolet radiationinhibit marine planktonic productivity.62Puite clearly, under cataclysmic lood conditions, including torrential rain, seaturbulence, decaying fish and other organic matter, and the violent volcanic eruptions associated with the Nfountains of thedeep?, explosive blooms on a large and repetitive scale in the oceans are realistically conceivable, so that the production of the necessary 7uantities of calcareous ooEe to produce the chalk beds in the geological record in a short space of time atthe close of the lood is also realistically conceivable. -iolent volcanic eruptions would have produced copious 7uantities of dust and steam, and the possible different mix of gases than in the present atmosphere could have reduced ultravioletradiation levels. However, in the closing stages of the lood the clearing and settling of this debris would have allowedincreasing levels of sunlight to penetrate to the oceans.9cean water temperatures would have been higher at the close of the lood because of the heat released during the cataclysm, for example, from volcanic and magmatic activity, and thelatent heat from condensation of water. &uch higher temperatures have been verified by evolutionists from their own studiesof these rocks and deepsea sediments,6> and would have also been conducive to these explosive blooms of foraminiferaand coccolithophores. urthermore, the same volcanic activity would have potentially released copious 7uantities of

nutrients into the ocean waters, as well as prodigious amounts of the C9 6 that is so necessary for the production of thecalcium carbonate by these microorganisms. #ven today the volcanic output of C96 has been estimated at about J.J milliontonnes per year, while calculations based on past eruptions and the most recent volcanic deposits in the rock record suggestas much as a staggering >> billion tonnes of C9 6 have been added to the atmosphere and oceans in the recent past that is,in the most recent part of the postlood era$.6@

The &inal Answer "he situation has been known where pollution in coastal areas has contributed to the explosive multiplication of microorganisms in the ocean waters to peak concentrations of more than / billion per litre. 6J *oodmorappe has calculatedthat in chalk there could be as many as 2 x / /2 coccoliths per cubic metre if densely packed which usually isn?t the case$,yet in the known bloom 4ust mentioned, / billion microorganisms per litre of ocean water e7uates to //2 microorganismsper cubic metre.Adapting some of *oodmorappe?s calculations, if the /W of the earth?s surface that now contains chalkbeds was covered in water, as it still was near the end of the lood, and if that water explosively bloomed withcoccolithophores and foraminifera with up to //2 microorganisms per cubic metre of water down to a depth of less than @metres from the surface, then it would have only taken two or three such blooms to produce the re7uired 7uantity of

microorganisms to be fossilised in the chalk beds. est it be argued that a concentration of //2

microorganisms per cubicmetre would extinguish all light within a few metres of the surface, it should be noted that phytoflagellates such as these areable to feed on bacteria, that is, planktonic species are capable of heterotrophism they are Nmixotrophic?$.6B &uch bacteriawould have been in abundance, breaking down the masses of floating and submerged organic debris dead fish, plants,animals, etc.$ generated by the flood. "hus production of coccolithophores and foraminifera is not dependent on sunlight,the supply of organic material potentially supporting a dense concentration.&ince, for example, in southern #ngland thereare three main chalk beds stacked on top of one another, then this scenario of three successive, explosive, massive bloomscoincides with the rock record. Given that the turnover rate for coccoliths is up to two days, 61 then these chalk beds couldthus have been produced in as little as six days, totally conceivable within the time framework of the flood. *hat is certain, isthat the right set of conditions necessary for such blooms to occur had to have coincided in full measure to have explosivelygenerated such enormous blooms, but the evidence that it did happen is there for all to plainly see in these chalk beds in thegeological record. 8ndeed, the purity of these thick chalk beds worldwide also testifies to their catastrophic deposition fromenormous explosively generated blooms, since during protracted deposition over supposed millions of years it is strainingcredulity to expect that such purity would be maintained without contaminating events depositing other types of sediments."here are variations in consistency see Appendix$ but not purity. "he only additional material in the chalk is fossils of macroscopic organisms such as ammonites and other molluscs, whose fossilisation also re7uires rapid burial because of their siEe see Appendix$.)o doubt there are factors that need to be better 7uantified in such a series of calculations, but weare dealing with a cataclysmic lood, the like of which has not been experienced since for us to study its processes.However, we do have the results of its passing in the rock record to study, and it is clear that by working from what is knownto occur today, even if rare and catastrophic by today?s standards, we can realistically calculate production of these chalkbeds within the time framework and cataclysmic activity of the lood, and in so doing respond ade7uately to the ob4ectionsand Nproblems? raised by the critics.

https://answersingenesis.org/geology/sedimentation/can-flood-geology-explain-thick-chalk-beds/#hardground








A Dee"er Understanding o the &lood7A Com"le! *eologic )uzzleby +r. Andrew A. &nelling on April /, 6/>

3he details of the lood have profound implications for e4plaining the geology of the earth today. 5n the !-&6s secular geologists discovered a broad pattern inthe rock layers that has puled them.&hop )ow"he forces that the flood unleashed toreapart the entire world, destroying all

landdwelling animals in a complexse7uence of events that is hard to

imagine.)o other catastrophe has ravaged the earth on this scale, so we have little to compare it to. or that reason it?s allthe more important to interpret the creation chronology of events correctly if we hope to understand the complex geologythat the lood produced and we observe today.&ome people interpret Genesis to mean that heavy rains caused the sealevel to rise steadily for /@ days, and then drop steadily until the end of the lood, on day 2B/. %ut a closer look indicatesthat another se7uence is more likelyDthe waters peaked on day >, and then rose and fell until the end."his se7uence of events could help solve one of the greatest mysteries in geology, megase7uences described below$, which has longpuEEled geologists, both evolutionists and creationists.)ossi0ility o Rising and &alling 2aters9ne of two things is possibleK the sea level fluctuated until day /@ and then steadily decreased to day 2B/, or it begandecreasing right after day >. Fore study is needed. %ut either way, the violent currents had many months to sweep aroundthe globe in a complex, shifting pattern of alternating highenergy and lowerenergy waves, depositing the complexse7uence of layers we see today.

A Solution to ,egase4uences"he intense, worldwide exploration for oil has produced an incredibly detailed picture of the interior of the crust, the earth?souter skin. "he largescale pattern that oil companies have found continues to mystify geologists.8n /0J2 a landmark paper proposed the fossilbearing, sedimentary rock layers across )orth America had been deposited inat least four large LpackagesM of layers called megase7uences./ +uring the early /01s the American Association of etroleum Geologists AAG$ conducted a massive pro4ect to line up and match the rock layers in all the local se7uencesacross )orth America, determined from drillholes and the rock layers that are exposed on the surface.6 "he outcome wasan overwhelming confirmation that these strange megase7uences exist.or geologists who believe in local floods, it wasstrange to find largescale deposits, thousands of feet thick, covering the entire continent. Consider closely what they found.

A megase7uence is a package of sediment layers of a continental scale bounded above and below by flat, eroded surfaces,called unconformities. %etween these eroded surfaces are layers of sediments, which show a distinct pattern from bottom totop. Generally, the sediment grains become smaller and smaller the higher you go. At the bottom are large boulders androcks conglomerates$, then sands, mud, and finally limestone. "his is especially evident on the AAG charts."hisdecreasing siEe suggests that the energy of the water was very intense at the beginning and then decreased throughout therest of the process. At the beginning, when the rushing water had the highest energy, it eroded across the surfaces of the

continents to produce the unconformity. As the energy decreased, large pieces of rocks conglomerates$ began droppingout, but the rapid currents still carried the finer sediments. )ext the sand dropped out, then the mud, and finally limestonewhich is formed in relatively lowerenergy solutions, when molecularsiEe minerals form crystals$."his pattern creates a7uandary for secular geologists. A megase7uence is usually interpreted as the sediments left behind when the ocean roseand advanced across the continent, depositing a large package of sediment layers before retreating. %ut how could theocean cover entire continents by the conventional slowandgradual uniformitarian$ model"he lood model provides theanswer. "he pattern suggests the water levels were high from early in the lood, with vertical fluctuations in between. Fost

of the erosion would have occurred betweenmegase7uences, as the highenergy ocean watersadvanced over the continents. %ut the dropping watersrepresented a time of relatively lower energy, when rocksand grains began dropping out of the currents igure!$.22hat #s a ,egase4uence5

"he 7uest for oil has produced an incredibly detailedpicture of the earth?s outer rock layers. 8n the /0Jsgeologists discovered a largescale pattern in )orth

America, called megase7uences, that still mystifies them.)obody expected to find largescale deposits, thousandsof feet thick, covering the entire continent.Amegase7uence is a package of sediment layers boundedabove and below by flat, eroded surfaces, calledunconformities. "he layers of sediments show a distinctpattern with grains becoming smaller and smaller thehigher up you go.

&igure 8 8n a megase7uence the grains decrease in siEefrom boulders at the bottom conglomerates$ to tinygrains of lime at the top. "his Lfining upwardM suggeststhe ocean currents were very intense at first, and then thewaters slowed down. "he heaviest material dropped outfirst, followed by lighter materials sand and then clay$,until only the finest grains lime$ were left. %ut why didthis happen several timesDid the &lood Cause ,egase4uences5





https://answersingenesis.org/geology/a-complex-geologic-puzzle/#fn_1













Geologists have discovered that powerful forces erodedthe entire )orth American continent, and then depositedthe debris over the whole continent. "his was repeatedseveral times. How is this possible "he obvious answer is the lood.&ecular geologists have found a clear pattern in the rocklayers that point to the lood. At the bottom is bedrockusually labeled LrecambrianM$, which was eroded andplaned off by the lood. As ocean waters tore across thecontinents, they laid down several megase7uencesCambrian through the (pper Cretaceous$."he rise and fall of the ocean level during the lood may

help explain these megase7uences.

&igure 9 Se/eral ,egase4uences. Fegase7uences areseparated by flat, eroded surfaces, called unconformities."o erode a flat surface across the entire continent meansthe ocean water was incredibly energetic. As the watersslowed down, they deposited another megase7uence ontop of the unconformity. "his process was repeated.&igure : Rise and &all o Ocean 'e/els5 &ecular geologists have discovered evidence that the ocean levelrose and fell between each unconformity. *hile theyassume this occurred over millions of years, creationistsbelieve it happened during the lood.

"he preserved rock record across )orth

America readily reflects at least four of these megase7uences, separated byunconformities igure " $.> *ithin thesemegase7uences we usually find massburials of creatures that were caught up inthe lood waters."hese megase7uencesshow clear evidence of the lood watersrising to advance across the continent,sweeping away creatures, and buryingthem in sediment layers. "his processexplains why we now see ocean creaturesburied in layers across the continent.@ 8t iseven possible to trace individual layers of rapidly deposited marine fossils rightacross the continent.

*e see from these megase7uences thatthe lood was anything but a tran7uil affair. !aging waters swept across the continent and back again as water levelsapparently fluctuated up and down many times igure #$. %ut what geologic mechanism could have caused suchfluctuations, and when did they occur within the se7uence of events in the creation accountCatastro"hic )late Tectonics"hat?s where another clue comes in. 8n /1@0 a Christian geologist noticed the coastlines of the continents on either side of the Atlantic 9cean fit like a 4igsaw puEEle.J He thus proposed that a prelood supercontinent had been broken up and thecontinental fragments then sprinted apart during the lood to open up the Atlantic 9cean."hus was born the catastrophicplate tectonics model, which gives a physical mechanism for the lood.B 8f all the waters of the prelood world had beengathered together into one place ,it is reasonable to conclude there was a prelood supercontinent. Fuch geologic data isconsistent with that.1&o when the fountains of the great deep were broken up at the initiation of the lood ,that event couldhave ripped apart the prelood supercontinent. "hen the continental fragments dashed across the earth?s surface."hisgeologic disaster would also explain the rise of the ocean waters. *hen the supercontinent ripped apart, humungousvolumes of lavas also spewed out from inside the earth.0 &ince hot rocks expand, the new volcanic rocks on the ocean floor

rose, raising sea level and pushing the ocean waters over the continents."oday we can visit places like the coastlines of eastern Canada and the %ritish 8sles to see where some of the fossilbearing sediment layers and volcanic rocks matchbetween continents./ "his is powerful evidence that the continents were originally 4oined but are now thousands of milesapart."hese earth movements and the earth7uakes they generated would have produced many cataclysmic tsunamis thatswept over the continents, contributing to relatively minor waterlevel fluctuations within the largerscale surges thatdeposited the megase7uences.2hen Did #t End5late tectonics not only helps us explain when the megase7uences were deposited, it also helps us understand when theyended.As the water was depositing these ma4or sediment packages during the lood, the continental fragments occasionallyslammed into one another. "he collisions produced crumpled mountain belts, such as the Appalachians and the #uropean

Alps. &ince these mountains already contained fossilbearing layers before they were crumpled, the mountains must haveformed after some megase7uences were deposited.Geologists have learned that these fossilbearing mountains formedwhen the African and Arabian lates collided with the #urasian late. &o by that time the lood?s megase7uences werealready deposited, and most continental movement had ceased.

Did ,eteors Trigger the &lood5by +r. Andrew A. &nelling on :anuary /, 6/6Q last featured +ecember /6, 6/6

Geologists are uncovering mounting evidence of asteroids and meteorites that struck the earth during the past. ,re thesee4traterrestrial missiles somehow related to the initiation of the lood?Have you ever wondered what triggered the lood Fost creation geologists believe that the opening of Lthe fountains of the great deepM refers to the breakup of the earth?s crust into plates. / "he subse7uent rapid, catastrophic movement of












https://answersingenesis.org/the-flood/did-meteors-trigger-noahs-flood/#fn_1













these plates would have released huge 7uantities of hot subterranean waters and molten rock into the ocean. As the hotwater gushed through the fractured seafloor, the water flashed into superheated steam and shot high into the atmosphereas supersonic steam 4ets, carrying sea water that eventually fell as rain.%ut what catastrophe might cause the earth?s crustDmany miles thickDto crack &ome have suggested a meteorite or asteroid impact of unprecedented siEe and scope.6 +owe find any evidence Geologists have discovered some gargantuous remnant craters and piles of debris, leftover frommassive impacts that easily fit the bill.A Smoking *un in Australia5

9ne example of an impact powerful enough to trigger the lood is the @Jmilewide 0 km$ Acraman impactcrater in &outh Australia. 8t apparently resulted from a6.@milewide > km$ asteroid that slammed into the9utback at almost /J miles per second 6J kmSs$

igure !$.2 "he explosion would have beene7uivalent to the detonation of @,5/,hydrogen bombs all at onceO "he impact blastedsome of the pulverised prelood crystallinebasement rocks to sites 61 miles >@ km$ away,and the debris accumulated in a layer /J inches >cm$ thick within some of the earliest lood deposits.>

An asteroid impactDor several simultaneous impactsDthat triggered the lood may also have been part of an ongoing, solarsystemwide catastrophe that lastedfor months or years.@ 8f so, we would expect to findevidence of many other meteorites that subse7uently

hit the earth duringthe flood. "wo lines of evidence can be used to support this

inferenceK /$ the rapid rate of past crateringduring the lood, and 6$ the fields of meteorites left by this bombardment.8mpact Crater #arly in the lood igure !$

A massive asteroid, perhaps 6.@ miles > km$wide, slammed into the earth at the start of the lood, leaving a @Jmilewide 0 km$impact crater in &outh Australia. +id thisexplosion, which e7ualed @,5/,hydrogen bombs, help trigger the loodContinuing #m"acts Throughout the&loodFany meteorite impact craters have nowbeen identified across the earth?s surface."hese have been imprinted and preserved in

layers deposited by the loodJ and are alsovisible on today?s postlood land surface,such as the famous Feteor Crater 4ust east

of lagstaff in northern AriEona.

A History of CratersK "wo 8nterpretations igure " $Geologists have found over a hundred impact craters on earth.9n this table 20 of the // impacts were deposited in theuppermost rock layers, and the rest were spread over the manylower layers.8f all these layers were deposited slowly over millions of years,then impacts have been more common in recent times. %ut if most layers were deposited during the yearlong lood, B/impacts occurred during only one year. "he other 20 were spread

over the next >,@ years."he impact LagesM of // craters asestimated using the secular dating methods$ are tabulatedin igure " .B &ecular geologists thus believe that large meteoritescrashed into the earth at a rate of /51 every 2 million years, butthat the rate was much higher in recent times. However, thosescientists who believe that the bulk of the fossil record wasdeposited during the lood reach a very different conclusion.

According to the lood model, the first B/ of these // impactswould have occurred during the year of the lood, and the other 20 were spread out over the >,@ years since the lood."he rateduring the lood was catastrophicDB/ in one year versus anaverage of only one impact every //@ years. #ven most of those20 postlood impacts likely occurred in the first few decadesafter the lood, as the catastrophic processes that triggered thelood slowed to today?s snail?s pace.&ossil ,eteorites in Sweden)ot surprisingly, fossil meteorites have been discovered invarious layers of the lood?s geologic record. 9ne of the mostmeteoritedense areas in the world known to date is found in9rdovician limestone beds in central and southern&weden.1 "hese deposits are among the earliest laid down by

the lood.orty fossil meteorites have been identified over the area within the "horsberg 7uarry at 3innekulle, southern




















&weden.0 "hey vary in siEe from .61 x .> inches B mm x / mm$ to almost J x 1 inches /@ cm x 6 cm$, and wererecovered from a 7uarry area of almost J@, s7uare feet J m6$. &o far, no impact crater has been found associatedwith these fossil meteorites. )umerous chemical analyses have determined that these are all ordinary chondritemeteorites./ !oughly 1W of meteorites that have fallen to the earth since the lood are also chondrite meteorites."heseforty fossil meteorites were recovered from 9rdovician marine limestone beds, which are part of the 9rthoceratite imestonethat was deposited across at least /, s7uare miles 6@, km 6$ of the %altic&candinavian region. "he 7uarriedsection holding the meteorites is /.@ feet 2.6 m$ thick and has been divided into twelve named beds igure #$.LFeteorite allM +uring the lood igure #$

At a 7uarry in &weden, over forty meteorites have been found in a /foot 2 m$ section of limestone. "he fragments arescattered in twelve thin beds deposited early in the lood. "hey share the same metallic 7ualities, as though they came fromone meteor, which exploded when it entered the earth?s atmosphere.According to secular dating methods, these beds areestimated to have accumulated over /.B@ million years at an average rate of only .1 inches 6 mm$ per /, years.

8nterestingly, many of these forty fossil meteorites were discovered embedded at the contact surfaces between layers wheresecular geologists claim that nothing was being deposited for periods ranging from / to /, years. "hus, secular geologists suggest that these meteorites fell on at least twelve different occasions.However, entombed with these fossilmeteorites are abundant fossiliEed straightshelled nautiloids, many up to about /J inches > cm$ long and about 6.@inches J cm$ thick. "his begs the 7uestionDhow could these fragile nautiloid shells be buried and preserved with their internal anatomy intact, and exhibit no signs of decay or erosion during such long periods when no sediments were beingdepositedAnd how could water deposit these limestone beds and their fossil contents so evenly over such a vast area of atleast /, s7uare miles 6@, km6$ #ven though the fossiliEed nautiloid shells show no particular orientation, theyhad to be buried rapidly to be so well preserved. &uch rapid sedimentation over such a wide area re7uires a catastrophicflooding event.urthermore, since all these fossil meteorites are essentially the same, and all likely accumulated duringrapid sedimentation and catastrophic flooding, they could easily represent the remains of one meteorite fall. &uch acatastrophic meteorite bombardment is consistent with the Global lood.

Noah;s 'ost 2orld

by +r. Andrew A. &nelling on April /, 6/>Q last featured Fay 2, 6/@&hop )ow"hat land was destroyed. 8n fact, it appears thatthe original continent was broken up and thepieces separated by thousands of miles."here were no Alps, !ockies, or snowcoveredHimalayasQ no Fississippi !iver rolling down intothe Gulf of FexicoQ no AmaEon spilling into the

Atlantic. "he geography of the prelood worldwas completely changed.8t appears that thewhole planet was different. Geologists have

stumbled across tantaliEing clues that allow them to begin reconstructing the se7uence of events necessary to produce thedramatic features on earth today. "his ongoing work is exciting for creationists. "hough the details are fragmentary, a pictureis emerging of what may have been the supercontinent ."hese findings point to &cripture, which makes much better senseof the catastrophic evidence than slow processes over millions of years.

Continental &ragments rom an Earlier TimeHave you ever wondered what world was like before the lood "he fragments that survived the lood make it possible tobegin piecing together the puEEle, at least in broad terms.#vidence indicates that the continents have moved around, brokenapart, and crashed together, but the basic pieces have remained fairly constant. -iolent catastrophes tore off slivers fromthe edges of the continents, but the core pieces seem to have survived.Geologists call the cores of these pieces Lcratons.M"hey seem to have remained stable throughout history. At one time they appear to have been 4oined together, but violentforcesDunleashed during the loodDtore them into many fragments."he core of )orth America appears to be one of thesecratons. 8n fact, most geologists believe it was a ma4or component of the early earth?s supercontinent.Foving Around the ieces

Rodinia left$ 9ur modern continents are made out of pieces from the original earth, which broke apart during the lood."hese core pieces are called cratons. Certain features within these pieces and on their edges can be lined up, helping usput them back together. *e call this original continent !odinia, but so much has been lost that many puEEles remain.















)angaea middle$ After the original continent broke apart during the lood, the pieces crashed together temporarily, forminga supercontinent known as angaea. How do we know this "he pieces were already covered with fossilcontainingsediment layers when they crashed together. 8n the impact Eones, these layers were pushed into folded mountains that westill see today.Today right$ "oday the earth consists of many separate continents, formed out of pieces from the first supercontinent. 9nlythe cores survived. "he rest of our modern continents were filled in by mud and sand that the lood stripped from the earth?ssurface. Geologists are studying the original pieces to see how the edges originally aligned.Coastlines o a Su"er Continent59ne of the biggest clues for the original configuration of continents is evident on any world map.8n /1@0 creationist geologist Antonio &niderellegrini noticed the 4igsaw puEEle fit of )orth and &outh America with #uropeand Africa if the Atlantic 9cean basin were closed up./ He also realiEed that the landmass was probably a supercontinent."hen that supercontinent broke apart during the lood and continental sprint opened up today?s Atlantic 9cean."hus was

born the catastrophic plate tectonics model, which provides a physical mechanism for the lood. 6 At the initiation of thelood the fountains of the great deep were broken up ripping apart the prelood supercontinent. "he upwelling molten rockfrom the underlying mantle then helped to propel the continental fragments across the globe, opening up new ocean basinsand colliding to produce today?s mountains.Fuch geologic data is consistent with this scenario, although the rapidmovement of plates is a separate topic.2 %y locating the remnants of the original prelood supercontinent we can pro4ectthe movements of those fragments back to their original positions to potentially reassemble the lost world.

)angaea 2as Not The 'ost "re<&lood 2orldHowever, there is a complication that has sometimes caused misunderstandings. "he supercontinent &niderellegrinireconstructed became known by geologists as angaea sometimes spelled 8angea$, after the ancient Greekwords panmeaning LentireM and Gaia meaning LFother #arth.M *e now know angea could not have been the preloodsupercontinent. &omething must have occurred earlier to produce the features on angaea.*hen we remove the Atlantic9cean and put the pieces back together again, we find a long mountain chain that ran from )orth America through #urope."he problem is that this chain, known as the AppalachianCaledonian mountains, is made out of fossilbearing sediments

that were deposited earlier during the lood. "he only known way to form a mountain chain like this is for one continent tocollide with another continent. "his means that the lood had to deposit fossilbearing layers in )orth America and #uropebefore they crashed into each other to form angaea."hus angaea cannot have been the prelood supercontinent. 8tcould only have been a temporary merger of continental fragments during the lood, lasting no more than a few weeks.angaea was a supercontinent during the lood, but it was completely underwater.How +o *e 3now angaea 8s )ot the Created Continent

"oday?s continents were once 4oined together because some mountain chains, such as the Appalachians (&$ andCaledonians (3 and &candinavia$, are now separated by thousands of miles. %ut these mountains were not on the originalsupercontinent because they are made out of lood deposits."he only way such mountain chains could form is for theoriginal supercontinent to break apart, the plates get covered by layers containing dead animals, and then crash together temporarily. As these plates moved again, they took with them pieces of the mountain chain formed by the collision, one

piece in the (& and one piece in the (3 and &candinavia.Clues to Realign the )re<&lood Continental &ragments"oday geologists are trying to identify the edges of the continental fragments or cratons$, and then line them up in their original configuration. "his helps them reconstruct the appearance of the original landmass."he angaean rearrangement isgenerally agreed on, but speculation increases as we go further back in time. or example, secular geologists find rocklayers with large salt and sand deposits and assume these came from deserts that were close to the e7uator. However,lood geologists know those sand layers were deposited underwater, apparently stripped from postulated coastal beaches

https://answersingenesis.org/geology/plate-tectonics/noahs-lost-world/#fn_1










around the world at that time.#ven though speculation increases the further we go back in time, several reliable clues havecome to geologists? aid.)aleomagnetism9ne clue is called paleomagnetism. +on?t let the term intimidate you. &ince the earth has a magnetic field, minerals that aremagnetic will tend to line up with the earth?s magnetic poles. *henever lava cools, for instance, those minerals will alignthemselves with the points of the compass.9nce the rocks harden, geologists can use their alignment to determine thelatitude where the rocks formed. 8f the landmass is moving 7uickly over hundreds of miles, different lavas will align indifferent magnetic directions as they harden.Rock Ty"es

Another clue is the physical content of the rocks. "here are thousands of different types of rocks, such as huge piles of certain basalt lavas that can be matched between some continents, and hundreds of ways to measure different rockcontents, including the type of fossils they contain and the radioactive decay within certain minerals. %ased on these clues,

geologists can often determine which large deposits once lay next to each other, even after they have moved thousands of miles apart.De0ris De"ositserhaps the most significant clue to line up the continents is the type of sedimentary rock layers that the lood initiallydeposited at the edges of the cratons. "hese deposits, 4ust above the LbasementM rocks, have some distinctivecharacteristics that can be lined up between continents."he basement rocks do not have multicellular fossils in them. "heyappear to be the originally created rocks, and sediment layers deposited in the prelood world. "he remnants are all thatwe have left after the lood waters shaved off the surfaces of the continents. > "he boundary between the prelood andlood rocks usually has a distinctive erosion surface, sometimes associated with huge broken fragments of rocks."he hugefragments, sometimes measuring up to twothirds of a mile across, represent places where the edge of the preloodsupercontinent collapsed at the initiation of the lood.@ Huge slabs broke off and cascaded down into deeper waters. "heinitial lood sediments then piled up on top of these debris deposits. "he same deposits can be traced along the edge of theprelood )orth American fragment.J9thers have also noticed these same debris deposits at many other places around theglobe at the same level in the strata se7uence.B "hey help define the edges of the prelood supercontinent.

The )re<&lood Su"er Continent Rodinia&o is there geologic evidence of an earlier supercontinent, which broke apart and its fragments subse7uently collided andcoalesced together to form angaea, which then broke apart into today?s continents that sprinted into their presentpositions IesO "his earlier supercontinent, which was thus likely the lost prelood world, has been called !odinia from the!ussian word rodina, meaning L"he FotherlandM$.*hat then did !odinia look like Geologists are fairly certain about thebasic configuration of the core cratons, but they are still unsettled about many of the details. "here are multiple ways to fittogether the fragmentary continental pieces of the puEEle. !emember, we are looking at scattered, damaged, and alteredrocky remnants of the prelood world.&everal reconstructions of !odinia have been published.1 Iet all consider the )orth

American fragment to be the central piece of the puEEle, and Australia and #astern Antarctica are placed along the westernedge. &o far, nobody can agree on how much of the edges are missing, or the precise location of some fragments, such as&outh China or Australia.0 !econstructing the lost world is very complex. )o reconstruction is yet able to produce the onecoherent supercontinent from all the fragments. All such reconstructions must have an element of speculation because somuch was destroyed by the lood cataclysm.%ut we do have a reasonable picture of what happened at the catastrophicinitiation of the lood. Huge plumes of molten rock blasted the underside of the earth?s crust like massive blowtorches./ #ventually the crust was ripped apart, and steam and molten rock burst forth. "he supercontinent collapsed, with

slivers of land sliding into the ocean at the margins.// 8t must have been horrific.

Ra"id O"als in the Out0ackby +r. Andrew A. &nelling on :uly /, 6/>Q last featured Fay 6, 6/@

'nly one place on Earth holds a treasure trove of precious opals9,ustralia2s 'utback. ar from re:uiring millions of years*the uni:ue conditions necessary to produce these beauties point to the lood.recious opal, with its daEEling display of brilliant blues, greens, yellows, and fiery reds, is one of the most recogniEable

Australian icons. Fore than 0@ percent of the world?s opals are mined in this one country, explaining why it is the nationalgemstone. 8n fact, most gem7uality opals come from one locale in AustraliaDthe Great Artesian %asin.&o what is so uni7ueabout Australia?s Great Artesian %asin that it produces so many precious opals "he answer is revealing because it hints atuni7ue circumstances that dovetail perfectly with the closing stages of the global cataclysmic lood .8t is also revealing tosee how 7uickly opals can form. aboratories can LgrowM them within weeks using the right ingredients. / *hen suchexperiments grow opals within the same kind of rock material that contains natural opals, the rapidly grown opal is virtuallyidentical to the natural stones. urthermore, commercial production of high7uality imitation opals has flooded the market,

and these gems, too, are often difficult to distinguish from natural opals.6"he ease of making opalsDand their limited localeDpoints to the special conditions in Australia at the end of the lood.2hat Are O"als59pal is made out of silica, known in chemical terms as silicon dioxide &i9 6$. *hen this chemical compound crystalliEes, itforms the common mineral known as 7uartE, found all over the #arthQ in its manmade form, this material is window glass.%ut opals aren2t crystalliEed like 7uartE, and unlike 7uartE they have a high water content, usually J5/ percent. "hisindicates that a different process formed the opals than 7uartE.recious opal does have some structure, however. 8t is madeof a regular threedimensional array of uniformly siEed silica spheres. *hen light passes through these orderly packedspheres, it diffracts and produces mesmeriEing colors.2Common opal, unlike precious opal, does not have this structure, soit is generally milky white or gray with a waxy, translucent sheen. )othing colorful here.Fost 7uartE crystals were forged inrelatively high temperatures and pressuresDcommon conditions throughout the upper crust during the lood. "he lessstructured opals, however, re7uired a rarer, cooler setting, near the #arth?s surface.2here Are )recious O"als &ound and &ormed5


















https://answersingenesis.org/geology/rocks-and-minerals/rapid-opals-outback/#fn_1



















*ith the exception of one location, all Australian precious opals are found at the same relative levels within /J> feet @ m$of the ground surface. "hese deeply weathered layers are ower Cretaceous sedimentary rocks located in the Great

Artesian %asin.> 8n fact, miners discovered a plesiosaur sea creature$ whose bones had turned to opalO"he most productivemines in the basin are located at the edge, mainly at Coober edy and Andamooka see map$. Fany famous white or milky$ opals were found here, such as the Pueen?s 9pal or the Andamooka 9pal$, given to Pueen #liEabeth 88 in /0@>. "helargest known opal came from Coober edyDthe 9lympic Australis, weighing in at a whopping /B, carats B.J pounds$O9ther precious opal mines dot the *inton ormation in the interior of the basin, such as the mines at ightning !idge, which

produce priEed black opals.At the time these sediments weredeposited, a huge basin, or LbowlM sat in the center of Australia.*ater from the ocean flooded into this region, becoming ashallow extension of the deep sea. "o the east on the edge of the

Australian continent, huge volcanoes were belching out copious

7uantities of volcanic ash.@ Fuch of this volcanic ash mingledwith fragments of mineral feldspar, organic debris, and pyriteiron sulfide, e&6$, as these sedimentary layers were depositedacross the Great Artesian %asin igures !;" $.ollowingdeposition of these layers, the center of the continent uplifted,causing sea waters to rush off the continent and erode therecently laid sediments. 8ntense drying out of the landscapefollowed conventional geology suggests a desert,$. "he climatewas relatively cold in the interior of this southerly continent, anddeep weathering occurred.J A uni7ue environmental interplaythen formed the precious opals igure #$.B

8n the !ight lace at the !ight "ime Australia experienced a uni7ue combination of circumstances

that allowed gem7uality opals to form in abundance, unlike any other place on #arth. "his took place during the lood when

a shallow LbowlM formed in the interior, known as the Great Artesian %asin. 8t is now ringed with rich opal mines.irst, Fassive &ediments *ere aid with a Fix of &pecial 8ngredients+uring the lood, a shallow sea formed in the Artesian %asin, where the floodwaters dumped a special combination of ironrich and organic sediments.

&econd, -olcanic Ash *as Fixed with the "op ayer of &ediments As the lood deposited its final sediments in the Artesian %asin, an arc of volcanoes belched ash into the shallow sea, whichmixed with the sediments, which included pyrite, feldspar, and organic debris.

"hird, the ayers *ere ifted (p, +ried, and *eathered Puickly A complicated se7uence of chemical reactions then occurred. irst, water percolated down and reacted with the pyrite,making the water acidic. "his acidic water then reacted with the feldspar to release the silica the basic ingredient in opals$.Conditions around /J> feet @ m$ became 4ust right alkaline, not acidic$ for the minerals to break down further. "he silicacould precipitate as precious opal Y$ only in tight spaces, such as along fractures and faults.













"he se7uence of events and chemical reactions necessary to form opal gets 7uite complicated. %ut here is a summary.

irst, as surface water percolated deep downward through porous sandstones and faults, oxygen reacted with the pyrite inthe sedimentary layers. As a result, the water became acidic. "hen the acidic groundwater reacted with the feldspar andvolcanic ash to produce a clay mineral known as kaolinite, along with sulfate minerals and silica."he minerals trapped in theconfined spaces, fractures, and faults began to break down. &omething very significant happened at the water level wherethe chemical conditions became alkaline not acidic$, around /J> feet @ m$ deepK further mineral breakdowns left ironoxides and even more silica, which precipitated as precious opal.8n summary, the formation of precious opal re7uired auni7ue combination of conditions. irst it needed sediments that contained silica. "hen it needed a chemical environmentwith strong acidic conditions to release the silica. Iet this silica had to appear in confined places so the acid and base couldreact called neutraliEation$ to produce the solid gems by precipitation$. "his final step could occur only under alkalineconditions, as opposed to the acidic conditions that prevailed earlier. *ithout the final alkaline conditions, only common opalis formed. *hat a rare combination of eventsOChemical LfingerprintingM of opals has confirmed that the Great Artesian %asinprovided all these conditionsDin the necessary se7uence. "he different precious opal deposits have different traceelements, depending on the local sediments where they came from. 9ther trace elements in the opals reflect the volcanicash that later became part of the gems.1How could the lood explain all these events Fassive sediments were deposited,with copious amounts of volcanic debris mixed into them, followed by a period of intense drying out and weathering. At thesame time, all the right conditions at the right time had to be met to rearrange various chemical compounds in theweathered rock layers to produce Australia?s precious opals.2here Does O"al &ormation &it in the &lood Account5rom what may be gleaned from the sedimentary layers of the rock record, it appears that the #arth?s sea level rose andpeaked during the laying of the first lood deposits the Cambrian$. "he ocean then fluctuated up and down until the finaldeposits were laid, reaching the last peak when the (pper Cretaceous layers highest dinosaur layers$ were laid. /"hus itseems possible that the water level peaked for the last time when these deposits were laid. "his certainly makes sense of the wiping out of the last dinosaurs as they scrambled to find a safe place to survive the rising waters and left footprints inthe *inton ormation among the main Cretaceous deposits where opals are now found$. //"he lood waters then retreatedfrom off the Australian continent, leaving the ground to dry out and intensely weather. +uring this intense drying phase at thevery end of the lood the uni7ue combination of materials and environmental and chemical conditions produced theprecious opals. )one of these events re7uired millions of years, as modern experiments confirm.

+osemite (alley7Colossal #ce Car/ing*eology

by +r. Andrew A. &nelling on :anuary /, 6/@Ies, it?s beautiful. "he spacious skies and mountain ma4esties direct our thoughts toward our Faker. Iet none of theselandscapes is the way they were originally created it. "he beauty resulted from catastrophic processes that reshaped theplanet. Consider Iosemite -alley, one of the most popular tourist sites in California. "his spectacular (shaped valley iscarved into the western slope of the &ierra )evada Fountains, /@ miles 6> km$ east of &an rancisco. 8t stretches B.@miles // km$, with an average width of about / mile /.J km$ and sheer granite cliffs towering 2,5>, feet 05/,6m$ on either side. Creeks cascade from hanging side valleys down into the main valley.8f this beautiful valley wasnt createdin the very beginning, how did it happen"he story behind most land features is more complicated than simply Lwater ran off the continent at the end of the lood.M 8n the centuries following the lood, the earth endured a series of ma4or catastrophicad4ustments as the land settled back into relative 7uiet. Continents rose and valleys fell. #ven the climate changed,producing a brief 8ce Age with massive glaciers that scoured the earth.The Ra"id )ower o 2ater and #ce at +osemite"he lood deposited sedimentary layers across )orth America. Feanwhile, tectonic plates collided on the *est Coast,

forcing melted deep rocks granites$ to be s7ueeEed up into the sediments. "he layers buckled and uplifted, producing themountains and valleys of the &ierra )evadas. As the lood waters retreated, they removed most of the sediments andexposed the hard granite.! of #)ost &lood= Heavy rainfall in the decades after the lood caused the granite to erode and weather 7uickly along parallel

fractures.

-oodoos o %ryce Canyon%ryce Canyon1 Utah

by +r. Andrew A. &nelling on :uly /, 6/>"he visitor overlooks at %ryce Canyon, (tah, provide abreathtaking spectacle of row upon row of towering columnspainted pink, red, white, and orange. "ogether, these columnswere formed in a series of horseshoeshaped amphitheaters, cut

into the surrounding cliffs. "he largest and most spectacular is%ryce Amphitheater, about /6 miles /0 km$ wide and 1 feet6>@ m$ deep, sporting thousands of columns.

duha!"7 < 3hinkstockphotos.com&tanding guard along the rim of a natural amphitheater is anarmy of tall columns, called hoodoos. Conditions were 4ust rightafter the flood to form them rapidly.

















8t is hard to capture in photographs the ex7uisite beauty of such a vast and devastated landscape. articularly stunning arethe delicate hoodoos, slender columns with balancing LhatsM on them that look ready to fall, and sometimes doO)ative

American legends say these statues were the egend eopleDanimals that took on human form but committed a wickeddeed and were turned into stone. &ome were standing in rows, some sitting, and some clutching each other. Iou can stillsee the red paint on their faces.#volutionists and lood geologists both say these colorful layers formed at the bottom of alake and that tectonic forces later pushed up the layers, exposing them to erosion. #volutionists say this erosion occurredover millions of years.How +id 8t !eally HappenIes, these layers were deposited by water, and catastrophic earthmovements exposed them to rapid erosion. %efore looking at the details, it is important to understand that %ryce is not,strictly speaking, a canyonO 8t?s actually the edge of a high plateau aunsaugunt lateau, an arm of the even greater Colorado lateau$. "his plateau rose up at the end of the lood as the last waters receded, and %ryce was eroded into itsside."he top of this plateau consists of the pink and white layers of the Claron ormation. "he pink is due to the iron andmanganese in the sediments, which reacted with oxygen. "he hoodoos were carved out of these layers."he Claron

ormation was likely among the first sediment layers deposited in the very early postlood period immediately after the lastlood waters receded. "his plateau region was rising up around the same time, creating natural dams that producedmassive lakes in the continent?s interior including the Green !iver lakes of (tah, *yoming, and Colorado$. "he waterseventually broke through the dams, surging away from the edges of the aunsaugunt lateau see figure$. / &ubse7uentlythe water draining out of the bases of the plateau would have completed the carving of the cliffs and amphitheaters at %rycea process of headward erosion technically known as sapping$.6Conditions at the edges of these cliffs are optimal for erosion. "he layers of the Claron ormation vary in hardness, with softer mudstones alternating with harder sandstones or limestones. *hen the mudstones wash away, other rocks collapse more readily and wash away, too. "he steep slopesincrease the speed and energy of the rainwater running off the top. 8n the early years after the lood, superstorms ravagedthe earth and eroded it much faster than we see today.

As the rain passes through the atmosphere, it becomes weakly acidic. "hat acid eats away at the sediments, especially thelimy layers. urthermore, the sedimentary layers at %ryce contain several sets of parallel cracks called 4oints. *ater entersthese cracks, where it freeEes at night and thaws during the dayDtoday the region experiences 6 freeEethaw cycles per yearDfurther weakening the rock layers.As the water flows downward, it picks up debris and scours any softer rocks it

encounters, creating gullies. "he gullies widen into canyons, exposing more surfaces to erosion along their vertical cracks.urther freeEethaw cycles expand the cracks and peel off side layers, especially of the softer rocks.)ormally we would expect weathered rocks to collapse into piles, rather than leaving behind tall, slender columns. "he keyto producing these marvels is putting a harder rock layer a LcapM$ on top of the soft layers. "his prevents the soft rocks fromwearing away so 7uickly. "he LcapsM on "hor?s Hammer and "he Hunter, for example, are made of harder rock.How *ere Hoodoos ormed

"he lood left behind massive lakes in the continent?s interior, where thick deposits settled at the bottom. ater, these lakesbroke free, catastrophically draining away the edges of the lakes.*ater continued to seep out of the lower rocks at the edgeof the plateau, taking more rock material with them a process called sapping$. "he steep walls eroded 7uickly, withoutlosing their shape."he steep slopes increased the speed of rainwater, which fell in heavy downpours after the lood. "heacidic water entered cracks and ate away the soft layers. reeEethaw cycles expanded the cracks and peeled off the sides.)ormally weathered rocks would collapse into piles. %ut a harder top layer LcapM$ kept the softer layers from wearing awayso 7uickly, leaving behind slender hoodoos.

The Sierra Ne/adasConsider the landscape one step at a time. irst, where did the&ierra )evadas come from before the (shaped valley wascarved into them +uring the lood many sedimentary rock

layers were deposited right across the )orth Americancontinent, as the ocean waters rose and flooded it. ate in thelood, the moving tectonic plates shoved some of the newacific 9cean floor down under the western edge of )orth

America. As the ocean floor sank subducted$, the heat atdepth caused the ad4acent rock above to melt, producinggranite magmas. "he compression in this collision Eones7ueeEed the granite magmas into the sediment layers above.

At the same time, the layers were being buckled and uplifted,producing the &ierra )evadas.*hen the granite magmass7ueeEed up into the buckled sedimentary layers, they cooledand crystalliEed in large bulbous masses, about 2, feet0,/@ m$ below the surface. "hese cooling granites alsocontracted, resulting in parallel fractures at right angles to oneanother.As the lood waters retreated, catastrophic erosion

scoured the uplifting mountains. Fost of the sedimentarylayers were removed by the retreating water and exposed themore resistant bulbous granite masses. +espite all thiserosion, the uplifted &ierra )evadas still rose to over />,

feet >,6B m$ above sea level."he fractures influenced the direction of the weathering and erosion of the granite masses. Another factor was the peeling off spalling$ of sheets on the surface of the granites, often leaving behind large granitedomes. 8n the early postlood decades, heavy rainfall eroded the deep Ferced !iver -alley. "he water, which was flowingin tributaries, could not cut into the more resistant granite walls and thus tumbled over waterfalls into the valley.

https://answersingenesis.org/geology/natural-features/hoodoos-bryce-canyon/#fn_1






The +osemite (alley*ith the onset of the postlood 8ce Age, the rapidly accumulating thick snows high in the &ierra )evadas moved down theslopes to collect in valleys and grow into glaciers. As the glaciers then moved down from the tributaries into the Ferced!iver -alley, rock debris within the ice underneath and at the edges of the thick glaciers scoured the valley floors and sides."hus, what became the Iosemite -alley deepened dramatically. "he valley floor was flattened so that the high granite cliffson either side of the valley produced the (shaped profile. And the tributaries became hanging valleys, with waterfalls todaycascading over the nowtowering granite cliffs down to the deep valley floor.At its peak the glacier in Iosemite -alley wasnearly half a mile deep at least 6, feet RJ mT thick$. "he weathering and erosive power of this glacier was immense.

Almost half of one granite dome on the valley?s edge eroded away. After the glacier melted away at the end of the 8ce Age, itleft behind today?s famous Half +ome.&imilar glacially eroded (shaped valleys are found in the !ockies, the mountainousregions of Fontana, the &cottish Highlands, &candinavia, )ew ;ealand, Canada, the #uropean Alps, and theHimalayas."hough beautiful, these landforms remind us that catastrophe has marred a beautiful world that was once

untouched by sin, and we look forward to a new heaven and earth with even more indescribable beauty to come.

Emeralds7Treasures rom Catastro"he*eology

0y Dr. Andrew A. Snelling on Octo0er 81 9>88? last eatured August 991 9>89+iamonds, rubies, and emeraldsDthe mosttreasured gems on earth. #ach has uni7ue7ualities that re7uire special conditions to form.#meralds, priEed for their color, are the mostunlikely of all. *hat uni7ue forces brought thisgem to the earth?s surface for us to en4oy

Awesome &cience -olumes / / &hop)ow+iamonds may get all the attention, butgreen emeralds, like red rubies and blue

sapphires, are rarer and 4ust as valuable.&uchrich beauty, produced by a mixture of plain ingredients, has always fascinated mankind. How were these gems producedCan we duplicate that process"o find clues, geologists have carefully investigated the rocks where emeralds are found. %utsince no human beings were present to observe how these gems were formed, finding the answers re7uires the correctstarting assumptions. *hile secular geologists have done a good 4ob cataloguing the physical clues found in the rocks, theyhave difficulty fully explaining the timing of the unlikely combination of chemicals and conditions that were necessary to formemeralds.2hat Are Emeralds5#merald is the clear green gem and a rare variety of the relatively rare mineral beryl./ "his fairly hard mineral is composedof four elementsDberyllium, aluminum, silicon, and oxygen %e2Al6&iJ9/1$."he emerald?s beautiful color is due to traceamounts of two other elementsDchromium andSor vanadium.6 "hese elements give emerald a red fluorescence thatenhances the luminosity brightness$ of its bluegreen color.#merald is the third most valuable gemstone, after diamond andruby. "he highest price paid for an emerald is (.&. Z/.@ million for an exceptional /.//carat Colombian specimen in 6.2(nlike other gemstones, the color of an emerald is more highly valued than its clarity or brilliance."he leading source of emeralds is the Colombian highlandsDthe same place where the AEtecs and 8ncas got their gems. #ven today, after

centuries of production, Colombia still supplies an estimated JW of the world?s emeralds, some @.@ million carats per year worth more than (.&. Z@ million.> Although the African nation of ;ambia is considered the world?s second most importantsource of emeralds by value, %raEil currently accounts for /W of the world?s bulk emerald production. #meralds have alsobeen mined in the Fiddle #ast #gypt and Afghanistan$, Australia, #urope Austria, %ulgaria, and &pain$, Asia China and8ndia$, a few other African nations Fadagascar, )amibia, )igeria, &outh Africa, "anEania, and ;imbabwe$, and the (nited&tates )orth Carolina$.2here Are the Necessary #ngredients &ound5#xplaining the origin of this gem is a challenge because three conditions must be met. irst, you need the mineral beryl, butit is rarely found near the surface of the earth?s continents. %eryllium tends to be concentrated in the base rock of thecontinentsDgranites. 8t is also found in large granitic veins called pegmatites and a clayrich sedimentary rock known asblack shale, which is rich in organic matter. Another source of beryl is the metamorphosed versions of these rocks, whichhave been transformed by great heat and pressure thus they are called metamorphic rocks$."he two other ingredients of emeralds, chromium and vanadium, are concentrated in a completely different kind of rockDbasalts and related rocks."hese rocks are found on and beneath the ocean floors, but they are also found near the earth?s surface wherever earth

movements have pushed oceanfloor rocks up onto the continents and transformed them by heat and pressure. Chromiumand vanadium are found in these types of rocks, as well as some sedimentary rocks, particularly black shales.&ince theessential ingredients are found in different rocks, unusual geologic conditions and processes had to have occurred for theberyllium to meet chromium andSor vanadium to make emeralds. And the key transport and mixing agent was hot water.%eryl, and therefore emerald, has been shown experimentally to form at temperatures of only >5J@V 652@VC$ inthe presence of water, depending also on the pressures and the coexisting minerals.@

A+-#!"8&#F#)"&Faranatha %aptist (niversityensacola Christian CollegeFasters College"hree &cenariosCareful investigations of the rocks in the small mines from which emeralds are extracted have revealed three scenarios toexplain how most emeralds formed.

8n the first scenario, molten rock magma$ deep in the earth?s interior, containing beryllium and water, forced its way upwardtoward the earth?s surface and was s7ueeEed into nearsurface rocks, where it crystalliEed and cooled as granite. "he laststage of this process produced pegmatite veins, which were rich in water and often beryllium. *herever the molten graniteand pegmatite veins particularly the latter$ came into contact with black shales and other rocks rich in chromium andvanadium, the hot water mixed the three essential ingredients to form emeralds.8n Colombia there is no evidence of thesegranites or pegmatites. 8nstead, the emeralds are found within veins and fractured rocks along faults. "he process of forming these high7uality emeralds began when hot groundwaters mixed with salt beds deep in the earth, causing thewater to become highly alkaline and salty. "hen the hot water, filled with various dissolved elements like beryllium, moved upalong the faults and fractures into the shales."he third scenario took place as sedimentary rocks were crumpled ands7ueeEed by earth movements. *ater was already in these sediment layers, as the heat and pressure metamorphosed the



rocks into schists. ault Eones developed during these earth movements, which provided conduits for heated waters todissolve the re7uired elements and form emeralds.2hen 2ere Emerald &ormed58t is clear that the formation of emeralds was closely linked to ma4or earth movements and rising waters during mountainbuilding. %ut the re7uired beryllium also needed to be concentrated near the hot waters and then brought into contact withchromium and vanadium. "his rare 4uxtaposition explains why emerald deposits occurred in so few places."hese findingshelp us to place emerald deposits within the Creationlood framework of earth history. "he global lood involved a seriesof catastrophic plate movements and collisions, each step of which would explain the different scenarios to form thesegems.J*hen the lood event began, the prelood supercontinent was torn into pieces. "he catastrophic collision of these

4ostling crustal plates caused new mountains to rise, with the accompanying formation of the granites and metamorphicrocks associated with the creation of new emeralds.B"he first mountains built early in the lood year would have beendeeply eroded, as the subse7uent water movements scoured all previous sedimentary deposits. Any emerald deposits were

then exposed and washed into new locations. "his may explain why there are so few emeralds within early lood deposits,such as those in Fadagascar, Australia, and the (nited &tates, and why these are so small.9n the other hand, the emeraldsin mountains built late in the lood, even though partially eroded by the lood waters retreating off the continents, would bemore likely to survive. "his is the case in Colombia, where the shales were formed so late in the process that they were noteven metamorphosed. 8n this marvelous way, postlood peoples would have access to this precious stone, despite thecataclysmic destruction of the old earth.&ince emeralds are likely products of the lood, they aren?t mentioned in the&criptures until the time of the #xodus. %y then, postlood populations had migrated from %abel to places where they foundemeralds.8f this interpretation is correct, the creation worldview explains why emeralds are so rare. 8t also may explainanother reason why emeralds were in :ohn?s vision of the )ew :erusalem. "hree scenarios have been proposed to explainhow the necessary ingredients of emeralds came together . . .!ise of Fagma "o orm Granite -einsK Folten rock deep inthe earth?s interior, containing beryllium and water, s7ueeEes into nearsurface rocks. #meralds form wherever the magmacomes into contact with black shales and other surface rocks rich in chromium and vanadium.!ise of Hot Groundwater Along aultsK Hot groundwaters mix with salt beds deep in the earth. "hen the hot water, filled withdissolved elements like beryllium, moves up along faults and fractures into shales and other rocks containing chromium and

vanadium.racturing of Fetamorphic !ocksK *ater erodes different rocks that contain the necessary minerals, and then the water deposits them in sediments. ressure from earth movements converts these sedimentary layers into metamorphic rocks.Continuing earth movements then fracture these rock layers, creating conduits for heated water to dissolve and mix theingredients.. . . and the global lood provided the mountainbuilding forces necessary for all three scenariosO

The *eology o #srael 2ithin the Creation<&lood &ramework o -istory= 8. The )re<&lood Rocks8. The "re<&lood Rocks

by +r. Andrew A. &nelling and +allel Gates on &eptember 1, 6/

A0stract8recambrian +pre0lood schists*gneisses* and related metamorphic rocks* intruded by granites outcrop

in the Elat area of southern 5srael.3heir radioisotope ages range from)66;)!# Ma to &66 Ma. ,lso* =ust to the north of Elat is the 3imna5gneous Comple4* a &!6;&"% Maseries of granitic intrusions. ,ll

these rock units across this region were then intruded along fractures by swarms of dikes. 3ogether these metamorphic and igneous rocks form the northernmost part of the ,rabian0>ubian hield* which would have likely been a section of the pre0lood supercontinent @odinia* established during the creation. 5t is thus envisaged that this cataclysmic rate of formation of these rocks during an episode of accelerated radioisotope decay accounts for their apparent long history when wrongly viewed in the conte4t of today2s slow process rates. Anconformably overlying these 8recambrian crystalline basement rocksare terminal 8recambrian conglomerates* arkoses and interbedded* e4plosively0erupted volcanics that were obviously deposited by catastrophic debris avalanches as the pre0lood supercontinent began to break up* with accompanying igneous activity that coincided with the bursting forth of the fountains of the great deep. 5t is envisaged that another episode

of accelerated radioisotope decay must have begun months previously* the released heat progressively increasing so as toinitiate the igneous activity that ultimately triggered the renting apart of the pre0lood supercontinent at the onset of thelood cataclysm. 3he pre0loodBlood boundary in southern 5srael is thus determined as the ma=or unconformity betweenthe 8recambrian crystalline basement and the overlying terminal 8recambrian conglomerates* arkoses and volcanics*almost identical to that boundary as determined in the A.. outhwest. 3he few "!6 8o radiohalos found in some of thebasement granitic rocks are likely due to the basinal fluids that flowed from the basal lood sediments when heated by burial under the overlying thick* rapidly0accumulated se:uence of lood sediments.&hop )ow


https://answersingenesis.org/bios/dallel-gates/



https://answersingenesis.org/bios/dallel-gates/




@eywords= 8srael, geology, prelood,recambrian, schists, gneisses, granites, dikes,radioisotope ages, radiohalos, Arabian)ubian&hield, conglomerates, volcanics, acceleratedradioisotope decay, unconformity, preloodSlood boundary#ntroduction9f the many countries whose geology would beuseful to understand within the creationloodframework of earth history it would be 8srael.8srael is the land in which so many postloodevents occurred. (nderstanding the geology of

8srael would thus provide background to thoseevents, and potential insights as to where andhow they happened. However, there is also thepossibility some of the early postlood eventsmay correspond to geologic events responsiblefor specific rock formations, and therefore datethose rock layers within the creation chronology."he land of 8srael certainly did not exist in itspresent form prior to the lood, which totallyrestructured and reshaped the earth?s crust andsurface. or example, the +ead &ea trough and:ordan !iver valley lie along a ma4or northsouthfault Eone, a narrow system of faults called the

+ead &ea "ransform ault, which is the primary geologic structure in 8srael fig /$. "his fault system extends today from the

ma4or fold mountains of southern "urkey southward through &yria, ebanon, :ordan, 8srael and the Gulf of A7aba to theEone of pronounced rift faulting in the !ed &ea and beyond into Africa. "he +ead &ea "ransform ault marks the boundarybetween two enormous lithospheric plates, the Arabian plate to the east, and the African plate to the west fig. /$. !ocktypes and geologic structures on both sides of this enormous horiEontalslip fault suggest that the Arabian plate has moved

northward horiEontally by about0@ km J miles$ relative to itsoriginal position against the

African plate.8t is because of this and other dramatic evidence of ma4or movements of the earth?slithospheric plates in the pasthaving shaped the earth?ssurface geology, composed inmany places on the continents of

fossilbearing sedimentary rocklayers which were deposited bythe lood, that the lood musthave been a global tectoniccatastrophe. "herefore, themodel for the lood eventadopted here is catastrophicplate tectonics Austin et al./00>Q %aumgardner 62$. Afuller treatment of the applicationof that model to the geologicrecord within the creationloodframework of earth history isprovided by &nelling 60$. "hat

treatment also includesdiscussion of the criteria for determining the preloodSloodboundary in the geologic record,which is also applicable to thedescriptive overview here of theprelood geology of 8srael.

&ig. 8. Geologic structure map of 8srael and its ad4oining neighborsshowing ma4or faults and foldsafter Garfunkel /0B1$.relood !ock (nitsig. 6 is a fairly detailed map of the geology of the southern half of 8srael &neh et al /001$ whereprelood rocks outcrop. ig. 2 isa generaliEed stratigraphic chartshowing the succession of rockunits across 8srael %artov and

Arkin /01Q 8lani, lexer, and3ronfeld /01B$. "he only



recambrian crystalline basement rocks at the base of the stratigraphic succession are in the extreme south of 8srael,around #lat. A more detailed geological map of that area is shown in ig. >."hese prelood crystalline basement rocks consist of granitic and metamorphic rocks. Garfunkel /01$ provides acomprehensive description of these rocks, dividing them into the #lat and !oded associations or terrains$, and the "imna8gneous Complex table /$.3he Elat ,ssociation +or 3errain:ust to the south and west of #lat fig. >$ outcrops consist of #lat &chist, the "aba Gneiss, the &hahmon Fetabasites, the#lat Granite Gneiss and the #lat Granite Garfunkel /01Q Halpern and "ristan /01/Q 3r[ner, #yal and #yal /00$ table /$."he relationships between these rock units are depicted in the crosssection in ig. @."he #lat &chist has been determined stratigraphically as the oldest rock unit, which has been confirmed by an !b&r isochron age determination of 1B\2@ Fa Halpern and "ristan /01/$, and by Eircon (b age determinations of 1\/2 Faand 1/2\B Fa #yal, #yal, and 3roner /00/Q 3r[ner, #yal, and #yal /00$. 8t is a monotonous formation which consists

primarily of a mosaic of 7uartE, plagioclase oligoclaseandesine$, biotite, and some muscovite in variable proportions, withminor intercalations of impure 7uartEitic layers up to / cm thick. Fineralogical and geochemical data support a pelitic or shalygraywacke semipelitic$ origin for most of this unit #yal /01$, which is estimated to be @5/ km thick normal to thestrike of the schistosity, and which has experienced prograde regional metamorphism well into the amphibolite facies, but of the low pressure Abukuma$ type, similar to other parts of the Arabian)ubian &hield &himron and ;wart /0B$. "he lowestgrade rocks, within the biotite isograd, occur in the north and are biotitemuscovitechlorite garnetbearing schists. Fost of the #lat &chist consists of rocks within the garnet almandine$ isograd and does not contain primary chlorite. A small area iswithin the staurolite isograd, while cordierite occurs in even smaller areas. Andalusite occurs in the latter two Eones, whileprimary muscovite is uncommon, in contrast to the lower grade rocks. "he cordieritestaurolite assemblage of the highestgrade rocks indicates maximum temperatures in the range of @@5J@VC, and pressures of 65@ kbar, e7uivalent to a depthof about B5/@

km Ganguly /0B6Q *inkler /0B0$. Fineral analyses have been used by Fatthews et al. /010$ to calculate,on the basis of continuous reaction exchange geothermobarometry FgSe between garnet and biotiteQ Ca between garnetand plagioclase$, that conditions for a segment of the pressuretemperature path of the high grade staurolitecordieritesillimanite Eone assemblages were @15JVC and 2.15>.J kbar. "he schists bear evidence of four stages of mineral growth

and deformation. "he #lat &chist was intruded by a variety of plutonic rock units, now mostly gabbroic to graniticorthogneisses, the most prominent being the "aba Gneiss and the #lat Granite Gneiss.



&ig. 9. +etailed geologic map of the southern half of 8srael, from the +ead &ea to #lat on the !ed &ea and encompassingthe )egev left$ after &neh et al. /001$. "he only recambrian prelood$ rocks are found in the outlined areas enlarged inigs. > and J. +etails of most of the rock units on the map are listed in the legend below$.

"he "aba Gneiss is a foliated and lineated, mediumgrained 7uartEdiorite gneiss fig. > and table /$, consisting of 7uartE6@W$, plagioclase oligoclase$ @5JW$, and biotite, rarely with some hornblende or microcline Garfunkel /01Q Halpernand "ristan /01/$. "he rock is usually uniform, but occasionally has an indistinct coarse layering. Contacts with the schistsare sharp. 8ts texture is dominated by elongated aggregates of the main constituent minerals, which produce thepronounced lineation and moderate to weak foliation. Grain siEes are very variable. "he texture seems to indicate formationfrom a coarsegrained tonalitic pluton, followed by metamorphism and incomplete postdeformational recrystalliEation. "o thewest of #lat this gneiss is intensely deformed in a broad shear Eone so the rock has a schistose appearance and has beenmapped as a Ltectonic schistM 3r[ner, #yal, and #yal /00$. Ages have been determined by Eircon (b analyses at

B1\/

Fa and BB\0

Fa for this gneiss and this schist respectively 3r[ner, #yal, and #yal /00$, and of BB0\1

Fa andB16\0 Fa for the gneiss and BJ1\0 Fa for the schist #yal, #yal, and 3r[ner /00/$. "hese ages are indistinguishable within



the error margins, so this confirms the field interpretation that the tectonic schist represents a strongly sheared variety of the"aba Gneiss.

&ig. :. A generaliEedstratigraphic chart showing thesuccession of rock units their names and geologic ages$across 8srael from south right$to north left$ after %artov and

Arkin /01Q 8lani et al. /01B$."he #lat Granite Gneiss wasformed from granitic plutons

emplaced into the pelitic #lat&chist and the "aba Gneiss,and also from small tabular bodies emplaced in the "abaGneiss Garfunkel /01QHalpern and "risten /01/$. 8t iscomposed of about e7ualamounts of 7uartE, plagioclaseoligoclase$ and alkali feldspar,with biotite accounting for @5/@W of the rock. "he mainminerals, especially 7uartE andbiotite, tend to form elongatedaggregates. "he texture is

very variable and displaysvarying grades of recrystalliEation due todeformation Heinmann et al./00@$. "he contacts with thesurrounding rocks aregenerally concordant, andoften accompanied byfeldspathiEation of thead4acent rocks. "his aureole,and the occurrence in placesof schist xenoliths, indicatesthat the original granite wasemplaced into alreadymetamorphosed #lat &chist.

oliation and lineation varyfrom indistinct to very

prominent, but lineations are generally better developed. %oth the lineations and foliations of the gneiss are parallel to thecontacts and to structures in the enclosing rocks. &ingle grain Eircon (b determinations yield a mean 6BbS6Jb age of B>>\@ Fa, slightly younger than the "aba Gneiss and thus confirming the field relationships."he &hahmon Fetabasites intrude the #lat &chist and comprise a suite of coarse to mediumgrained metamorphosedplutonic rocks that originally consisted of a layered and differentiated intrusion a few hundred meters thick. "hey form adiverse range of compositions, from hornblende metagabbro to biotite hornblende metadiorite Heinmann et al. /00@$, butcommonly consist of plagioclase andesinelabradorite$ and amphiboles. -ariations in the amounts of these minerals and ingrain siEe produce bands and layers less than / cm to many meters thick. A border Eone consists of welllayered rockshaving a biotite and 7uartEdioritic composition, and near the borders the metabasites contain interbeds of schist. "hisbanding, layering and border facies are interpreted as a result of crystal accumulation and gross differentiation of the originalintrusion. "he occurrence of actinolite and plagioclase, but no epidote, in these rocks indicates metamorphism of themreached low amphibolite facies, which is compatible with their position close to the almandine isograd in the surrounding

schists. oliation and mineral orientation are poorly or moderately developed, except in the micarich layers and in theborder Eone where the structure is concordant with that of the enclosing schists. 9riginally thought to be the oldest plutonicassemblage of the area with primary igneous layering well preserved, abundant elongated xenoliths of foliated #lat &chistindicate that the dioritegabbro intrusion post dated at least part of the schist deformation. "his is confirmed by singlegrainEircon (b age determinations of J>\/6 to J>>\// Fa 3r[ner, #yal and #yal /00$, and of J>\/ Fa #yal, #yal and3r[ner /00/$. Amphiboles from this metabasite also yielded a mean ArAr plateau age of J26 Fa Heimann et al. /00@$ andan imprecise ArAr isochron age of J6@\11 Fa due to the presence of excess Ar$ Cosca, &himron, and Caby /000$. "heseage determinations are thus consistent with the field evidence that this suite of mafic plutonic rocks intrudes and crosscutsthe foliation of the older host #lat &chist, even though these metabasites show varying degrees of deformation andrecystalliEation that occurred subse7uent to their intrusion.

https://cdn-assets.answersingenesis.org/img/articles/arj/v3/GoI-Figure-2.jpg






















































































&ig. . "he recambrianprelood$ crystallinebasement metamorphicand igneous$ rocks in the#lat area of southernmost8srael after Garfunkel/01Q &neh et al. /001$."he locations of thesamples collected from&hehoret Canyon for theradiohalos study are shown

in the far north of the maparea.&traight and rather steeplydipping bands of lineatedhornblendebearingschistose rocks cross allrock types alreadydescribed above. "hey areup to a few meters wideand a few hundred meterslong, strike #* to )#&*,and tend to form swarms.%entor /0J/$ interpretedthese bands as

metamorphosed dikes."hey consist now of plagioclase andesine$ upto JW$, biotite 652W$,and hornblende /56W$,with 7uartE minor or absent, and sphene,apatite, and iron oxides asusual accessories. "hismineralogy indicatesmetamorphism in the lowamphibolite facies, which isgenerally not muchdifferent from the grade of the enclosing pelitic

schists. Cohen et al. 6$and 3atE et al. 6>$determined that the originalchemical composition of these dikes was andesite,which was little changed bythis metamorphism, exceptwhere hot fluids hadcaused minor alteration,mainly along the contactswith the host rocks. "hetexture consists of agranoblastic mosaic, withthe mafic minerals

arranged in layers or sheaves. Grain siEe is

uniform. ineation is very well developed and mostly parallel to that in the enclosing rocks. Good foliation is sometimesdeveloped. "he fabrics are conspicuously parallel to the walls of the dikes, but sometimes are deformed and deviate by upto 6V52V from the walls. "hese relationships indicate that the dikes were intruded after the development of the schistosity,and after folding of the contact with the granitic gneiss. &ubse7uently a penetrative lineation was imposed on all rocks. "hislineation was clearly produced during metamorphism of the dikes, and is thus younger than the foliation of the pelitic schists."his late deformation was inhomogeneous, being very strong in the dikes themselves, and often also in the ad4acent graniticgneiss, but mild in the pelitic schists even immediately ad4acent to the dikes where the older schistosity survived. Heimannet al. /00@$ obtained > ArS20 Ar totalgas ages of >0@5@06 Fa for amphiboles and >>J Fa and 2/J522J Fa average 26B Fa$for biotites, compared with > ArS20 Ar plateau ages of @>J\2 Fa to @0J\6 Fa amphiboles$ and 2J0\6 Fa to 210\/ Fabiotites$. &uch a broad range of ages was interpreted as implying two thermal events affecting these dikes subse7uent totheir intrusionDthe first coinciding with intrusion of the #lat Granite recorded by the amphiboles$, and a much later thermalevent recorded by the biotites$. However, there are two generations of these metamorphosed andesite dikes in the !odedarea, one which is discordant to the metamorphic structure of the country rocks and which intrudes the !oded PuartE+iorite, and the other which is concordant to the metamorphic structure but which does not intrude the !oded PuartE+iorite3atE et al. /001, 6>$. &ince this diorite yields Eircon (b ages of J2>\6

Fa 3atE et al. /001$ and J2\2

Fa &tein andGoldstein /00J$, these andesite dikes must have been intruded respectively 4ust prior to, and 4ust after, ]J26 Fa 3atE et al.6>$.



&ig. B. A schematic geologiccrosssection depicting therelationships between the variousmetamorphic and igneousrecambrian prelood$basement rock units in the #latarea of southernmost 8srael after Garfunkel /01$. "he symbolsand colors for the rock units arethe same as in ig. >."he #lat Granite, which outcrops

to the west and north of #lat fig. >$, forms several undeformed plutons of red porphyritic granite consisting of very sodicplagioclase up to @W$, microcline /@52W$, and 7uartE about 6@W$, with small 7uantities of biotite and some muscovite,and apatite, Eircon and iron oxides as minor accessories Garfunkel /01Q Halpern and "risten /01/$. "he texture of thiscalcalkaline granite is generally e7uigranular, with no foliation and almost no mineral lineation. "he coexistence of sodicplagioclase with nonperthitic microcline 3feldspar$ indicates subsolvus crystalliEation at pressures exceeding 25@ kbar,that is, at a depth of /5/@ km &eck /0B/$. At such pressures crystalliEation of plagioclase before 7uartE indicates a lowfew W$ water content *yllie et al. /0BJ$. "he granite near the contacts is very contaminated. Figmatites are developedalong some contacts with the schists, while contacts with the metabasites and "aba Gneiss are characteriEed by fracturingof the host rocks which are invaded by apophyses of granite. eldpathiEation is common along the contacts. "he plutons of the #lat Granite are grossly concordant with the regional structure of the enclosing rocks in spite of small scalecomplications of contacts. "he metamorphics tend to dip away from the granite plutons, suggesting some shouldering asideof the country rocks by the granite bodies, which were thus intruded after deformation of the schists and gneisses fig. @$."his is confirmed by !b&r age determinations Halpern and "risten /01/$. &everal wholerock analyses of the graniteplotted on a @0 Fa reference isochron, while the constituent minerals yielded a mineral isochron age of @0B\/ Fa.

&ubse7uently, &tein and Goldstein /00J$ obtained a !b&r isochron age for the #lat Granite of J

Fa, while Cosca,&himron, and Caby /000$ obtained an ArAr plateau age of @0B\/

Fa for biotite from the #lat Granite.3he @oded ,ssociation +or 3errain"his rock suite has been relatively little studied. Garfunkel /01$ reported that there are hardly any rock types in commonwith the spatially ad4acent #lat Association. urthermore, the structural trend in the !oded Association rocks is close to )&,almost perpendicular to that found in the rocks of the #lat Association. "he distribution of the main !oded rock types isshown in ig. > and their spatial relationships in ig. @. "he undifferentiated metamorphics include schists, gneisses, andmigmatites. "able / lists the main !oded rock types."he schists are variable in composition. 8n the north they consist essentially of plagioclase andesine$, biotite andhornblende, though some layers contain little or no biotite. 8n the south the schists consist of sodic plagioclase, 7uartE,biotite, and some muscovite, while hornblende is rare or absent. Garnet is often present. &ome beds contain more than @W7uartE. &econdary epidote, chlorite and sericite are widespread. "he texture consists of e7uigranular granoblastic mosaics."he southern schists are obviously pelitic metasediments somewhat similar to those of the #lat Association and have evenbeen designated as #lat &chist by Gutkin and #yal /001$, whereas those in the north are 7uite different and may be metavolcanics. 3Ar dating of biotite from a schist sample yielded an age of B/@\0 Fa 3atE et al. /001$.

Ta0le 8. recambrian crystalline basement rock units in southern 8srael.

*eogra"hicRegion

Rock Units Constituents Radioisoto"e Ages

"imna 8gneousComplex

PuartE monEodioritelagioclase, orthoclase, 7uartE and biotite, withsome hornblende

@00.2\6.

FaEircon (b$

Alkali granite erthite, orthoclase, albite and 7uartE, with biotite

J0\/ FaEircon (b$@06\B Fa !b&r isochron$

FonEodiorite lagioclase, orthoclase, amphibole and biotite

J/\1 FaEircon (b$@06\B Fa !b&r isochron$

9livine noritegabbro$

9livine, orthopyroxene, amphibole, biotite,magnetite and accessories

J//\/

FaEircon (b$

orphyritic granitelagioclase, orthoclase, 7uartE, perthite and somebiotite J6@\@ Fa Eircon (b$

#lat Associationor "errain$

#lat Granite&odic plagioclase, microline and 7uartE, with biotiteand some muscovite

@0B\/ Fa !b&r mineral isochron$J Fa !b&r isochron$@0B\/ Fa ArAr plateau age$

&chistose dikeslagioclase, biotite and hornblende, with 7uartEminor or absent

@0J\6 Fa amphibole ArAr plateau age$]J26 Fa host?s Eircon (b$

&hahmonFetabasites

Hornblende metagabbro to biotite hornblendemetadiorite

J>6 Fa and J>\/ Fa

Eircon (b$J26

Fa mean amphibole ArAr plateau age$

#lat GraniteGneiss

PuartE, oligoclase and alkali feldspar, with @5/@Wbiotite

B>>\@ FaEircon (b$

"aba Gneiss PuartE, oligoclase and biotite, rarely withBJ1\0

Fa to B16\0

Fa



hornblende or microcline Eircon (b$

#lat &chistPuartE, oligoclaseandesine, biotite and somemuscovite

1B\2@ Fa !b&r isochron$1\/2 Fa to 1/2\B Fa Eircon (b$

!oded Associationor "errain$

!oded PuartE+iorite9ligoclaseandesine, 7uartE, biotite andhornblende, with minor microcline

J2>\6 Fa Eircon (b$J/B\// Fa and J>B\6 Faamphibole and biotite 3Ar$

Figmatites

FelanosomesDPuartE, plagioclase and biotite,sometimes with garnet or muscovite eucosomes

DPuartE and plagioclase

B6 Fa

Eircon (b$ Amphibolites andmafic schists

Hornblende and plagioclase, with biotite andsometimes 7uartE

B6>\B Faamphibole 3Ar$

Gneisseslagioclase, 7uartE and biotite, fre7uently withhornblende

&chists Andesine, biotite, hornblende and 7uartE,sometimes with garnet and muscovite

B/@\0 Fabiotite 3Ar$

&everal types of gneisses occur, mainly to the west of the schists. "hey generally have a 7uartEdioritic or tonaliticcomposition, with up to /@W biotite, and fre7uently also some hornblende which may contain 7uartE inclusions. &econdarychlorite, epidote and iron oxides have developed mainly at the expense of the mafic minerals, and rarely does secondarymuscovite occur. &ome relatively large rectangular plagioclase crystals may be relicts of an igneous protolith. However,most plagioclase crystals are polygonal and form granoblastic mosaics, or slightly elongated aggregates. "he mafic minerals

often form aggregates which produce the foliation and lineation. ocally the gneisses are folded on a scale of a centimeter to several meters. 8n places the gneisses are banded, mainly close to the migmatite areas. 9ften the normal simple mineralmosaics here pass into crystals with complicated shapes and variable siEes, sutured textures very characteristic of migmatites. "he gneisses were probably derived from rather homogeneous 7uartEdioritic to tonalitic plutons."he migmatitesare widespread in several locations, occurring on the periphery of the !oded PuartE+iorite pluton fig. > and below$. "herock consists of schist layers, often feldspathiEed, and 7uartEplagioclase layers from / mm to several centimeters thick.%iotite layers are common. 8n one area the schist beds are often without 7uartE. "he grain siEe is very variable, and suturedtextures are very common. 8ntricate mesoscopic folding is very conspicuous. 8n another area this !oded Figmatite has beensubdivided into two typesDmildly folded migmatites and intensely folded migmatites Gutkin and #yal /001$. "hey aredescribed as dark, banded rocks showing welldeveloped layers of leucosomes and melanosomes ranging in thickness froma few millimeters to tens of centimeters. "he melanosomes consist of 7uartE 25>W$, plagioclase 652W$ and biotite65>W$, but in the mildly folded migmatites up to /@W garnet is present, whereas it is rare in the intensely foldedmigmatites, which instead contain /56W muscovite. "he leucosomes are predominantly 7uartE and plagioclase. "heabsence of 3feldspar from the leucosomes is inconsistent with derivation as a partial melt of the neighboring biotitebearing

rocks *inkler /0B0$. "hus the migmatites were probably formed by metamorphic differentiation calculated to have occurredat approximately JVC and >.@ kbar, based on the analysed compositions of garnets and the muscoviteplagioclasegeobarometer respectively Gutkin and #yal /001$. ;ircon (b dating of the migmatites has yielded an age of B6 FaGutkin and #yal /001$.!egular bands of biotite7uartEplagioclase schists, hornblendebiotite schist and amphibolites crossthe gneisses or are ad4acent to them 3atE et al. /001$. "hese have been interpreted as probably metamorphosed dikes,similar to those in the #lat Association. 8n some places separate small bodies of metagabbro and amphibolite have beenmapped Gutkin and #yal /001$. "heir foliation and lineation are parallel to their walls. urthermore, the gneisses contain avariety of irregular schist inclusions which may range from mica schists through hornblende schists to amphibolites. "heyare often deformed. "hese may be in part xenoliths or metamorphosed and dismembered minor intrusions. 3Ar dating of amphibole from an amphibolite sample yielded an age of B6>\B

Fa 3atE et al. /001$."he !oded PuartE+iorite figs. > and@, and table /$ consists of variable amounts of plagioclase oligoclaseandesine$ @5BW$, 7uartE up to 6W$, biotite up to6@W$, hornblende up to /@W$, and minor microcline up to @W$. Chlorite, iron oxides, epidote, sericite and sometimescalcite replace the mafic minerals and plagioclase. "he mafic minerals form aggregates, which are often elongated, whiletabular plagioclase crystals sometimes tend to be oriented. "hese features may produce a weak foliation which trendsroughly )&. 8n at least one area this unit has been divided into a 7uartEdiorite gneiss and a 7uartEdiorite, even thoughboth are homogeneous and have similar mineralogical and chemical compositions Gutkin and #yal /001$. Fafic stringersand elongated xenoliths, locally 7uite abundant, are arranged parallel to the foliation. 8n places there are abrupt and crosscutting contacts between varieties of 7uartEdiorite. "he xenoliths are medium to finegrained igneous or foliated rocks, allhaving a mela7uartEdioritic to meladioritic composition. As already described above, migmatites occur along much of theborders of the !oded PuartE+iorite pluton fig. >$. "hey contain tongues, often discordant, of a somewhat foliated rocksimilar to the 7uartEdiorite, only richer in mafic minerals. "he eastern border of the pluton is grossly parallel to the structuralgrain of the ad4acent metamorphics, but to the north and south the transition is along strike, though contacts are largelymasked by faults. "his 7uartEdiorite body is interpreted as having been formed by anatexis, and did not move far from itsplace of origin Garfunkel /01$. "he mosaics of polygonal 7uartE and untwinned plagioclase crystals and poikilitichornblende crystals in the 7uartEdiorite that resemble those found in the gneisses, and the stringers of mafic minerals andthe xenoliths, are probably relicts of the source rocks. "he heterogeneity of the pluton suggests incomplete mixing andproduction of many batches of partial melt. 8t is also possible that a portion of the melt moved still further upwards in thecrust at that time, so the present rock is a residue left behind. "he bordering migmatites, though most probably formed bymetamorphic differentiation, must be genetically linked to the pluton because of their spatial relationship. "he foliation of the

7uartEdiorite probably formed by flow during emplacement. ;ircon (b dating of the 7uartEdiorite has yielded acrystalliEation age of J2>\6 Fa, while 3Ar dating of amphiboles and biotites from the same rock gave ages of J/B\// Faand J>B\6 Fa respectively 3atE et al. /001$. "hus the intrusion of this 7uartEdiorite is regarded as occurring at aroundJ26 Fa 3atE et al. 6>$.&chistose dikes, which were originally andesite Cohen et al. 6, 3atE et al. 6>$, also cutacross the !oded PuartE+iorite and are discordant to the metamorphic structure of the country rocks. 9ther such dikeswhich are concordant with the metamorphic structure do not intrude the 7uartEdiorite 3atE et al. 6>$. "hus, due to thedating of the 7uartEdiorite 3atE et al. /001Q &tein and Goldstein /00J$ these dikes must have been intruded 4ust prior to,and 4ust after, ]J26 Fa 3atE et al. 6>$.A porphyritic granite or granite porphyry$ occurs in the northern part of the !oded



terrain fig. >$. "his rock has many features resembling the 7uartEdiorite, being heterogeneous, and rich in xenoliths and inbands of mafic minerals. However, this porphyritic granite contains abundant microcline 3feldspar$ as phenocrysts, oftenperthitic, enclosing plagioclase, 7uartE and mica crystals, and it is also common in the matrix. "he latter resembles thematrix of the 7uartE diorite, but is richer in 7uartE and microcline, has a lower color index, and no hornblende. Fyrmekiteand replacement of plagioclase by 3feldspar are common. Figmatites are also developed along the border of this graniteand contain 3feldspar in the leucosome, in contrast to the neighboring migmatites developed on the northern periphery of the 7uartEdiorite.&mall irregular stocks, dikes or veins of leucogranites intrude all of alreadydescribed rock units, withsharp contacts. "he compositions of these leucogranites are 7uite variable, and are characteriEed by a low color index anda high content of 3feldspar 6@5@W$. "he plagioclase is albiteoligoclase. "he leucogranites and the enclosing rocks arecrossed by numerous fractures with displacements of less than a meter and by cataclastite bands."he !oded PuartE+ioriteand porphyritic granite plutons, which are heterogenous, charged with inclusions, somewhat foliated and associated withmigmatites, resemble deepseated plutons, whereas the #lat Granite plutons are of the highlevel type %uddington /0@0Q

Hutchinson /0B$. "his suggests that the !oded Association or terrain$ was formed deeper in the crust, which is consistentwith geothermometry studies based on analysed mineral chemistries in the schists, gneisses and amphibolites 3atE et al./001$. "he peak metamorphic pressuretemperature conditions were inferred to have been about J@VC and less than @

kbar, probably attained by B6@ Fa. %oth the #lat and !oded suites of rocks though appear to record an overall similar history. 8n both terrains metamorphosed dikes probably distinguish an older metamorphic complex, including metasedimentsand completely reconstituted intrusions, from young unmetamorphosed intrusions.Timna Igneous Complex "he most northerly outcrops of the recambrian crystalline basement rocks are in the "imna area north of #lat fig. 6$. "heintrusive rocks of the "imna 8gneous Complex consists of five ma4or plutonic and various hypabyssal lithologies fig. J andtable /$ %eyth /01BQ %eyth et al. /00>aQ &hpitEer, %eyth, and Fatthews /00/$. "he plutonic variants includeKCumulates of olivine norite gabbro$, with up to >W olivine, BW orthopyroxene, /@W amphibole, />W plagioclase, /W biotite, 1Wmagnetite and sulfides$, and JW accessories apatite and Eircon$. Finor pyroxene hornblende peridotite accompanies theolivine norite.Amphibole diorite, monEodiorite and monEonite, collectively mapped as monEodiorite fig. J$, with 26521Wplagioclase, @52@W orthoclase, //52@W amphibole, @5/0W biotite, >5@W magnetite and sulfides$, and /52W accessories.

PuartE monEodiorite, with >W plagioclase, 62W orthoclase, /@W 7uartE, 2W hornblende, //W biotite, @W magnetite andsulfides$, and 2W accessories.orphyritic granite, with >>W plagioclase, 6@W orthoclase, 62W 7uartE, 2W perthite, 2Wbiotite, and 6W accessories.Alkali granite pink$, accompanied by alkali syenite, with 6>5@BW perthite, 62W orthoclase, //56@W albite, 6656>W 7uartE, 25>W biotite, /52W magnetite and sulfides$, and /6W accessories."he hypabyssal rocks include dikes of rhyolite, andesite potassic trachyandesites and shoshonites$ %eyth and eltE /006$,and diabase dolerite$, as well as composite andesiterhyolite dikes fig. J$.

&ig. . ocation and general geologic maps of, with two geologic crosssections through, the "imna 8gneous Complex in theFt. "imna area of southernmost 8srael after %eyth et al. /00>a$. "he locations of the samples collected for the radiohalosstudy are shown."he "imna 8gneous Complex is exposed over an area of about 6 km6 around Ft. "imna fig. J$. "he alkaligranite and syenite$ make up the ma4ority of these exposures, occupying the topographically elevated parts. "he lower elevations surrounding the alkali granite are built of olivine norite blocks, typically 2 ^ 2 meters, which are most probablyxenoliths, engulfed by monEodiorite with diffuse contacts. "he monEodiorites are very heterogeneous and appear to be

differentiated from olivine norite to amphibole monEonite &hpitEer, %eyth, and Fatthews /00/$. "hese are associated withsmall alkali granite stocks, while the massive part of the alkali granite and syenite overlie the monEodiorite. All these rocksare intruded into the porphyritic granite fig. J$, which occurs as blocks of varying siEes. "he youngest plutonic rock is the7uartE monEodiorite which contains numerous xenoliths of all the previously mentioned earlier$ rock types. "he dikesintrude this plutonic complex in three distinctive generations %eyth et al. /00>a$. "he oldest one is in a )& direction, theintermediate and dominant one is in an #)# direction, and the youngest in a )* direction fig. J$.;ircon (b dating determinations confirm the se7uence in which the intrusions were emplaced table /$ as gleaned fromthe field evidence outlined above. "he porphyritic granite yielded an age of J6@\@ Fa, and is thus clearly the oldest unit



exposed at "imna %eyth et al. /00>a$. &imilar ages were obtained for the olivine norite J//\/ Fa$, monEodiorite J/\1

Fa$, and the alkali granite J0\/ Fa$, consistent with the interpretation that these are comagmatic %eyth et al. /00>a$."he 7uartE monEodiorite, the youngest plutonic intrusive based on the field evidence, yielded a Eircon (b age of @00.2\6. Fa, averaged from /> grains %eyth and !eischmann /00J$. !b&r data for samples of the J/ Fa olivine norite,monEodiorite and alkali granite yield an apparent isochron age of @1/ Fa with a high F&*+ of 1.@ %eyth et al. /00>a$,which is very similar to the @06\B

Fa !b&r isochron age obtained by Halpern and "ristan /01/$ for "imna graniticrocks.%ased on wholerock ma4or, trace and rare earth element, and isotopic, geochemical analyses, %eyth et al. /00>a$concluded that the J6@ Fa porphyritic granite is a typical calcalkaline 8type subsolvus granite with volcanic arc or collisionalaffinities, which was probably generated by anatexis of slightly older crust. After an apparent transitional period from such anorogenic collisional tectonic regime, a crustal extensional tectonic regime was initiated, in which a mantlederivedmonEodiorite, or sanukitoid &tern, Hansen, and &hirey /010$, magma intruded the porphyritic granite at J/ Fa, forming astratified magmatic cell. 9livine norite formed as cumulates at the bottom of the cell and were later brought up as xenoliths

by late monEodioritic in4ections into this cell. "he alkali granite formed by fractionation from this mantlederived, 8#enriched sanukitoid magma."his interpretation that the olivine norite, monEodiorite and alkali granite are comagmatic isbased on their field relationships and on several other lines of evidence %eyth et al. /00>a Q &hpitEer, %eyth, and Fatthews/00/$. irst, these are the same J/

Fa age, within the analytical uncertainty. &econd, their )d and b isotopiccompositions are consistent with the interpretation of consanguinity. astly, their ancillary chemical data support thisinterpretation. "hese include similar 3S!b in both the monEodiorite and alkali granite, both of which are distinct from theolder porphyritic granite. urthermore, incompatible element abundances such as )b, "a, "h, and Ib are inverselycorrelated as indices of fractionation. "hus it was concluded that the alkali granite was fractionated from the monEodioritemagma, either as a conse7uence of crystal fractionation or li7uid immiscibility. Additionally, geothermobarometric studiesusing mineral chemistries indicate temperatures in the range @5JVC and pressures less than @ kbar for all these rocktypes &hpitEer et al. /00/$."he 7uartE monEodiorite, which is the youngest plutonic rock in the complex, suggests that thismonEodioritic intrusion event ended with the intrusion of the rhyolite, andesite and rhyoliteSandesite composite$ dikes %eythet al. /00>a$. "hese younger hypabyssal intrusions have chemical compositions that plot with the monEodiorite and alkaligranite respectively, so it is inferred that the fractionation relationship between the alkali granite and the monEodiorite was

repeated on a small scale between the magmas responsible for the rhyolite and andesite dikes, and is especially wellexpressed in the composite ones. "hese dikes, which were probably feeder dikes for volcanic rocks that were later eroded,have been dated in the nearby &inai area as @0 Fa &tern and Fanton /01B$."he ma4or diabase dolerite$ dike intrudedthe alkali granite, which at the time had previously been fractured and intruded by rhyolite, andesite and andesiterhyolitecomposite dikes fig. J$, so it is the youngest igneous event in the "imna complex %eyth and Heimann /000$. "his has beenconfirmed by wholerock 3Ar and ArAr determinations. "he mean 3Ar age obtained, based on two samples, was@>J.2\/./ Fa %eyth and Heimann /000$. "he total ArAr age of one sample was @6B.6 Fa, whereas its ArAr plateau agewas @2/.B\>.J Fa. %ased on the argument that the plateau age is the best estimate of a sample?s age, it was concludedthat this diabase dike was intruded at @2/.B\>.J Fa @26 Fa$. Geochemically similar diabase dikes are also found at Ft.

Amram, where alkali granite, monEonite and 7uartE monEonite are also exposed /2 km south of Ft. "imna %eyth et al/00>bQ 3essel, &tein and )avon /001$, elsewhere in the &inai riE"opfer /00/$ and in nearby :ordan :arrar, *achendorf and &affarini /006$. "he dikes in :ordan, though, yielded a 3Ar age of @>@\/2 Fa, similar to the 3Ar age of @>J.2\/./ Faobtained for the "imna diabase dike. )evertheless, the ages for these dikes are close to @>6

Fa, the defined date of theCambrianSrecambrian boundary Gradstein, 9gg, and &mith 6>$, although :arrar, *achendorf, and ;achmann /002$compiled an age of @2\/ Fa for the CambrianSrecambrian peneplain boundary in this &inai:ordan region. "hat the

diabase dike at "imna was intruded before this peneplanation occurred is confirmed by the lack of any contactmetamorphism in the overlying lower Cambrian sandstone of the Amudei &helomo ormation %eyth and Heimann /000$.Allthe intrusive rocks of the "imna 8gneous Complex have subse7uently been subtly altered. A chemical remnant magneticdirection similar to the subrecent field Fiocene to present$ was identified in the olivine norite, monEodiorite, 7uartEmonEodiorite and dikes of various compositions Farco et al. /002$. "he magnetic mineral assemblage of magnetite and "imagnetite in these rocks was thus found to have been altered by oxidation and hydration to secondary hematite andgoethite. &ubse7uent investigations %eyth et al. /00BQ Fatthews et al. /000$ showed that these alteration processes hadalso resulted in significant modification of both the mineralogy and the oxygen and hydrogen isotope compositions of theserecambrian igneous rocks, consistent with hydrothermal alteration under warm conditions _6VC$ at low to mediumwaterSrock ratios, followed by weathering or supergene alteration by local meteoric waters. "his hydrothermal activityoccurred before uplift and erosion exposed these basement rocks during the early stages of tectonic activity along the +ead&ea rift in the middle Fiocene, presumably at the very end of the lood event. "he most likely fluid source would have beenthe basinal brines in the overlying looddeposited sedimentary rocks, the movement of which into the recambrianbasement rocks below was triggered by onset of the +ead &ea rifting. "his also resulted in uplift, so the retreating lood

waters would then have eroded away some of these sedimentary rocks, exposing the recambrian igneous rocks toweathering to produce the present outcrops.General latest Precambrian igneous activity *ithin the #lat and !oded terrains are found isolated remnants of latest recambrian igneous activity that likely coincideswith the progressive emplacement of the "imna 8gneous Complex, especially the hypabyssal dikes. 3essel, &tein, and)avon /001$ delineated three distinct swarms of dikes that cut across both the #lat massif which includes both the #latand !oded terrains$ and the Amram massif which is situated between the #lat massif and the "imna 8gneous Complex tothe north$. "he oldest dike suite consists of andesitic to rhyolitic dikes that strike )& and geochemically are calcalkaline."he second group strikes )#&* and contains tholeiitic basaltic to rhyolitic dikes that crosscut the older calcalkaline dikes.%oth these suites of dikes are commonly .@5@. m wide, and have not been dated. However, dikes of similar chemistry andstratigraphic emplacement from nearby massifs show a range of ages between J and @> Fa %eyth et al. /00>a Q %ielski/016$, the calcalkaline dikes likely corresponding to the last phase of the emplacement of the #lat Granite. inally, theyoungest group of dikes, not represented in the #lat massif, consists of two )*&# striking alkali basaltic dikesapproximately J m wide in the Amram massif. "hese diabase dolerite$ dikes are similar in orientation, appearance and

chemical composition to the diabase dolerite$ dike in the "imna massif which also cuts across dikes of two older swarmssimilar to the calcalkaline and tholeiitic dikes in the #lat and Amram massifs %eyth et al. /00>a, b$. %eyth and Heimann/000$ concluded that "imna diabase dike was intruded at @26 Fa.Gutkin and #yal /001$ also recogniEed the same older two suites of dikes in the Ft. &helomo area, @ km northwest of #lat, as described by 3essel et al. /001$. "he first oldest$group forms a swarm of hundreds of dikes, a few meters thick, which in many cases cross one another, but are usually onlytens of meters long. "hese dikes similarly range from andesite or andesitic basalt to dacitic and rhyolitedacitic. "he secondyounger$ swarm crosscuts all the metamorphic and plutonic country rocks as well as the earlier dikes, and consists of afew large rhyolitic dikes, one of which is /52 m thick and more than 2 km long.Garfunkel /01$ noted a volcanic neck in



the southern part of the !amat Iotam area about 6 km west of #lat, containing tuffs and surrounded by a hydrothermallyaltered breccia of "aba Gneiss. &ubse7uently, #yal and eltE /00>$ mapped the structure of what they recogniEed as adeeply eroded ashflow caldera, now called the !amat Iotam Caldera. Although faulted after eruption, when restored to itsoriginal position this ellipticallyshaped caldera would have had a diameter of about 6 ^ 2 km. Composed mainly of silicicignimbrites, the thickness of the exposed composite section is about 6@ m."hese silicic ignimbrites of the !amat Iotam Caldera are the southernmost representatives of the silicic #lat volcanic field#yal and eltE /00>$, remnants of which are exposed further north in the &hehoret Canyon area and at Ft Amram, as wellas to the northwest at Ft. )eshef. "hese outliers of the #lat volcanic field cover some /2 km6. Garfunkel /01$ claimed thatthe !amat Iotam Caldera could have been the source of these dacitic or rhyodacitic ignimbrites found further north, so%ielski /016$ dated many of these tuffs and obtained a wholerock !b&r isochron age of @>1\> Fa. &egev /01B$ thoughregrouped these and other similar volcanic rocks according to their individual sites and recalculated their !b&r isochronages, obtaining ages of @60\/6 Fa Ft. )eshef$, @>1\> Fa &helomo area$, and @26\B Fa for Ft. )eshef and three other

nearby sites in northeastern &inai and southwestern :ordan combined$. Clearly, given the spatial and temporal proximity of these explosivelyerupted silicic volcanic rocks to the recambrianCambrian boundary and therefore the beginning of thelood event see below$, and the unreliability of the radioisotope dating methods &nelling 6Q -ardiman, &nelling, andChaffin 6@$, it is 7uite likely that the explosive eruption of these rhyolitic volcanics and ignimbrites, and the intrusion of theassociated dikes, were related to the initiating stage of the Lbreaking upM of the Lfountains of the great deep.MThe Ara0ian<Nu0ian Shield"hese recambrian basement granites and metamorphics in southern 8srael and in neighboring :ordan$ are recogniEed asthe northernmost exposed extent of the Arabian)ubian &hield. "his recambrian shield area outcrops along the coastlinesof the Gulf of #lat or A7aba$ and across into the &inai eninsula 3r[ner, #yal, and #yal /00$, and extends along either side of the !ed &ea. 9n the African coastline is the )ubian &hield of #gypt and &udan that also extends through #ritrea intonorthern #thiopia, while along the opposite !ed &ea coastline is the Arabian &hield of &audi Arabia that extends into Iemen%e?eri&hlevin et al. 60Q &tacey and Hedge /01>Q &ultan et al. /00$. "hat these two shield areas were once 4oinedtogether as the Arabian)ubian &hield has been established by reconstructing the pre!ed &ea opening configuration, thetwo areas matching along the !ed &ea rift line."he geochronologic and isotopic evidence available confirms that the

Arabian)ubian &hield was originally part of the recambrian supercontinent !odinia. "he oldest rock so far established is agranodiorite in &audi Arabia that has yielded a aleoproteroEoic Eircon (b concordia age of /,J61\6 Fa &tacey andHedge /01>$, which was concluded to probably be its emplacement age. urthermore, the b isotopes show that these/,J2 Fa crustal rocks could have inherited material from an older, probably Archean, source at the time of their formation."his is consistent with contemporaneous addition of mantle material that considerably modified the !b&r and &m)dsystems so that they now yield similar, or only slightly older, /,J5/,1 Fa apparent ages.8n the northernmost Arabian)ubian &hield in the &inai eninsula, detritral Eircons within a schist, coupled with wholerock )d isotopic analyses, haveprovided evidence of pre)eoproteroEoic crust %e?eri&hlevin et al. 60$. "he detrital Eircon age population was bimodal,with concordia ages in the /,5/,/

Fa range. "he wholerock )d isotopic value was significantly lower than for 4uvenile)eoproteroEoic rocks in the region, which was interpreted as implying that / Ga age crust was incorporated into thenorthernmost Arabian)ubian &hield. "he `/19 Eircon$ values were also consistent with supracrustal recycling beinginvolved in the formation of this /,5/,/ Fa crust."he Arabian)ubian &hield, consisting of a diverse variety of metamorphosed sedimentary and volcanic rocks intruded by granitic and other plutonic rocks, thus has an apparent longhistory somewhat similar to the recambrian crystalline basement rocks exposed in the inner gorges of the Grand Canyon innorthern AriEona %eus and Forales 62$. "he initially created and formed earth, likely with an initial crust divided from the

mantle and core, and then subse7uently further formed and structured the crust to produce the dry land, likely as asupercontinent, perhaps that identified as !odinia by the conventional geologic community. "he Arabian)ubian &hieldwould have been a part of the prelood supercontinent, thus designating these recambrian crystalline basement rocksexposed in southern 8srael as likely Creation *eek rocks, similar to their e7uivalents in the Grand Canyon Austin /00>$.8f some credence is given to the radioisotope age determinations of these recambrian metamorphic and granitic rocks of the #lat area in southern 8srael fig. > and table /$ as already detailed, then, due to the systematic pattern of radioisotopeages that would result from an episode of accelerated nuclear decay during the Creation *eek &nelling 6@bQ -ardiman,&nelling, and Chaffin 6@$, there are significant differences between these rocks and their e7uivalents in the GrandCanyon. "here is no doubt that they form the crystalline basement foundations to the stratigraphic succession of sedimentary rock units in 8srael fig. 2$. However, they yield radioisotope ages of 151/2 Fa for the #lat &chist to J5J6@

Fa for the #lat Granite and "imna 8gneous Complex, placing them according to &nelling 60$ in the prelood erabetween Creation *eek and the lood, at the time when the )eoproteroEoic Chuar Group sediments were being depositedin the Grand Canyon area Austin /00>$. 8n the Grand Canyon the basement metamorphic and granitic rocks yieldaleoproteroEoic radioisotope ages of /.B25/.B@ Ga metamorphics$ and /.1> Ga and /.JJ5/.B> Ga granites$ %eus and

Forales 62$, placing them in the early part of the Creation *eek Austin /00>Q &nelling 60$, and are overlain by theFesoproteroEoic (nkar Group sediments and lavas that were likely midlate Creation *eek rocks. "hus if thesemetamorphic and granitic rocks in southern 8srael are to be placed in the creation framework of earth history based only ontheir radioisotope ages, then they would have to represent metamorphism and magmatism that occurred during the prelood era, while people and animals were living elsewhere on the supercontinental land surface. "his seems unlikely, soclearly using relative radioisotope ages is not always a reliable indicator of where rock units should be placed in the creationframework of earth history, as mixing and inheritance are still processes that can perturb the radioisotope systems &nelling6, 6@b$. 8ndeed, crustal recycling of radioisotopes and mixing of mantle components in the Arabian)ubian &hield iswell documented %e?eri&hlevin et al. 60Q 3r[ner, #yal, and #yal /00Q &tacey and Hedge /01>Q &ultan et al. /00$, asalready indicated above.Radiohalos8t hardly seems necessary to defend the catastrophic formation of these metamorphic and granitic rocks in southern 8srael if they were formed. However, it can be demonstrated that both regional metamorphism and granite magmatism arecatastrophic processes &nelling /00>, 6B, 60$. 9ne important indicator that imposes severely short time constraints on

these processes is the formation within these rocks of polonium radiohalos &nelling 6@a, 6B, 61b, cQ &nelling and Armitage 62Q &nelling and Gates 60$. &o it is to be expected that polonium radiohalos would be present in theserecambrian granitic rocks in southern 8srael."he !oded orphyritic Granite and the "imna 8gneous Complex?s monEodioriteand alkali granite were sampled five samples from each area$ see figs. > and J$. 9utcrops sampled in the &hehoretCanyon and "imna areas respectively are shown in ig. B. "he samples were processed and biotite flakes mounted for microscope examination to count their contained radiohalos according to the method outlined by &nelling and Armitage62$. ig. 1 provides photomicrographs of the different sampled rock units showing their mineralogy and textures, whileig. 0 shows some of the radiohalos found in the biotites of these samples. All five samples of the !oded orphyritic Granite



contained 6/o radiohalos, while three samples each contained a 621( radiohalo, with an abundance range of .J5.BJradiohalos per slide in the separated and mounted biotite flakes table 6$. 8n contrast, only two samples from the "imna8gneous Complex, both monEodiorite, contained radiohalos, but both 6/o and 621( radiohalos, with a higher abundancerange of /.25/.@ radiohalos per slide table 6$."he ratios of 6/oK621( radiohalos are high and typical of recambrian prelood$ granitic rocks, as are the low radiohalos abundances &nelling 6@a$. "his is because these granitic rocks havelikely had all the radiohalos that formed in them initially, when the original magmas crystalliEed and cooled, subse7uentlyannealed by temperatures of /@VC and above generated by their burial below the thick overlying sedimentary rockse7uence deposited during the lood &nelling 6@a$. "hus the radiohalos now observed in these granitic rocks were likelyformed by the passage of further hydrothermal fluids through them during the lood, for which there is abundant evidence inthem, namely, the chloritiEation of biotites and sericitiEation of feldspars, as observed in the thin sections fig. 1$.&ig. 0elowF. 9utcrops sampled for the radiohalos study locations shown in igs. > and J$. a$ General view of &hehoretCanyon, looking Lupstream.M b$ &ample 8G!/ collection site from the !oded orphyritic Granite exposed in &hehoret

Canyon. c$ &ample 8G!2 collection site from the !oded orphyritic Granite in &hehoret Canyon. d$ "he !oded orphyriticGranite at the sample 8G!@ collection site showing the dark enclaves of mafic minerals. e$ General view of the alkaligranite of the "imna 8gneous Complex, in the "imna mountains, opposite and above the sample 8G!/ collection site. f$"he alkali granite of the "imna 8gneous Complex at the sample 8G!J collection site. g$ "he monEodiorite of the "imna8gneous Complex at the sample 8G!B collection site. h$ the monEodiorite of the "imna 8gneous Complex at the sample8G!/ collection site.



&ig. G 0elowF. hotomicrographs of some of the samples examined in the radiohalos study. All are at the same scale 6^or / mm > mm$ and as viewed under crossed polars, a$ !oded orphyritic Granite, sample 8G!/K plagioclase withmultiple twinning$, microcline, and biotite colored flakes showing alteration$. b$ !oded orphyritic Granite, sample 8G!>Qplagioclase partly extinguished$, microcline, biotite altered$, and 7uartE small grains$. c$ !oded orphyritic Granite,sample 8G!@K plagioclase, microcline, and biotite. d$ "imna alkali granite, sample 8G!JK perthite intergrown plagioclaseand orthoclase$, biotite altered$, and orthoclase. e$ f$ "imna monEodiorite, sample 8G!BK plagioclase, orthoclase, perthite,biotite, and magnetite black$. g$ h$ "imna monEodiorite, sample 8G!/K plagioclase, orthoclase, biotite, amphibolealtered$ and magnetite.

&ig. H 0elowF. hotomicrographs of some of the radiohalos identified and counted in the radiohalos study see table 6$. Allare at the same scale >^ or / mm 6m$ and as viewed in plane polariEed light. a$ !oded orphyritic Granite, sample8G!/, slide 26, three 6/o radiohalos and one 621( radiohalo top$. b$ !oded orphyritic Granite, sample 8G!/, slide 26,three 6/o radiohalos. c$ !oded orphyritic Granite, sample 8G!6, slide /@, three 6/o radiohalos and one partial 621(radiohalo to the left on the edge of the grain$. d$ "imna FonEodiorite, sample 8G!B, slide B, one 6/o radiohalo upper

left$, three 621( radiohalos bottom center and right$, and several elongated fluid inclusions. e$ "imna FonEodiorite, sample8G!B, slide /2, four 6/o radiohalos plus fluid inclusions. f$ "imna FonEodiorite, sample 8G!B, slide /2, one 6/oradiohalo lower left$, one 621( radiohalo upper right$ and fluid inclusions. g$ "imna FonEodiorite, sample 8G!/, slide 2,three 6/o radiohalos, with one of them around a fluid inclusion. h$ "imna FonEodiorite, sample 8G!/, slide 6>, two 6/oradiohalos, with one around a fluid inclusion.

#ven though all the rock unitssampled table 6$ show the effects of alteration subse7uent to their originalcrystalliEation, there are obviousdifferences in their radiohaloabundances. "he "imna alkali granitecontains no radiohalos, the !odedorphyritic Granite a few radiohalos,

and the "imna monEodiorite many moreradiohalos. Assuming that all these

granitic rock units after crystalliEation were sub4ect to temperatures above /@VC, due to subse7uent deeper burial by thickoverlying looddeposited sedimentary se7uences, so that all the radiohalos produced in them when they originallycrystalliEed were annealed, then these relative differences in radiohalo abundances in these rock units could be due to themsubse7uently experiencing different 7uantities of hydrothermal fluids during the lood event. "hat greater abundances of radiohalos are produced by greater 7uantities of hydrothermal fluids has been well established and verified, both in graniticrocks &nelling 6@a, 61cQ &nelling and Gates 60$ and in metamorphic rocks &nelling 61a, b$.Ta0le 9. !adiohalos in the recambrian #lat Granite, and alkali granite and monEondiorite from the "imna 8gneousComplex.



'ocation Rock Unit

Sam"leNum0er

Num0er o Slides

Radiohalos Num0er o Radiohalos "er Slide

Num0er o )oRadiohalos"er Slide

Ratio98>)o=9:GU98>

<

)o

98)o 98G)o 9:GU 9:9Th

&hehoretCanyon #lat Granite

8G!/ @ 2B D D D D .B> .B> D

8G!6 @ > D D D D .1 .1 D

8G!2 @ 2 D D D D .J .J D

8G!> @ // D D D D .66 .66 D

8G!@ @ 1 D D / D ./1 ./J 1K/

"imna ark,and "imnaFountains

"imna alkaligranite 8G!J @ D D D D D D D D

"imnamonEodior ite 8G!B @ J6 D D / D /.6J /.6> J6K/

"imnaalkaligranite 8G!1 @ D D D D D D D D

"imnamonEodior ite

8G!0 @ D D D D D D D D

8G!/ @ B6 D D 2 D /.@ /.>> 6>K/

8t can easily be demonstrated that these granitic rock units in southern 8srael were buried under thick sedimentaryse7uences during the lood. 8n the areas where these samples were obtained, the unconformity between these granitic rockunits and the overlying looddeposited sedimentary se7uence is exposed fig. /$. "hus at some stage during the lood, asor after the overlying sedimentary se7uence was deposited, the basinal brines in these deeply buried basal Cambrian$sediments 4ust above the unconformity would likely have been heated sufficiently to become hydrothermal fluids. "his hasbeen confirmed by evidence that temperatures in the overlying Cambrian sandstone reached as high as 6VC -ermeesch,

Avigad, and Fc*illiams 60$. "hese hydrothermal fluids would then have circulated down into the underlying recambriancrystalline basement rocks. "hat this has certainly occurred in the "imna 8gneous Complex rocks has been confirmed bypaleomagnetic and isotopic evidence%eyth et al. /00BQ Farco et al. /002QFatthews et al. /000$. And since itoccurred at the end of the loodduring the early triggering stages of tectonic activity along the +ead &earift, which is ad4acent to both sampledareas, then most of the recambriangranitic and metamorphic rocks wouldhave been affected similarly.However, %eyth et al. /00B$ showedthat the monEodiorite was morealtered than the alkali granite by these circulating hydrothermal fluids. "hus it seems reasonable to conclude that the degree

of alteration corresponds to the volume of hydrothermal fluids which circulated through these rocks. "his in turn would beconsistent with the earlier proposal that the greatest abundance of radiohalos in the monEodiorite is due to a greater volumeof hydrothermal fluids circulating through it during the lood. 8f this conclusion is correct, then it would imply that the !odedorphyritic Granite in the &hehoret Canyon area, with its consistent low radiohalos abundance, had slightly morehydrothermal fluidflow through it than the "imna alkali granite with its complete lack of radiohalos.

&ig. 8>. "he unconformity between the recambrian prelood$ crystallinebasement rocks and the overlying Cambrian sandstone at the base of the loodsediment se7uence. a$ b$ Above &hehoret Canyon c$ d$ %elow &olomon?sillars in the "imna area, close by the sample 8G!B collection site see fig. J for location$.%iotite, which hosts the radiohalos in the !oded orphyritic Granite andthe "imna monEodiorite and alkali granite, is also present to abundant in the #lat&chist, the "aba Gneiss, the #lat Granite, and the #lat Granite Gneiss, as well as

the metadiorites of the &hahmon Fetabasites, of the #lat Association, in the

schist, gneisses and 7uartEdiorite of the !oded Association, and in the "imna8gneous Complex?s olivine norite, 7uartE monEodiorite, and porphyritic granite.&ince radiohalos are known to be abundant in similar recambrian schists,gneisses and granitic rocks &nelling 6@a$, especially the e7uivalent of thepelitic #lat &chist in the Grand Canyon, it is anticipated that both 6/o and 621(radiohalos would be relatively abundant in these metamorphic and graniticrocks in southern 8srael. "heir presence could further confirm the catastrophic



formation of these granitic rocks, and the catastrophic mode and rate of the regional metamorphism that formed theseschists and gneisses &nelling /00>, 6@a, 61b$.The "re<&loodI&lood %oundary and the Terminal )recam0rian

Austin and *ise /00>$ suggested five discontinuity criteria for determining the position of the preloodSlood boundary inthe strata record of any region. "hese were a mechanicalerosional discontinuity, a time or age discontinuity, a tectonicsdiscontinuity, a sedimentary discontinuity, and a paleontological discontinuity. 8n applying these criteria to the Grand CanyonFo4ave +esert region of the (. &. &outhwest, they identified the boundary as 4ust below the terminal recambrian &ixtymileormation 4ust below the Great (nconformity in the Grand Canyon, but within the )eoproteroEoic 3ingston eak ormationin the Fo4ave +esert, with a considerable thickness of terminal recambrian sedimentary layers above that boundary. 8nboth places there are thick )eoproteroEoic sedimentary units sitting on the crystalline basement below this boundary, but inthe Grand Canyon the aleoEoic strata se7uence immediately overlies the &ixtymile ormation. "his is because the terminalrecambrian sedimentary se7uence, the earliest deposits of the lood, thickens westwards from off the higherstanding pre

lood crystalline basement exposed in the Grand Canyon.

&ig. 88. "he generaliEedstratigraphic se7uenceacross 8srael, extendingfrom the Fediterraneancoast in the northwest to

Arabia in the southeastafter reund /0BB$. "herelationships between thema4or rock units of 8srael?sgeology are depicted, withthe heavy linesrepresenting the regional

unconformities separatingsix ma4or stratigraphic LpackagesM of strata. "he conventional ages of the tops and bottoms of these strata LpackagesM aredesignated. +otted areas indicate clastic rocksQ bricks indicate shales and nonclastic mainly calcareous$ rocksQ vs indicatevolcanics.A similar situation appears to apply in southern 8srael figs. 2 and //$. 8n the #lat area the fossiliferous Cambriansedimentary strata of the early lood sit directly on the eroded surface of the crystalline basement of the northernmost

Arabian)ubian &hield 3arcE and 3ey /0JJ$ figs. /, // and /6$, a remnant of the prelood supercontinent that brokeapart at the beginning of the lood Austin et al /00>$. However, to the north beyond the northern edge of the exposedcrystalline basement of the Arabian)ubian &hield figs. // and /6$ the sedimentary strata se7uence thickens, and at itsbase are terminal recambrian units Garfunkel /0B1$. "hese include unmetamorphosed )eoproteroEoic sediments, mainlyimmature coarse clastics interpreted as molassetype debris that was deposited on the flanks of the crystalline basementcomplex as it was eroded and shaped at the end of the recambrian %entor /0J/Q icard /0>2$.8n the #lat region coarseconglomerates the #lat Conglomerate$ interbedded with minor intermediaterhyolitic volcanics are exposed in smallgrabens figs. > and @$ that predate the erosion of the peneplain surface on the crystalline basement %entor /0J/QGarfunkel /0B1$. "hese sediments consist of coarse, poorly sorted, polymictic conglomerates with a matrix of lithic arkoserich in dark minerals Garfunkel /000$. "he conglomerates are well cemented, with subangular to slightly rounded pebbles

and boulders ranging in siEe from a few centimeters to /. meter Gutkin and #yal /001$. !ock units presented asfragments in this conglomerate include all rock units known from the ad4acent recambrian crystalline basement. 8ndeed,the relative amount of pebbles of any rock unit within the conglomerate increases with proximity to the in situ outcrop of thisrock unit, which indicates the transport distance during conglomerate deposition must have been very short and thereforedeposition was very rapid. #ven pebbles derived from the LyoungestM andesite and rhyolite dikes on which the conglomeratesits unconformably are one of the main constituents of this #lat Conglomerate Garfunkel /000Q Gutkin and #yal /001$.However, a few dikes are intruded into the #lat Conglomerate, indicating both a younger event of dike intrusion postdatingdeposition of this conglomerate, and the very short duration of the conglomerate deposition during this continuing se7uenceof dike intrusions.

&ig. 89. &chematic stratigraphic crosssection of southern 8srael, indicating the ma4or unconformities and the relationships of

the terminal recambrian sediments and the overlying lood sediments to the recambrian crystalline basement of the Arabian)ubian &hield A)&$ after -eermeesch, Avigad, and Fc*illiams 60$. "he inset map shows the location of thiscrosssection.+istinct from the #lat Conglomerate, but also unconformably overlying all the eroded crystalline basementrocks including the dikes, is a 65> m thick volcanoconglomeratic series that is also preserved in small grabensGarfunkel /000$ figs. > and @$. "his series begins with a basal conglomerate layer similar to that of the #lat Conglomerate,and in the &helomo area most of its pebbles consist of local 7uartEdiorite gneiss and migmatite of the !oded Association$Gutkin and #yal /001$. "he rest of the series in that area, about 26 m thick, is mainly composed of andesiticbasaltic lavasand pyroclastic flows alternating with several conglomerate layers, and is intruded by hypabyssal andesitic bodies and



7uartEporphyry dikes. A few arkose layers are also in this series. Contained boulders are usually big .65/. m$ androunded, but comprise only a small percent 652W$ of the rock?s volume."hese exposures of the #lat Conglomerate and thevolcanoconglomeratic series probably represent the margins of a large basin known from the subsurface via drillingGarfunkel /0B1$, in which the terminal )eoproteroEoic ;enifim ormation, more than 6.1 km thick in the !amon/ well,accumulated Garfunkel /000Q *eissbrod /0J0$ fig. //$. "his formation consists of arkoses, similar to the matrix of theexposed conglomerates, some conglomerates, and small amounts of finer clastics, as well as andesitic volcanics anddiabase intrusives, one of which in the Hameishar/ well$ yielded a 3Ar age of J0\0 Fa Garfunkel /000$. "he availablesubsurface data from drilling suggests that this terminal recambrian ;enifim basin which formed north of the #lat area was/@56

km wide and received the outwash from an uplifted area exposing mainly granitoids andSor gneisses, though someigneous activity also contributed to the basin fill. "he source area was probably situated to the south where the northernmost

Arabian)ubian &hield is now exposed in the #lat area and the nearby &inai, because the grain siEe of the basin sedimentsgenerally tends to decrease northwards.Applying the five discontinuity criteria of Austin and *ise /00>$ to determine the

preloodSlood boundary in southern 8srael, there are only two possibilitiesK the unconformity at the base of the fossiliferousCambrian strata se7uence, or the unconformity between the crystalline basement and the terminal )eoproteroEoic coarseclastics with interbedded volcanics figs. // and /6$. 8n any case, these two unconformities merge at the exposed erosionsurface on the crystalline basement, which certainly represents a mechanicalerosional discontinuity. "here is only a veryshort time or age discontinuity at both unconformities, and both unconformities represent tectonic discontinuities. &o far there is no data on whether the ;enifim ormation contains any fossils, but due to it consisting of coarse immature clastics,the depositional conditions would not have been conducive for fossiliEation.-ery little data pertaining to the ;enifimormation is available apart from that obtained in boreholes, so a definitive determination is problematical. However, givensome clear similarities between the coarse, poorly sorted, polymictic conglomerates and immature lithic arkoses of the;enifim ormation and the #lat Conglomerate and volcanoconglomeratic series$ and both the &ixtymile ormation inGrand Canyon and the 3ingston eak ormation in the Fohave +esert, it is considered that on balance the ;enifimormation and the related conglomerates$ likely represent the initial lood deposits in southern 8srael. *ith the breaking upof the Lfountains of the great deepM triggering the onset of the lood, massive erosion of the crystalline basement wouldhave occurred, with submarine debris avalanches rapidly accumulating these sediments catastrophically on the flanks of the

rifting edges of the prelood supercontinent Austin et al. /00>Q Austin and *ise /00>Q &igler and *ingerden /001Q*ingerden 62$. "he presence of interbedded volcanics and contemporaneous explosive volcanism would be testimony tothe volcanic activity likely accompanying this breaking up process. "hus the preloodSlood boundary in southern 8sraelwould be the unconformity between the terminal roteroEoic ;enifim ormation and the erosion surface across thecrystalline basement. However, in some places the fossiliferous Cambrian strata se7uence sits unconformably directly onthat erosion surface across the recambrian crystalline basement.(nlike the Grand CanyonColorado lateau area wherethere is a very large radioisotope time gap between the last igneous activity the Cardenas %asalt and related diabase sillsconventionally regarded as ]/./ Ga$ and the onset of the lood event near the terminal recambrianCambrianunconformity Austin /00>Q Austin and *ise /00>Q %eus and Forales 62$, in the northernmost Arabian)ubian &hield areaof southern 8srael, repeated, almost continuous igneous activity seems to have spanned the last / million years or so of the recambrian right up to, and on into, the onset of the lood event. "he physical manifestation at the earth?s surface thatthe lood was beginning was the catastrophic Lbreaking upM of Lthe fountains of the great deepM, but the creation accountdoesn?t indicate what precursors may have been occurring inside the earth, even for years before, which triggered thatLbreaking up.M rom a geophysical perspective, igneous activity had to have built up molten rock and accompanying steaminside the earth under confining pressure until the magma and steam were cataclysmically released by the renting apart of

the earth?s surface. "hus the rocks resulting from this igneous activity throughout the terminal recambrian in southern8srael may be the record of this precursor buildup inside the earth that eventually triggered the lood event. 8ndeed, thelatest igneous activity from about J/ Fa onwards has been described as occurring in a crustal extension or rifting tectonicregime, with the intrusion of the "imna alkali granite and monEodiorite followed by the multiple generations of dike swarms,and the initiation of catastrophic erosion and depositional of the ;enifim ormation %eyth et al. /00>aQ Garfunkel /000$.Asfor the radioisotope timescale involved, -ardiman et al. 6@$ reported five independent evidences that demonstrate a lot of nuclear decay occurred during the lood event at grossly accelerated rates. A significant biproduct of this acceleratedradioisotope decay would have been a huge amount of heat, which would have rapidly increased as the radioisotope decayexponentially accelerated. 8f this acceleration of radioisotope decay was initiated months before the lood event began onthe earth?s surface, then the heat which rapidly accumulated as a result would have begun melting upper mantle and lower crustal rocks. "he intrusive igneous rocks produced within those few months would have LagedM radioisotopically by tens of millions of years due to the accelerating nuclear decay, while the pressure confining the molten rock and steam would havebuilt up until they could not be held LinM any longer, so Lthe fountains of the great deepM were broken up. &uch an initiationprocess would thus explain the close spatial and temporal relationship between the terminal recambrian igneous activity in

the prelood crystalline basement of southern 8srael and the tectonic upheaval and catastrophic erosion and depositionwhich marked the beginning of the cataclysmic lood event.

The *eology o #srael within the Creation<&lood &ramework o -istory= 9. The &lood Rocksby +r. Andrew A. &nelling on +ecember /@, 6/

A0stract





3he sedimentary strata that cover most of 5srael are an obvious record of the lood. , ma=or erosion surface +unconformityat the base of the sedimentary se:uence cut across the 8recambrian +pre0lood crystalline basement rocks. 3his resulted from the catastrophic passage of the lood waters as they rose in enormous tsunami0like surges over the continental land at the initiation of the lood event. 3hese rising lood waters transported sediments and marine organisms over thecontinental land. Many thousands of meters of marine sediments were thus deposited on a vast scale across 5srael* rapidly burying myriads of marine organisms in fossil graveyards. and organisms were similarly overwhelmed by the lood waters*their remains buried with the marine organisms. 3he global e4tent of some of these sedimentary layers in 5srael is confirmed by correlations of strata across and between continents* such as the sandstone with pebbles at the base of the lood se:uence* and the massive pure chalk beds at the top. 3he creation account of the lood describes the formation of mountains from halfway through to the end of the year0long lood event. 3hus late in the lood powerful tectonic upheaval processes overturned and upthrust lood0deposited sedimentary strata to form these mountains. imultaneous isostatic

ad=ustments also resulted in restoring continental land surfaces as the lood waters receded and drained into new deepocean basins. 5n 5srael this great regression is marked by the end of the widespread Dmarine sedimentation and an erosionsurface across the country. 3he subse:uent minor local continental sedimentation represents residual post0lood geologic activity. 3he end of the lood also coincided with the commencement of the rifting that opened the @ed ea and the Fead ea0(ordan @iver rift valley* as well as the uplifting of the (udean Mountains and the upthrusting of Mt. ermon.&hop )ow

@eywordsK 8srael, geology, lood, sedimentary strata, fossils, erosional unconformities, eloodSlood boundary,loodSpostlood boundary8ntroduction





https://cdn-assets.answersingenesis.org/img/articles/arj/v3/geology-fig-1-map-a.jpg



https://cdn-assets.answersingenesis.org/img/articles/arj/v3/geology-fig-1-map-b.jpg



https://cdn-assets.answersingenesis.org/img/articles/arj/v3/geology-fig-1-key-a.jpg



&ig. 8 "". 9GJ98F. +etailed geologic map of 8srael, in two ad4oining sheets, from the mountains of ebanon in the northnorthern sheet$ to the )egev and !ed &ea in the south southern sheet$ after &neh et al. /001$. "he only recambrianprelood$ rocks are found in the far south of the country near #lat. 9therwise most of 8srael is covered by lood rocks.+etails of most of the rock units on the map are listed in the legend.urthermore, because some postlood events likelyaffected the geology of 8srael, identifying those effects may aid our alignment of the global geologic record within thecreation framework of history."he yearlong global catastrophic lood is the event which divides the global geologic recordinto its three main sectionsDprelood, lood, and postlood rocks. &nelling 6/a$ identified and discussed the prelood rocks of 8srael, found only in the #lat area in the far south of the country. "he unconformity across the top of therecambrian igneous and metamorphic basement rocks was suggested as marking the onset of the lood, which also

included the rapid deposition of coarse clastic sediments arkose and arkosic conglomerate$ accompanied by volcanicsbasalt flows, some erupted under water, and explosively erupted tuffs and other pryoclastics$ Garfunkel /01$, consistentwith the breaking up of the prelood crust as waters of the fountains of the great deep erupted."he initiation of this breakingup of the prelood crust triggered the catastrophic plate tectonics that provides a coherent, all embracing model for thelood event and its contribution to the global geologic record Austin et al. /00>Q %aumgardner 62$. A fuller treatment of the application of that model to the geologic record within the creationlood framework of earth history is provided by&nelling 60b$. "hat treatment also includes presentation and discussion of the details of the lood event and the

https://cdn-assets.answersingenesis.org/img/articles/arj/v3/geology-fig-1-key-b.jpg



evidences of catastrophic deposition of the lood sediments, all of which is relevant to the descriptive overview here of thelood rocks of 8srael.&lood Rock UnitsFuch of 8srael consists of exposed looddeposited fossiliferous sedimentary strata, from the far north of the country downthrough the central LspineM of the :udean Hills to the )egev in the south reund /0B1Q Garfunkel /0B1$. ig. / in two parts$is a detailed geologic map of the whole country &neh et al. /001$. igs. 6 and 2 are two depictions of the stratigraphicsuccession of the rock units across 8srael %artov and Arkin /01Q reund /0BBQ 8lani, lexer and 3ronfeld /01B$. ig. 6provides more details of the rock types, while ig. 2 is more stylistic and includes subsurface information obtained inboreholes.8n southern 8srael the flatlying sedimentary strata sandstone, limestone and shale$ stacked above theunconformity representing the beginning of the lood are about /.J km / mi.$ thick, similar to the strata se7uence exposedin the Grand Canyon Austin /00>Q %eus and Forales 62$. 8t was originally expected that this approximately /.J km / mi.$thick Cambrian through :urassic sedimentary se7uence in southern 8srael would be persistent in thickness into central and

northern 8srael, being concealed there beneath the widespread cover of Cretaceous limestone and chalk. However, atFakhtesh !amon in the central )egev, where over 0/@ m 2, ft$ of "riassic, :urassic and Cretaceous sedimentary strataare exposed, drilling penetrated another 6, m J,@J ft$ of sedimentary strata before reaching the unconformity with theprelood crystalline basement Austin /001a$. urthermore, at !amallah only 6> km or /@ mi. north of :erusalem$ drillingand seismic refraction profiling indicate that there is about B, m 66,0J ft$ of sedimentary strata down to the sameunconformity. &imilarly, drilling on the coast near GaEa penetrated some J, m /0,J1 ft.$ of sedimentary strata beforereaching the basement granite. "herefore, there is more than a threefold thickening of looddeposited sedimentary stratain the subsurface beneath central and northern 8srael and northwestward into the Fediterranean &ea basin. And given thatthese sedimentary layers contain abundant marine fossils, the ocean waters clearly rose and prevailed during the lood,covering the region.

&ig. 9. A generaliEed stratigraphic chart showing the succession of rock units their names and geologic ages$ across 8sraelfrom south right$ to north left$ after %arton and Arkin /01Q 8lani, lexer and 3ronfeld /01B$.

https://cdn-assets.answersingenesis.org/img/articles/arj/v3/geology-fig-2.jpg



&ig. :. "he generaliEed stratigraphic se7uence across 8srael, extending from the Fediterranean coast in the northwest to Arabia in the southeast after reund /0BB$. "he relationships between the ma4or rock units of 8srael?s geology are depicted,with heavy lines representing the regional unconformities separating six ma4or straigraphic LpackagesM of strata. "heconventional ages of the tops and bottoms of these Lmegase7uencesM are designated. +otted areas indicate clastic rocksQbricks indicate shales and nonclastic mainly calcareous$ rocksQ vs indicate volcanics.enifim !ormationu""ermost Neo"roterozoic1 terminal )recam0rianF

As argued by &nelling 6/a$, the first of the lood rock units was likely the sediments and volcanics of the ;enifimormation fig. 2$. 8n the #lat area polymictic conglomerates and volcanics outcrop in several small grabens %entor /0J/QGarfunkel /01$. "hey lie on the eroded surface of the metamorphic and granitic basement rocks. "he conglomerates

contain clasts of all those older crystalline rocks, including the dikes. "he matrix of the conglomerates is rich in lithicfragments and mafic minerals. %oth clasts and matrix of these conglomerates are derived locally, indicating catastrophicerosion and nearby burial before fragile and weatheringprone minerals could disintegrate. "hese coarse conglomerates areinterbedded with basalt and spilite flows the latter indicating eruption under water$, intermediateacid volcanics, tuffs andpyroclastics indicative of violent eruptions$.Grouped together informally as the #lat conglomerate, these conglomerates withinterbedded volcanics have been correlated with the very similar &aramu4 Conglomerate in :ordan, southwest of the +ead&ea and in 8srael west of the Avara -alley, and with the ;enifim ormation, known only from boreholes in the )egev. 8ndeed,the outcropping #lat and &aramu4 conglomerates are regarded as representing the margins of a large subsurface basin inwhich the ;enifim ormation, more than 6,1 m 0,/1 ft$ thick in the !amon/ well, accumulated Garfunkel /0B1Q*iessbrod /0J0$. "his formation consists of arkose, similar to the matrix in the exposed conglomerates, and small amountsof finer clastics as well as volcanics.*hile it has been argued &nelling 6/a$ that these conglomerates and the ;enifimormation arkose and volcanics bear some resemblance positionally to the terminal )eoproteroEoic &ixtymile ormation inthe Grand Canyon and the 3ingston eak ormation and overlying units in the Fo4ave +esert California$ Austin and *ise/00>$ as the initial lood deposits, a closer correlative may be the Fount Currie Conglomerate and (luru Arkose of central

Australia &nelling /001Q &weet and Crick /006Q *ells et al. /0B$. "he Fount Currie Conglomerate is also a coarsepolymitic conglomerate with an arkose matrix identical to this unit?s lateral e7uivalent, the (luru Arkose, which together areup to J, m /0,J1 ft$ thick. "hese were once interpreted as glacial deposits Holmes /0J@$. &imilarly, Garfunkel /01$describes the #lat conglomerate as sometimes Lnot unlike glacial depositsM. 8nstead, all these named and other rock unitsare excellent examples of the results of catastrophic submarine debris avalanches when the edges of the preloodsupercontinent collapsed as the breakup of the fountains of the great deep triggered the initiation of catastrophic platetectonics Austin et al. /00>Q Austin and *ise /00>Q &igler and *ingerden /001Q *ingerden 62$. urthermore, both the;enifim ormation arkose and conglomerates in 8srael, and the Fount Currie Conglomerate and (luru Arkose in central

Australia &nelling /001$, are added testimony to the catastrophic erosion and deposition at the onset of the loodcataclysm responsible for the rapid local accumulation of such enormous thicknesses of the immature sediments that wereimmediately buried by ongoing lood sedimentation. "he underwater and explosively erupted volcanics interbedded with the;enifim ormation arkose and conglomerates are also consistent with the breaking up of the prelood crust explosivelyreleasing lavas as well as steam when the lood began."am#$uf Group Cam0rianJDe/onianF"he exposed upper surface on the recambrian metamorphic and granitic basement in southern 8srael is a regular

peneplain that extends over hundreds of s7uare kilometers Garfunkel /0B1$. 8n the #lat region the uppermost few meters of these basement rocks appear to have been deeply weathered before being covered by sediments. However, thisweathering profile may have originally been up to hundreds of meters deep in the prelood world, so that what remains is

4ust a remnant after the severe deep erosion across this crystalline basement at the onset of the lood. *hile the peneplainis usually a featureless plain, there is some local relief, sometimes 7uite rugged, amounting to /5/@ m 261 ft5>06 ft$ inthe #lat area 3arcE and 3ey /0JJ$.

&ig. . "he bedding inthe sedimentary strataoverlying the crystallinebasement is parallel tothe erosion surfaceacross it. a$ "he cliffforming Amudei

&helomo ormation of the Cambrian Iam&uf Group at &olomon?sillars, "imna. )ote thatthe erosion surface

unconformity$ across the crystalline basement is at the base of these cliffs. b$ "he sedimentary strata se7uence in the"imna area, with the Iam&uf Group in the lower half of this cliff."he overlying sedimentary strata are parallel to the surfaceof the basement fig. >$. However, because their conventional age varies from place to place, from early Cambrian near #lat




and south of the +ead &ea the Amudei &helomo ormation of the Iam&uf Group$ to late Carboniferous in the subsurfaceof the )egev, it is claimed that this peneplain was shaped during various periods in different places, supposedly over some62 million years Garfunkel /0B1$. #ven its primary shaping during the early Cambrian in the #lat&inai region is suggestedto possibly have taken /56 million years. %ut to suggest this vast flat peneplain was little modified over such a vast periodis totally inconsistent with erosion processes and rates even in the present. 8t is far more reasonable for a singlecatastrophic erosive event to have swept across the region to shape the peneplain, such as the devastating tsunamisgenerated by the cataclysmic earth7uakes as the prelood crust broke up at the initiation of the lood, that must haveswept up and onto the prelood land surface, deeply stripping weathered rock off it in a matter of hours to days. "hedifferent ages of the sediments then deposited onto that peneplained surface in different places would simply have been dueto the successive sedimentladen tsunamis sweeping inland and depositing the various sediment layers in different placesover the ensuing days of the lood event.

&ig. B. &tratigraphic section of theCambrian of southern 8srael after &egev/01>Q -ermeesch, Avigad and Fc*illiams60$. "he deeply weathered and erodedupper roteroEoic granitic basement isunconformably overlain by lower Cambrianpebbly arkoses sandstones$ of the Amudei&helomo ormation, subarkoses andcarbonates of the "imna ormation, andfinegrained subarkoses and 7uartEarenites of the &hehoret and )etafimormations, all together making up theIam&uf Group."he first rock unitsdeposited on this exposed peneplain are

those of the 2 m 01> ft$ thick Cambrian5ower 9rdovician Iam&uf Group, which iscomprised of four formations fig. @$. "hefirst of these is the Amudei &helomoormation, which is up to 0 m 60@ ft$ thickand consists of brown, red and gray,relatively immature arkose to subarkosicsandstone, with fine to gritsiEed, roundedand poorlysorted grains, with lenses or beds of 7uartEitic polymictic pebbleconglomerate, often present at its base&egev /01>Q -ermeesch, Avigad andFc*illiams 60$. ig. >a shows the fullthickness of the flatlying Amudei &helemoormation sandstone with its bedding

paralleling the peneplained unconformitysurface on top of the recambriancrystalline basement, while ig. J is acloser view of the unconformity at the samelocation. ig. B shows the basalconglomerate at the unconformity, whileig. 1 shows crossbedding within thearkosic sandstone. %oth the basalconglomerate and the crossbedding in thearkosic sandstone, together with the poorlysorted mixture of mineral grains especiallyfeldspars$ and rock clasts, are indicative of very rapid transport and deposition of thisformation, consistent with the initial lood

conditions.(nconformably overlying the Amudei &helomo ormation is the "imna

ormation, which consists of two membersDthe Hakhlil Fember overlain by the &asgon Fember fig. @$. "he HakhlilFember is in turn composed of four subunits. At its base is a conglomerate comprising pink to brown polymictic, poorlysorted, angular 7uartE porphyry fragments, which are up to 6 cm 1 in.$ in diameter &egev /01>Q &egev and &ass /010$.9verlying it are laminar red, finegrained to coarse subarkosic sandstones fig. 0$. "hese are overlain by beds of finegrained sandstone to grit cemented by calcite and dolomite, and sandy dolomite layers which alternate with red, purple andgreen siltstones and shales. "he cemented sandstone beds exhibit crossstratified internal structures and ripples. "heuppermost subunit is composed of varicolored shales and siltstones containing thin beds and lenses of limestone and

dolomite.

&ig. . "he peneplainedunconformity erosionsurface$ on top of therecambrian prelood$crystalline basement rocksbeneath the Cambrian

Amudei &helomo ormationsandstone arkose$ at thebase of the lood se7uence,&olomon?s illars, "imna.



&ig. . "he basal conglomerate in the Amudei &helomo ormation, 4ust above the unconformity with the recambrian prelood$ crystalline basement rocks, above &hehoret Canyon."he upper part of the >@5@ m />B5/J> ft$ thick "imnaormation is the &asgon Fember, which is characteriEed by complicated lateral relationships between three distinctivelithofacies fig. @$. "hese were originally defined as separate members, but the fre7uent and irregular transitions betweenthem and the inability to map them has led to them being grouped together into the &asgon Fember. 8t is this member thathosts copper mineraliEation &egev and &ass /010$, which was originally exploited by the #gyptians, and some uraniummineraliEation &egev /006$. "he first of these three lithofacies is a dolomitic lithofacies up to 61 m 06 ft$ thick which ismainly composed of wellbedded brown to gray sandy dolomite with a few interbeds of shale, sandstone and limestone&egev /01>, /006Q &egev and &ass /010$. &edimentary structures include lamellar rippledform$ stromatolites, gentlecrossstratification, ripple marks and trace fossils. Copperrich horiEons typify the base of this lithofacies fig. /$. "he maincopper minerals in the dolomites are copper sulfides, but copper carbonate malachite$ also occurs in the sandstones fig./$. 8t has been proposed that intense weathering of the copper porphyry granites and 7uartEporphyry dikes of the "imna

8gneous Complex during the late recambrian late prelood$ provided the source of copper incorporated into thesesediments &hlomovitch, %arFatthews and Fatthews /000$. "he sandy lithofacies is distinguished by finegrained to grittysubarkoses cemented by manganese and clay minerals. 8t is generally @5B m /J562 ft$ thick, reaching a maximumthickness of 6/ m J0 ft$. "he upper part is laminar and contorted, the laminar structure reflecting regular alternation of variation in the content of black manganese oxides. "he unit is commonly brecciated, mainly along intraformational faults,with collapse structures, and copper and manganese mineraliEations are dispersed throughout. "he transitions betweenthese two lithofacies is either abrupt, gradual or in the form of interfingering tongues fig. @$. %locks of the dolomiticlithofacies, in a wide range of siEes, are commonly found in the sandy lithofacies. "he shaly lithofacies, which overlies boththe dolomitic and sandy lithofacies, is usually only 6 m J.J ft$ thick and is composed of light green, red or brown shales,siltstones and finegrained subarkoses containing manganese and copper mineraliEations.

&ig. G. Crossbedding sets in the arkosic sandstone of the Amudei &helomo ormation, which indicate rapid water transportof the sand a$ &olomon?s illars, "imna. b$ Above &hehoret Canyon.

&ig. H. "he laminar red,

finegrained to coarsesubarkosic sandstonesof the Hakhlil Fember of the "imna ormation canbe seen 4ust abovehalfway up this cliff near &hehoret Canyon.

&ig. 8>. Green malachite copper carbonate$ in the coarse sandstone of the &asgon Fember of the "imna ormation, within old mining tunnels firstdug by the #gyptians in the "imna area. a$ ine malachite grains following

the laminations of crossbedding in the sandstone. b$ Coarser malachitein a band within the sandstone.(nconformably overlying the "imnaormation are the &hehoret and )etafim ormations, which together complete the Iam&uf Group fig. @$. "he &hehoret ormation is up to />1m >1@ ft$ thick and consists of fine to coarsegrained subarkosicsandstones, which have been informally subdivided into a lower multicolored unit, a middle white unit and an upper variegated unit &egev/01>Q -ermeesch, Avigad and Fc*illiams 60$. "he 66 m B6 ft$ thick)etafim ormation comprises finegrained 7uartE arenite with alternating

layers of siltstone and claystone. "here is some disagreement over whether the )etafim ormation is upper Cambrian only,or transitional into the lower 9rdovician."he Cambrian designation of the Iam&uf Group was established principally due toits basal position in the sedimentary strata se7uence of 8srael, where it sits directly and unconformably on the recambriancrystalline basement. "his is confirmed conventionally by the presence of both lower Cambrian brachiopods and trilobitesfound in the "imna ormation Cooper /0BJQ arnes /0B/$Dtrilobites in both the Hakhlil Fember and the sandy lithofaciesof the &asgon Fember, and brachiopods in the dolomitic lithofacies of the &asgon Fember. "hese fossils wouldconventionally indicate that these rocks and the overlying formations are younger than @6 Fa anding et al. /001$.&ome age information has also been obtained from > ArS20 Ar and (b radioisotope dating of detrital 3feldspar and Eircongrains respectively Avigad et al. 62Q 3olodner et al. 6JQ -ermeesch, Avigad and Fc*illiams 60$ figs. // and /6$."he detrital 3feldspar grains were obtained from a sample of the &hehoret ormation subarkosic sandstone, considered tohave a depositional age of about @ Fa. ifty singlegrain, 3feldspar, laser totalfusion extractions yielded a population of ages that tightly clustered around @2@ Fa lower Cambrian$, indicating a single provenance and thermal history. About half of the grains yielded apparent ages that overlap with the very latest phase of igneous activity in the recambrian basement,



while all the grains are older than the depositional age. "he > ArS20 Ar age spectrum produced by stepheating yielded late)eoproteroEoic to Cambrian apparent ages between @6 and @1 Fa, and a plateau age of about @J Fa. However, noneof these > ArS20 Ar apparent ages is likely to represent the provenance age of these detrial 3felspar grains, as the oldestEircon (b ages for suitable, close enough, source rocks are @1 Fa for an alkaline pluton intruding the )eoproteroEoic&aramu4 conglomerate :arrar, *achendorf and ;ellmer /00/Q :arrar, *achendorf and ;achmann /002$, and J/ Fa for a"imna alkaline granite %eyth et al. /00>$.

&ig. 88. +etrital grainage distributionand density estimate of 3feldspar > ArS20 Ar data after -ermeesch, Avigad and Fc*illiams60$. )ote the logarithmic scale on

the time axis of the main graph. Alinear version of the hightemperaturedata is shown as an inset left$.

AbbreviationsK n number of grainsQ f smallest fraction sampledwith 0@W certainty."he detrital Eircon (b ages fig. /6$are more revealing. Avigad et al.62$ extracted and analyEed detrial

Eircon grains from four sandstone samples, one from each of the four formations comprising the Iam&uf Group, includingone sample from the basal section of the Amudei &helomo ormation. 9n the other hand, 3olodner et al. 6J$ 4ustfocussed on the same sandstone sample Avigad et al. 62$ had collected from the &hehoret ormation. )evertheless, thespread of detrital Eircon (b ages in the resultant histograms fig. /6$ was similar. "he ma4ority of grains yielded (b agesless than 0 Fa, consistent with the conventional ages of the nearby underlying )eoproteroEoic igneous and metamorphic

basement rocks of the northern Arabian)ubian &hield %eyth et al. /00>Q Halpern and "ristan /01/Q 3r[ner, #yal and #yal/00$. However, there were also grains with FesoproteroEoic, aleoproteroEoic, and even Archean (b ages, up to 2/Fa. 8ndeed, the three groupings at 05// Fa, /J@5/1@ Fa, and 6>@56B Fa represent about 2W of the totalEircon grains analysed. "hese ages coincide with the crystalline basement rocks of the &aharan Fetacraton of north Africa,the southeastern portion of the Arabian)ubian &hield in &audi Arabia, and granitoids in central Africa, which has led to thesuggestion that some of these detrital Eircon grains may have been transported up to 2, km /,1J> mi.$ before depositionand burial in these Cambrian sandstones of southern 8srael.

&ig. 89. Histogram showing age distribution of detrital Eircons from the Cambrian siliciclasticsection of southern 8srael after Avigad et al. 62$."otal number of Eircons 6. /@B grains yieldedconcordant ages. 6JbS621( ages are used for Eircons younger than .1 GaQ6BbS6Jb ages are7uoted for older grains. >2 discordant grains are

plotted on the basis of their 6BbS6Jb ages.&uchan agreed long distance of sand transport bybraided streams in littoral and shallow marineenvironments Garfunkel /0B1Q -ermeesch, Avigadand Fc*illiams 60$ may be somewhatinconceivable, but during the onset of the globallood cataclysm it is expected. urthermore, thecontext of these sandstones is totally inconceivableunless their deposition was during the lood.Garfunkel 66$ describes the widespreaddistribution of early aleoEoic sediments rightacross north Africa to Arabia as Lthe largestsediment body preserved on earthM %urke and3raus 6Q Choubert and aureFauret /0B@Q

+e*itt et al. /011$. "his 6, km /,6>2 mi.$ wideplatform of fartraveled mature clastic sedimentsstretches from the west coast of north Africa to

central &audi Arabia, although only large LpocketsM remain as a result of the subse7uent erosion and reworking of thosesediments. 8n southern :ordan and northwest &audi Arabia this strata se7uence thickens, and so extends up through the9rdovician and &ilurian into the +evonian Garfunkel 66Q icard /0>2Q *eissbrod /0J0$. "he same Cambrian5&iluriansedimentary layers also outcrop in both &yria and "urkey, and are easily recogniEed as L)ubianM sandstone in #gypt andibya. 9nly relics remain as much of this vast and voluminous sediment body, comprising Lthe largest body of sedimentsever depositedM, was eroded already before the ermian in &audi Arabia and late Cretaceous in the )egev, with the detritusprobably being swept as far south as the 3aroo basins of southern Africa Garfunkel /0B1$.&uch scales for a single vast andvoluminous sediment body are not observed for any sediments being deposited today, nor such 2, km /,1J> mi.$ longdistances of sediment transport, to deposit, or to erode and carry away, such sediments. Iet these scales are to beexpected in the global lood cataclysm. urthermore, a similar vast and voluminous body of sandstone, with a similar basalconglomerate, is found on another continent, and also sitting unconformably on a recambrian crystalline basement. "he"apeats &andstone in the Grand Canyon is the basal lithosome of the &auk Fegas7uence, which covers, or once covered,much of )orth America Austin /00>Q &loss /0J2$. As well as a basal conglomerate, with boulders up to >.@ m /@ ft$ wide,the base of the "apeats &andstone is often subarkosic, with 3feldspar grains ripped up from granites in the underlyingrecambrian basement on which it sits unconformably Austin /00>Q %eus and Forales 62$. And Cambrian trilobites arefound in the transition Eone between the "apeats &andstone and the overlying, laterally deposited, %right Angel &hale."hesimilarity of the Amudei &helomo ormation sandstone figs >, J and B$ to the "apeats &andstone is remarkable, given theynow outcrop on different continents thousands of kilometers apart. Iet there is no 7uestion that they correlate as directe7uivalents, both in their stratigraphic position and in their makeup. "here is also the enormous scale of these continent



wide sand deposits, which were formed at the same time and in the same way. "his is not to suggest they could have beenthe same single deposit of sand. !ather, they are consistent with a single global event forming them both at the same timein the same way. )othing like this is happening today, so the present is not the key to the past, as conventionally thought."oday?s slowandgradual geologic processes are not depositing the same uniform sand beds with basal conglomerates onan unconformity surface right across two continents at the same time. "hese two very similar, e7uivalent and enormoussandstone layers are instead remarkable testimony to the onset of the global lood cataclysm. *ith the breaking up of theprelood crust, both oceanic and continental, and the initiation of catastrophic plate tectonics, the margin of the preloodsupercontinent collapsed, and the rising ocean waters energiEed into repeated tsunamis by the catastrophic earth7uakesswept up onto and right across the continental plates, bringing sand and other sediments with them scraped off the shallowocean floors, and eroded off the prelood crystalline basement to produce more sand and other sediments, which werethen deposited across that eroded and peneplaned, continentwide unconformity surface Austin et al. /00>Q Austin and*ise /00>Q %aumgardner 62Q &nelling 60a$.

Negev Group u""er Car0onierousJlower TriassicF"here is an erosive unconformity at the top of the upper Cambrian lower 9rdovician$ )etafim ormation sandstone of theIam&uf Group in southern 8srael figs. @ and /2$. "he e7uivalents of the Iam&uf Group in southern :ordan and northwest&audia Arabia are much thicker because they also include 9rdovician, &ilurian and lower +evonian sedimentary layers fig./2$ Garfunkel 66Q icard /0>2Q *eissbrod /0J0$. And the same Cambrian5 &ilurian strata outcrop in &yria and "urkey,so it is likely that this whole thicker strata se7uence was originally deposited right across 8srael. &ubse7uently much of it waseroded from across 8srael, leaving this truncated remnant in southern 8srael, with 4ust the erosive unconformity at the top astestimony to the enormous erosion that occurred. "he scale of this erosion was continentwide, with the detritus transportedvery long distances, for example, right across Africa to the south Garfunkel /0B1$.

&ig. 8:. Correlation chart of the Cambrian5&ilurian stratigraphic units of 8srael and surrounding countries after Garfunkel66$."his again is only consistent with the scale of geologic processes during the lood cataclysm. After the initial surges of therising ocean waters across the continental plates, the water levels over the sediments on the continents would havedramatically fluctuated, due to the ebbs and surges caused by repeated tsunamis, and the tides which now resonated on a

global ocean Clark and -oss /00Q &nelling 60b$. Combined with rapid movements of the sedimentladen surfaces asthe continental plates now moved at meters per second Austin et al. /00>$, any rapid continentalscale regression of thelood waters would have catastrophically eroded into the previously deposited sediment layers on a massive scale, both inarea and depth. "hen with the next transgression as the lood waters again surged across the continents, further erosioninto the previouslydeposited sediment layers would have occurred, followed close behind by the next cycle of rapidsedimentation. As this next LpacketM of sediments was deposited, it would be inevitable that the layers deposited couldinvolve lateral LfaciesM changes across the continents within the same megase7uence, due to the mixture of sediment typesin the surges, the water flow speeds, and how long the supply of the different sediment types lasted as they were water




transported across the continents. Conventionally, these lateral LfaciesM have resulted in the different LfaciesM layers beinggiven different formation names, when in fact such formations are lateral e7uivalents deposited at the same time from thesame surges of lood waters.8n southern 8srael the Iam&uf Group is overlain unconformably by 7uartEose sandstones of unknown age, though they are likely to still be aleoEoic *eissbrod /0J0$. "his is because the next cycle of sedimentationis known to have begun with upper Carboniferous sediments, based on sedimentary strata of upper Carboniferous andermian conventional ages found in the subsurface of southern 8srael, but also exposed around the northern part of the Gulf of &ueE, in west central &inai, and east of the +ead &ea Garfunkel /0B1Q *iessbrod /0J0$. 8n the subsurface of the )egevthree formations have been definedK"he &a?ad ormation is essentially sandy, is upper Carboniferous, and lies unconformably on the terminal recambrianvery earliest lood$ ;enifim ormation, or on volcanics."he Ar7ov ormation is upper Carboniferousermian and consistsof alternating shales and carbonates, with few sandstones under the northern )egev, but becoming essentially sandy under the central )egev."he Iamin ormation is ermian, and consists mainly of carbonates, but sandstone is abundant in the

south."he total thickness of these sedimentary layers is >5@ m /,2/65/,J> ft$ Garfunkel /0B1Q *eissbrod /0J0$."ogether they have been grouped into the )egev Group fig. 2$. 8n the south they are truncated by the lower Carboniferousunconformity. "oo little is known about these upper Carboniferousermian sedimentary layers in 8srael and ad4acentcountries, but as their conventionally interpreted marine character becomes more pronounced to the north and northwest, itis presumed that the ermian transgression came from that direction. "he ermian"riassic boundary is not exposed, butprobably occurs on top of the Iamin ormation. 8t is thus not clear whether there is a hiatus at that level. However, overlyingthe Iamin ormation, and exposed in Fakhtesh !amon in the central )egev, is the lower "riassic ;afir ormation, whichconsists mainly of shales with variable 7uantities of limestone. 8t has been also included in the )egev Group *iessbrod/0J0$. 8ts inclusion increases the total thickness of the sedimentary layers in this group to up to J m /,0J1 ft$ reund/0BB$.

%amon Group TriassicF"riassic sedimentary rock units are wellexposed in the central )egev, primarilyin Fakhtesh !amon, a huge elongated

craterlike erosional structure that hasbeen called the LGrand CanyonM of 8srael Austin /001a$, where over /,m 2,61 ft$ of socalled FesoEoic strataare exposed fig. />$. "here are five"riassic named formations, thelowermost ;afir ormation mainlyshales and sandstones with variable7uantities of limestone$ being assignedto the )egev Group. "he remainingfour "riassic formations constitute the!amon Group Garfunkel /0B1$ fig./>$K"he !a?af ormation consists mainly of limestones, with some dolomite, and

siltstone and shale layers, with a richmarine fossil fauna. "he rocks aremostly micrites and biomicrites."heGevanim ormation is relatively rich inclasticsDsandstones and siltstones inlower parts, and shales and siltstonesin upper parts, which also containfossiliferous limestones. "he amount of shales and carbonates increasesnorthward, in the subsurface."he&aharonim ormation consists mainlyof carbonates, with lesser amounts of claystones and mudstones, and somesulfates especially anhydrite and

gypsum$. "he carbonates in the lower part are micrites, both biomicrites andgrainsupported biomicrites. "heamount of dolomite increases up thesection, and so does the amount of sulfates. "hese are associated withfossil stromatolite beds and some flatpebble conglomerates. Concurrentlythe formation becomes lessfossiliferous."he Fohilla ormation ischaracteriEed by a great developmentof anhydrite and gypsum in exposuresonly$ which are associated withdolomites and some shales. 9olitesand beds with an impoverished fossilfauna are also present. "his formationis characteriEed by abrupt facieschanges, in contrast with the underlyingformations in which facies changes are

gradual.



&ig. 8. Composite stratigraphic section of the "riassic sediment layers in southern 8srael after arnes, %en4amini andHirsch /01@$. "he locations from where exposed outcrops and boreholes were used to construct this composite stratigraphicsection are shown in the inset location map.*here well developed, the "riassic strata range in total thickness from @ m/,J> ft$ to /,/ m 2,J1 ft$. "he !a?af ormation is B m 62 ft$ thick in the !amon/ borehole, but only 6B m 10 ft$ of itare exposed at Har NArif to the south of Fakhtesh !amon fig. />$ arnes, %en4amini and Hirsch /01@$. 8n Fakhtesh!amon the Gevanim ormation is 6B m 11J ft$ thick although only the upper /2 m >6J ft$ are exposed$, and the&aharonim ormation is /@25/B m @65@@1 ft$ thick %en4amini, +ruckman, and ;ak /002Q arnes, %en4amini and Hirsch/01@$. "he known thickness and facies variations of the "riassic formations are compatible with a pattern of )#5&* belts,and the distribution of the clastics, mainly sandstones, is compatible with a southeasterly provenance +ruckman /0B>$.However, a southwesterly provenance is e7ually probable, as paleocurrent measurements in the sandstones of theGevanim ormation indicate the predominant direction of sediment transport was to the northeast 3arcE and %raun /0J>Q3arcE and ;ak /0J@, /0J1$. "hese paleocurrent measurements were derived from crossbeds that consistently dip at /@5

6@V, which is consistent with water transport of those sands Austin /00>Q -isher /00$."he nature of the !amon Groupsediments themselves and their fossil contents fig. />$ clearly indicate that ocean waters had flooded over the area,although the postulated depositional environments all involved only shallow waters Garfunkel /0B1$. Carbonates arepresent in most of the "riassic se7uence, with clastics sandstones and shales$ important in the lower part, and evaporitesprecipitites$ becoming common in the upper part fig. />$. 9pen marine, shallow marine subtidal, intertidal and supratidal$,restricted brackish to hypersaline$, and continental depositional environments have all been postulated +ruckman /0B>$.*ithin the exposed stratigraphic section in Fakhtesh !amon, from the upper half of the Gevanim ormation through the&aharonim ormation to the Fohilla ormation, it is claimed there is evidence for some five coupledtransgressiveSregressive cycles %en4amini, +ruckman and ;ak /002$, but these can be interpreted as representingoscillations in the lood conditions.&even successive levels of ammonites are present in the !amon Group, through the!a?af, Gevanim and &aharonim ormations, which are useful for correlating these strata around the Fediterranean regionarnes /0J@Q arnes, %en4amini and Hirsch /01@$. %ut these are not the only marine creatures fossiliEed in these rockunits. "he &aharonim ormation particularly has rich micro and macrofossiliferous horiEons, including the ammonites, withconodonts, bivalves, nautiloids, brachiopods, other molluscs, cephalopods, crinoids and echinoderms %en4amini, +ruckman

and ;ak /002$. )ear the base of the formation is a limestone bed with a great many preserved cephalopods, with other nautiloids, and some ammonites. &ponges and corals are notably absent. ossiliEed burrows are the main trace fossils,while foraminifers are the main microfauna. Algal structures are found in the limestone beds, and stromatolites increase inabundance upwards in the dolomite and evaporate precipitite$ beds through the &aharonim and Fohilla ormations. &omeof these stromatolites are domal structures up to 6 m J.J ft$ in diameter."he Fohilla ormation is more than 6 m J@J ft$thick in Fakhtesh !amon, so this massive deposition of dolomite and gypsumSanhydrite evaporites precipitites$ warrantsexplanation. !ather than the conventional interpretation of a hypersaline environment in which these dolomites and sulfatesslowly accumulated by evaporation, within the global lood the catastrophic expulsion of hot saline hydrothermal fluids intothe cold lood waters can explain these deposits via rapid precipitation Hovland et al. 6JQ &nelling 60b$. &uchhydrothermal fluids would have been associated with, and produced by, nearby magmatic and volcanic activity.8t is thussignificant that also exposed in Fakhtesh !amon are a composite gabbro laccolith up to 0 m 60@ ft$ thick !ophe, #yaland #yal /002$, basaltic and trachytic dikes and sills %aer /002$, and stocks, bosses, dikes and sills of 7uartE syenite8tmar and %aer /002$, all of which are indicative of prolonged and intense magmatic and volcanic activity in this regioncoinciding with the deposition of the sedimentary strata. "he gabbro laccolith has been 3Ar dated at being emplacedbetween /2J\> Fa and /60\> Fa ang et al. /011$, while the 7uartE syenite intrusions have been !b&r dated at /B\/6

Fa &tarinsky, %ielski and &teinitE /01$ and 3Ar dated at /2\@ Fa ang and &teinitE /01@$. &uch conventional earlyCretaceous dates are consistent with these intrusions being younger than the sedimentary strata they intrude. "he gabbrolaccolith was emplaced between gypsum beds in the upper "riassic Fohilla ormation, and the 7uartE syenite intrusions arevariously emplaced in the middle "riassic Gevanim ormation and :urassic strata overlying the !amon Group, while thebasaltic and trachytic dikes and sills also regarded as early Cretaceous$ intruded into the "riassic Gevanim, &aharonim andFohilla ormations and the overlying lower :urassic units.Conventionally, therefore, there could be no connection betweenthis magmatic and volcanic activity and the deposition of the Fohilla ormation sulfate precipitites. 9n the other hand,however, within the yearlong Global lood there would have been only up to a few weeks between deposition of the"riassic strata and the lower Cretaceous emplacement of the intrusives. "hus the magma chambers that fed these intrusiveshad to already have been emplaced and active in the weeks preceding emplacement of the intrusives, so that the hot salinehydrothermal fluids associated with this magmatic activity could have been escaping along fractures into the lood watersabove to rapidly precipitate their dissolved salts to deposit the Fohilla ormation sulfates. 8ndeed, it is likely the intrusiveswere subse7uently emplaced along the fractures and pathways the growing magma chambers produced during catastrophicexpulsion of the saline hydrothermal fluids."hat abundant saline hydrothermal fluids were associated with these intrusives is

evident from the hydrothermal alteration present especially in the 7uartE syenite bodies, and from the contact metasomaticalteration and brecciation of the sedimentary rocks immediately ad4acent to the intrusives 8tamar and %aer /002$.urthermore, polymetallic hydrothermal mineraliEation occurs as veins and lenses within phreatomagmatic breccia Eones atthe roofs of the 7uartE syenite intrusions close to their contacts with the overlying sedimentary rocks. "his polymetallichydrothermal mineraliEation consists of Ag, b, ;n, Cd, Cu, Co, )i and e sulfides, arsenides and sulfoarsenides plusnative &n in a ganguedominated by 7uartE and abundant anhydrite and gypsum, with rare 3feldspar and fluorite. 3Ar dating of this gangue 3feldspar at /6@\6 Fa indicates that this hydrothermal veining was the last stage in the magmaticactivity 8tamar and &teinitE /011$. &ignificantly, the calculated oxygen and sulfur isotopic compositions of the hydrothermalfluids, based on analyses of oxygen isotopes in the gangue 7uartE and sulfur isotopes in the vein sulfides 8tamar andFatthews /011$, indicate that the hydrothermal fluids and the sedimentary connate waters had the same composition,consistent with mixing of the two. "hus there is sufficient evidence of a causal relationship within the timeframe of the loodbetween the hydrothermal fluids generated and expelled by all this magmatic activity and the deposition via precipitation of the sulfates within the !amon Group sediments, particularly the Fohilla ormation.



&ig. 8B. Columnar stratigraphic section of the layers exposed in the Fakhtesh !amon and )ahal )e7arot areas after %en+avid /002$.




&ig. 8. GeneraliEed stratigraphic section of the upper :urassic Arad Group and lower Cretaceous 3urnub Group stratase7uence exposed in the southeastern slope of Ft. Hermon, northern 8srael after reund /0B1$. Arad Group KurassicF

"he :urassic rocks of the Arad Group are also exposed in the erosional cir7ues in the )egev fig. /@$ and in neighboringnorthern &inai and :ordan, as well as being encountered in many boreholes Garfunkel /0B1$. "he stratigraphy in the )egevwas established by Goldberg and riedman /0B>$, while the paleontology was studied by Hudson /0@1$. "his :urassicse7uence extends into central and northern 8srael, being exposed only in a small area in &amaria reund /0B1$, but iswidely exposed on Ft. Hermon figs. /, /J and /B$ and in ebanon.8n all places the top of the :urassic se7uence waseroded, this se7uence being completely removed in the central )egev, before deposition of lower Cretaceous rocks. "hecontact with the upper "riassic rocks in the )egev is unconformable, and marks a brief hiatus in deposition. "he upper surface of the "riassic rocks was eroded, apparently weathered and covered by a few to 2 m 01 ft$ of kaolinitic clays, oftenwith iron oxides, and having a pisolitic structure. "hese comprise the Fishor ormation fig. /@$. 8n spite of the claim that thisformation was produced by a prolonged weathering episode, it is admitted that at least some of its material wasallochthonous transported into position$ Garfunkel /0B1$. "his formation occurs in a @ km 2/ mi.$ wide belt, which istruncated to the south, where it contains dolomite beds consistent with watertransported deposition."he :urassic Arad Group se7uence of the )egev is divided into the following formations fig. /@$K"he Fishor ormation, a few to 2 m 01 ft$ thick accumulation of kaolinitic clays with iron oxides and a pisolitic structure,

and some dolomite beds."he Ardon ormation consists of limestone, shale and dolomite, and in the subsurface alsocontains some evaporites precipitites$."he 8nmar ormation is mainly sandstones, some with crossbedding, but in thesubsurface further north it contains some shale and carbonate beds. "he formation is rich in plant remains and contains afew thin coal beds."he +aya Fahmal$ ormation consists of alternating fossiliferous limestones, sandy limestones, andshales and some sandstones. "he carbonate sediments are claimed to have been dolomitiEed subse7uent to depositionthen dedolomitiEed, but such claims expose the inability in conventional thinking to satisfactorily explain the processresponsible for forming dolomites. 8t is more likely that these carbonate sediments were deposited as dolomites due to thechemistry of saline hydrothermal fluids mixing with the lood waters, with dedolomitiEation occurring subse7uent todeposition as connate waters leached and removed magnesium."he &herif ormation resembles the +aya Fahmal$ormation but also contains much disseminated pyrite, and carboniEed plant remains, as well as coal beds."he ;ohar ormation consists predominantly of fossiliferous limestone, marl and shale, with subordinate amounts of silt and sand.ocally it contains marine fossil accumulations in structures claimed to be fossiliEed reefs, but these can be better explainedas depositional features &nelling 60b$. &ome dolomitiEation and dedolomitiEation is also claimed to have taken place,but again the evidence can be interpreted as primary dolomite deposition from saline hydrothermal fluids mixing in the lood

waters, followed by postdepositional leaching and removal of magnesium."he &herif and ;ohar ormations are notexposed in Fakhtesh !amon because of their nondeposition or erosion in that area and further south Garfunkel /0B1$. "othe north and northwest the original thickness of :urassic sediments increases considerably from about /,5/,2 m2,615>,6J@ ft$ in the northern )egev to about 2, m 0,1>6 ft$ under the coastal plain. Fost of the thickness differencewas produced during deposition of the Ardon and 8nmar ormations, although in the northern )egev three additional upper :urassic formations were deposited on top of the ;ohar ormation, the uppermost unit of the Arad GroupK"he 3idod ormation consists predominantly of shales with a few carbonate layers. 8t is rich in pyrite and plant debris, whilemarine fossils are abundant especially in the limestone beds and lower shale beds."he %eer &heva and Halutsa ormationsconsist of alternations of fossiliferous limestones, which are sometimes dolomitic, and shales, with subordinate sandstone inthe upper part of the section.

&ig. 8. (pper :urassic Arad Group limestone at %anias on the slopes of Ft. Hermon, northern 8srael.Farine fossils are common throughout this:urassic se7uence %arEel and riedman /0BQ Hudson /0@1$. "heseinclude pelecypods, gastropods, echinoids, crinoids, corals, sponges,

brachiopods, ammonites, stromatoporoids, calcareous algae andubi7uitous foraminifers. "hey are found sporadically scattered throughoutthe se7uence, with some forms more common that others at differentlevels. "ypically they are only preserved as skeletal fragments, such asloose tests, shells, plates, spicules and spines, embedded haphaEardly ina micrite or sparite matrix %arEel and riedman /0B$. Fany fossilfragments are coated with algal crusts, and pellets fecal or mudaggregates$ are sporadic. PuartE grains, making up to at least BW by




volume of the fragments embedded in the matrix, are scattered through the rocks. "hese textural features and this fossilcontent is fully consistent with rapid watertransported deposition of these rocks.)orth of the )egev in central and northern8srael was a domain of continuous calcareous deposition, so there most of these formations except the upper :urassicones$ lose their identity Garfunkel /0B1$. "he Arad Group in northern 8srael is composed of limestone with some shale in a6,52, m J,@J50,1>6 ft$ thick se7uence figs. 2 and /J$. At the base of the se7uence in a downfaulted block in theCarmel area 4ust south of Haifa deep boreholes encountered a volcanic se7uence about 6,@ m 1,66 ft$ thick consistingpredominantly of flows and pyroclastics Garfunkel /010$. Called the Asher -olcanics, petrographic and geochemical studieshave shown that the fresh rocks are alkali olivine basalts +vorkin and 3ohn /010$, with rare earth elements and &r and )disotopic signatures resembling ocean island and other intraplate basalts, but spilitiEed rocks are also common. 3Ar datinghas yielded ages in the range of about /056@ Fa uppermost "riassic5lower :urassic$ for the relatively fresh basaltsang and &teinitE /01B$, which is consistent with these volcanics overlying upper "riassic limestones.Kurnub Group lower CretaceousF

Cretaceous rocks are exposed very extensively in 8srael figs / and 6$ and in neighboring regions. "hey lie unconformablyon upper :urassic to Cambrian rocks, and even on the recambrian crystalline basement farther south. "his unconformitywas obviously due to ma4or erosion as a result of the lood waters temporarily retreating off the region. "his coincided withrelatively accentuated earth movements Garfunkel /0B1$. "his makes sense, because by this time in the lood year suchearth movements would be the beginnings of the final phase in which today?s mountains were starting to be built as a resultof crustal isostatic ad4ustments. #arth movements catastrophically raising sections of the earth?s continental crust wouldcause rapid retreat en masse of the lood waters as a sheet over wide regions, resulting in massive sheet erosion. "houghlarge volumes of rocks were removed across 8srael and beyond, the unconformity at the base of the Cretaceous strataalways appears as a smooth surface, both in outcrop and in the subsurface, which is consistent with catastrophic water retreat and sheet erosion not over 652 million years as conventionally claimed$.However, the lood waters rapidlyreturned to advance again across the whole of 8srael and surrounding regions, progressively depositing a thick blanket of Cretaceous sediments &ass and %ein /016$ figs. 6 and 2$. 8n most of the )egev, and especially in outcrops, the lower Cretaceous se7uence is predominantly sandstone, which has been designated as the Hatira ormation of the 3urnub GroupGarfunkel /0B1$ figs. 2 and /@$. Fuch of this formation consists of variegated, poorly cemented, sometimes crossbedded,

sandstone, which may contain small 7uartE pebbles, as well as some beds of finely laminated siltstone and marly claystone."he remains of fossil plants are widespread, including fossiliEed logs exposed by erosion of the Hatira ormation sandstonein Fakhtesh Hagadol fig. /1$. 8n the central )egev the coarse Arod Conglomerate, consisting of 7uartEite pebbles, occursat the base of the section fig. /@$. 8n the nearby eastern &inai, the Arod Conglomerate is commonly @ m /J ft$ thick, butranges from 5/@ m 5>0 ft$, as it also does in Fakhtesh !amon %artov et al. /01$. "he pebbles in it are of various7uartEites, reach a siEe of 2 cm / ft$ or more, and are embedded in friable sandstone, which is locally limonitic andcalcareous at the base.

&ig. 8G. A fossiliEed log exposed by erosion from the lower Cretaceous 3urnub Group?s Hatira ormation sandstone on thefloor of Fakhtesh Hagadol in the )egev, southern 8srael. a$ A wide view showing the fossiliEed log on the floor of FakhteshHagadol with the overlying strata exposed behind in the cliffs of the Fakhtesh. b$ A closer view of the fossiliEed log."heselower Cretaceous Hatira ormation sandstones with the basal Arod Conglomerate are somewhat similar, significantly, to thelower Cambrian Amudei &helomo ormation of the Iam&uf Group at the base of the lood sedimentary se7uence, whichwas deposited by the onrush of the lood waters surging onto and over the continents at the beginning of the lood, similar to, and at the same stratigraphic level as, the "apeats &andstone in Grand Canyon %eus and Forales 62$ and itse7uivalents across )orth America &loss /0J2$. However, the Hatira ormation and its basal Arod Conglomerate are theproducts of what appears to be the last ma4or surge of the lood waters over the continents prior to the lood waters finally

retreating into today?s new ocean basins. And the presence of one5four interfingering LmarineM beds within the Hatiraormation is certainly confirmation of that. "he uppermost of these has the greatest extent, reaching the Fakhtesh !amonarea / km J6 mi.$ from the present coast Garfunkel /0B1$. "hese LmarineM strata designated as such because of their contained marine fossils$ compromise sandstones, fossiliferous limestones and shales.*ithin Fakhtesh !amonangiospermlike macrofossils and angiospermous pollen grains are found in the lower Hatira ormation sandstones, whichalso contain marine intercalations with invertebrate fossils, and are topped by the !amon basalts. "he conformable upper Hatira ormation is exposed in the northern slopes of Fakhtesh !amon, and consists of variegated crossbeddedsandstones with lenticular, finely laminated siltstones and marly claystones containing occasional marine fossils and locallyabundant terrestrial plant debris. "he fossil plant assemblages consist of ferns, ginkgophytes, conifers and the LearliestMangiosperm macrofossils in the stratigraphic se7uence 3rassilov et al. 6B$. "runks, roots, fronds and particulate debris of the fern Weichselia are numerically dominant. )ext in abundance are narrow angiospermous leaves of severalmorphotypes, often forming matlike beddingplane accumulations that are constantly associated with Weichselia. "he other angiosperms are broadleafed morphotypes, such as the peltate shieldshaped$ >elumbites or those with subpeltateplatanoid leaves all of which are relatively infre7uent, poorly preserved and LapparentlyM allochthonous transported$,together with occasional leaves and cone scales of araucariaceous conifers. )ot only is the evidence that this fossil plantdebris was watertransported, but the presence of impressions of insect egg sets on some of the leaf blades up to 6@ eggson one leaf$ indicate transport, deposition, burial and fossilisation had to be rapid, as it would have been under loodconditions.8n the subsurface of the very northern part of the )egev, the lower Cretaceous 3urnub Group se7uence becomesincreasingly LmarineM that is, contains marine fossils$, and the amount of shales and carbonates increases considerably atthe expense of sandstones Garfunkel /0B1$. (nder the southern coastal plain the se7uence is largely marine. "hethickness of the Hatira ormation increases from about 6 m J@J ft$ in the central )egev to about > m /,2/6 ft$ in theHatira cir7ue to the east, while under the southern coastal plain the lower Cretaceous beds are /,/ m 2,J0 ft$ thick. 8n



central and northern 8srael this mainly clastic 3urnub Group se7uence is 15/, m 6,J6@52,61 ft$ thick. "he upper partof the se7uence is exposed in several places in central Galilee, while the whole se7uence is exposed on the southeasternslopes of Ft. Hermon fig. /J$ and in a small area of the &amaria fig. /0$ reund /0B1$. "he se7uence begins with alkalinelavas and tuffs, followed by variegated sandstones with fossiliEed tree remains figs /J and /0$. A limestone cliff, referred toas LFuraille de %lancheM, marks the middle of the 3urnub Group, which terminates with about 6@ m 16 ft$ of yellowfossiliferous marls containing some beds of oolitic iron oxides.As already indicated, during deposition of the lower Cretaceous 3urnub Group sedimentary rocks there was a brief period of magmatism and volcanism in 8srael andneighboring areas Garfunkel /0B1$.

&ig. 8H. Columnar stratigraphic section of the upper :urassic Arad Group and lower Cretaceous 3urnub Group strataexposed at *adi Falik in &amaria, central 8srael after reund /0B1$."his included the gabbro laccolith, 7uartE syeniteplutons and other intrusions exposed in Fakhtesh !amon in the central )egev, the basalt and trachyte dikes and sills, andthe basalt flows referred to above as the !amon basalt %aer /002Q Garfunkel /010Q 8tamar and %aer /002Q !ophe, #yaland #yal /002$. "hese have been radioisotope dated, yielding various lower Cretaceous ages ang et al. /011Q ang and&teinitE /01@Q ang and &teinitE /01BQ &tarinsky, %ielski and &teinitE /01$. "he intrusions were primarily emplaced in the"riassic !amon Group and the :urassic Arad Group, producing metasomatic alteration of the host limestones, for example,in the &aharonim and Ardon ormations fig. /@$. A pavement of the :urassic 8nmar ormation sandstone in Fakhtesh!amon, on a hill known locally as L"he Carpentry,M consists of prismatic pillars of hard 7uartEite, with 251 facets, which are25/6 cm /.65>.B in.$ wide and 651 cm B.052/.@ in.$ long fig. 6$ FaEor /002$. "hese pillars occur in beds with a totalthickness of about J m 6 ft$, outcropping along J m /0B ft$. "his and other such LcarpentriesM in the 8nmar ormationwithin the Fakhtesh !amon occur near emplaced magmatic bodies, but they have no direct contact with the pillars, so it hasbeen suggested that these 7uartEitic pillars were formed by hot fluids that accompanied the igneous intrusions infiltratinginto the sandstone. "he basalt dikes may have been the conduits from which the Fakhtesh !amon basalts flowed fig. /@$,interrupting deposition of the Hatira ormation sandstones of the lower Cretaceous 3urnub Group. "he Arod Conglomerateat the base of the 3urnub Group also contains trachyte pebbles eroded from the trachyte dikes Garfunkel /010$. "he lower Cretaceous basalts seem to have only covered a relatively small area in the central )egev, and neighboring east &inai%artov et al. /01$, but a small basalt plug intruded into Cambrian beds at "imna has a lower Cretaceous 3Ar age %eythand &egev /012$, suggesting these basalt flows may have originally extended much further southwards.

&ig. 9>. "he LpavementM of upper :urassic Arad Group 8nmar ormation sandstone in Fakhtesh !amon known locally asL"he Carpentry.M a$. A wide view showing the vertical prismatic pillars of hard 7uartEite baked sandstone$, with 251 facets,




in beds about J m 6 ft$ thick. b$ An end on view showing that most of the pillars have @5J facets, and are generally aboutJ51 cm 6.>52.6 in.$ wide.8n the &amariaGalilee area, considerable magmatism also occurred, known mainly from thesubsurface Garfunkel /010$. +rillholes which reached below the Cretaceous se7uence penetrated up to > m /,2/6 ft$ of extrusives, mainly olivine basalts and tuffs, known as the "ayasir -olcanics. "hey also outcrop in *adi Falih in the &omronarea, some / km J mi.$ west of the :ordan -alley in northeastern &amaria, where they are 62 m B@@ ft$ thick fig. /0$reund /0B1Q ang and Fimran /01@Q Fimran /0B6$. *ithin the tuffs are thin beds of laminated shales that are slightlycalcareous and contain plant remains, wellpreserved skeletons or prints of fish up to / cm > in.$ long, fossil tadpoles andostracodes. "he eastward extension of this volcanic field, offset by the +ead &ea transform fault, is exposed in the south of Ft. Hermon Garfunkel /010$. "here numerous small basalt intrusions cross the upper :urassic beds, extrusives occur atthe base of the lower Cretaceous 3urnub Group se7uence fig. /J$ reund /0B1$, and several vents delimited by faults arepresent Garfunkel /010$. Geochemical studies show these basalts range from thoeliitic to alkaline and form a typicalintraplate suite with a geochemical signature similar to ocean island basalts. 3Ar dating of rocks from both the *adi Falih

and Ft. Hermon outcrops yielded uppermost :urassic to lower Cretaceous ages ang and Fimran /01@Q &himron and ang/011$.&udea Group middle CretaceousF"he middle Cretaceous sedimentary units of the :udea Group are widely exposed in southern 8srael, where in Fakhtesh!amon in the central )egev they are collectively up to @6 m /,BJ ft$ thick fig. 6/$. "o the north of the )egev, outcrops of the :udea Group form the backbone of the mountains of 8srael, where the group is about 1 m 6,J6@ ft$ thick anddominated by dolomite. "here are facies changes laterally, so that the stratigraphic subdivisions and their names have beendefined differently in the )egev fig. 6/$ compared with in the :udean Hills to the north fig. 66$.8n the )egev, the :udeaGroup se7uence has been divided into the following formations fig. 6/$ Avni /002Q %artov, et al. /0B6Q %artov and &teinitE/0BBQ Garfunkel /0B1$K"he HaEera ormation consists predominantly of fossiliferous limestone, dolomite and marl. 8t hasbeen subdivided into five members. "he transition between the sandstones of the Hatira ormation on which the carbonatese7uence of the HaEera ormation always sits is 7uite abrupt. Compared with the HaEera ormation se7uence in the central)egev in the Fakhtesh !amon area$ towards the south, especially in the #lat area, shale and sandstone becomeincreasingly abundant. "o the north and northwest the se7uence especially its lower part$ becomes thicker and increasingly

dolomitic. "hus near the +ead &ea, in :udea and under the southern coastal plain it consists of a predominantly dolomiticse7uence, with some sandstone in the latter region Arkin and Hamaoui /0JB$."he predominantly marly +erorim ormationis only developed in part of the northern )egev, and is characteriEed by a rich ammonite fauna."he &hivta ormationoverlies the +erorim ormation, or the HaEera ormation where the latter is absent. 8t consists of poorly bedded fossiliferouslimestones, occasionally with chert concretions. 8t often contains fossil rudists, which are large horncorallike pelecypodsbivalve molluscs$ Foore, alicker and ischer /0@6$, especially in its upper part where other fossils are also common."he)eEer ormation consists of wellbedded limestone, mostly micritic, and occasionally contains sandstones."he 9raormation, developed only in the Fakhtesh !amon area and to the south, consists mainly of marl and shale with somelimestone interbeds. 9olitic limestone, gypsum and sandstone occur near its top. 8ts basal beds are rich in and often packedwith ammonites, as seen in the LAmmonite *allM exposed in the southern side of Fakhtesh !amon fig. 62$. "his dramaticdisplay of large ammonites all lying flat and regularly spaced at the same level in the same upturned bed is clearly testimonyto their catastrophic transport and burial by the lood waters, as well as to the rapid deposition of the argillaceous dolomitebed that encloses them. "hese basal beds are e7uivalent to the +erorim ormation, while higher ammonitebearing bedsand the overlying parts of the 9ra ormation which contain them are the lateral e7uivalents of the &hivta ormation."he cliffforming Gerofit ormation fig. 6>$ overlies the 9ra ormation, and consists predominantly of limestone, dolomite, and minor

chert, marl and shale. &ometimes this formation contains LbanksM of accumulated fossil rudists, with fossil hydroEoa,gastropods fig. 6@$ and other pelecypod fragments present, that have been interpreted as LbiohermsM %artov et al. /0B6$,but instead would be the result of the rapid pileup of such broken organic debris by the lood waters."he ;ihor ormationoccurs above the Gerofit ormation only in the southern half of the )egev ewy /0B@$. 8t consists of a variety of fossiliferous limestones, marls, sandy limestones and some dolomite. "he dolomite is coarsegrained and sandy, and likethe sandy limestones often exhibits depositional structures such as planar crossbedding and ripple marks %artov et al./0B6$, which are consistent with clastic deposition by the fastmoving lood waters. "he ;ihor ormation forms a softlandscape above the cliffs of the Gerofit ormation. &ome confusion has existed over its classification. %ecause it resemblesthe underlying beds and its top is an unconformity, it is usually included in the :udea Group. However, due to its claimedfossil age, where its upper boundary is indistinct it has sometimes been included in the overlying upper Cretaceous5aleocene Ft. &copus Group."he fossiliferous sections in the lower :udea Group se7uence in the )egev contrast with thedolomiterich sections north of it, indicating different depositional conditions and source materials. "he sandstoneoccurrences are compatible with sediment transport from the south and southwest Garfunkel /0B1$. &edimentation patternsthen changed in response to differential subsidence, so that by the time the upper :udea Group was deposited the northern

part of the )egev had become a relatively uplifted area, on which reduced thicknesses of sediments were deposited. &outhof it much thicker sections accumulated in a relatively subsiding area. "here was an influx of clastics, so argillaceoussedimentation extended over much of the )egev. "he occurrences of fossil ammonites seem to outline several depositionalLbeltsM, which have been interpreted as a result of structurally controlled depressions in which the waters were deeper thanin nearby areas reund /0J/$. However, these belts in the )egev may not have 4ust been associated with markedthickness variations, as facies changes may also have been involved, such as the calcareous sedimentation in thenorthernmost )egev and beyond, in contrast to the marlyshaly sedimentation in the central and southern )egev. "hedistribution of upper :udea Group sandstones indicates a southwesterly provenance.



&ig. 98. Composite stratigraphic section for the western area of Fakhtesh !amon with a detailed legend p. />2$ after Avni/002$. "he hard strata of the thick middle Cretaceous :udea Group are prominent.

&ig. 98. egend.)orth of the )egev, the :udean Hills, together with the Hebron Hills to the south of them and&amaria further to the north, form the centralhilly area of 8srael. 9utcrops of the :udeaGroup form the backbone of this hilly area,where the group is about 1 m 6,J6@ ft$ thickand dominated by dolomite. Hard, pure, white,very finegrained, durable limestone in the:udea Group has been valued for threemillennia as a building stone, being used toconstruct &olomon?s "emple. Fuch of :erusalem itself sits on the uppermost beds of the :udea Group, including the "emple Fountfig. 6J$. "he rock units making up the :udeaGroup in the :udean Hills are representedschematically in ig. 66 reund /0B1Q &assand %ein /016$. "he se7uence between theGiv?at Ie?arim and *eradim ormations isdominantly dolomitic, but displays distinctvertical and lateral facies changes, no doubtdue to the controls on sedimentation, such aswater depth and sediment supply."he variety of dolomitic rocks in the :udean Hills area can be

classified into two main facies, which tend tooccur in separate formations. irst, there arethe thickly bedded to massive, coarse tomedium crystalline dolomites which occur in theGiv?at Ie?arim, 3esalon, Amminadev and*eradim ormations. eatures such asdedolomitiEation, transitions to limestones andchalks, association with coarsely crystalline




silicified rocks, and karstic features are common to these formations. &econd, there are well bedded, finely crystallinedolomites which characteriEe the &ore7 and %eit Fe?ir western facies$ ormations. "hese formations are usually poor incalcite, include varying amounts of interbedded clays and marls, and contain siliceous rocks in the form of chert nodules and7uartE geodes.

&ig. 99. ithostratigraphic relationships within the middle Cretaceous :udea Group strata in the :udean Hills after &ass and%ein /016$. imestones and dolomites predominate."hree distinct types of siliceous rocks are closely associated withspecific carbonate facies, and thus seem to be related to the depositional conditions. irst, there are coarse to mediumcrystalline silicified rocks termed 7uartEolites fig. 66$. "hese usually contain wellpreserved skeletal fragments, where thefossil fragments are silicified either selectively or differently from the matrix. 9n the basis of textural and mineralogicalcriteria, the formation of these 7uartEolites and their crystal fabrics is considered to be early diagenetic &ass and %ein

/016$. "hey are characteristically associated with the coarsely crystalline dolomites. &econd, chert occurs as nodules andthin layers, and is 7uite common in the &ore7 and %eit Fe?ir ormations fig. 66$. Cherts are rarely associated with the7uartEolites, indicating different modes of formation. "hird, there are 7uartE geodes which contain minor anhydriteinclusions, with relics of original anhydrite nodules. "hey occur sporadically in, and are a characteristic of, the &ore7 and%eit Fe?ir ormations, and thus are only associated with the finely crystalline dolomites."he FotEa ormation fig. 66$ marksa stratigraphic break between the underlying se7uence of dominantly finely crystalline, wellbedded dolomites and theoverlying coarsely crystalline dolomites. 8t is the only nondolomitic unit in the :udea Group with a widespread arealdistribution, consisting mainly of marl and claystone, with some limestone intercalations and rich marine fossil assemblages.

&ig. 9:. "he LAmmonite*allM consists of a fossilgraveyard of largeammonites on an

exposed surface of upturned 9ra ormationmarl middle Cretaceous:udea Group$ in thesouthern side of Fakhtesh !amon. a$ Ageneral view of the wall,with a boy for scale in

the top right corner. Hundreds of regularly spaced fossiliEed ammonites can be seen. b$ A closer view of several of thefossiliEed ammonites. &ince the lens cap is @ cm 6 in.$ across, many of these ammonites are 25>1 cm /65/0 in.$ across,although there are smaller ones visible. &ince these are all the same species in a range of siEes, these represent a livingpopulation that perished in a catastrophe, being buried en masse.&ome of the formations display characteristic facieschanges, such as the 3efar &ha?ul ormation, which is chalk in the central and eastern :udean Hills, but is calcitic dolomiteto the west fig. 66$. Generally speaking, dolomitic facies are better developed in the western :udean Hills, while limeyfacies are more abundant in the central or eastern part. %ecause of the observation that dolomites only form today in

shallow water evaporitic environments 3endall /006$ it is claimed that when these dolomites in the :udea Group weredeposited the area must have constituted a wide shelf lagoon covered only by shallow hypersaline sea waters &ass and%ein /016$. urthermore, relatively deeper waters supposedly existed at different times and places to explain the lateralfacies changes from dolomites to chalks and limestones. "he diversity of skeletal fossil forms in the chalks and limestones,as well as the planktonic foraminifers and ammonites, is said to indicate closetonormal salinities prevailed in thosedepositional areas. However, it is argued here that the dolomites, cherts and anhydrite in the 7uartE geodes can be better explained as precipitites, whereby contemporaneous magmatic and volcanic activity for which there is much evidencethroughout 8srael$ contributed copious 7uantities of hot saline waters and hydrothermal fluids to the cooler lood waters, that




conse7uently became supersaturated in salts, resulting in deposition of precipitites &nelling 60b$. (nder such loodconditions the lateral and vertical facies variations in the :udea Group would have resulted from rapid fluctuations in thesupply of sediments and salts, and the fluctuations and oscillations in the levels, volumes and flow rates of the lood watersmoving over the continental plates, as they too moved rapidly across the globe due to catastrophic plate tectonics.

&ig. 9. "he cliffforming Gerofit ormation of the middle Cretaceous:udea Group, as seen here above the highway 4ust below the northern rimof Fakhtesh !amon. "he lightcolored strata are limestones anddolomites, whereas the darkcolored layers are shale.&ig. 9B. ossiliEed coiled gastropods marine snails$ in a slab of Gerofitormation limestone middle Cretaceous :udea Group$ on display outsidethe Fakhtesh !amon -isitors Center. or so many of the one species tobe buried together en masse like this in a fossil graveyard is again

evidence of catastrophic burial.

&ig. 9. "he "emple Fount Ft. Foriah$, :erusalem, as seen from theFount of 9lives. "he golden +ome of the !ock can be seen top right, andthe southeastern corner of the wall of the 9ld City to the left, with the3idron -alley below. "he 9ld City is built on the uppermost beds of limestones and dolomites of the :udea Group middle Cretaceous$, whichare exposed beneath the wall. "he boundary with the overlying Ft. &copusGroup chalk beds is in the 3idron -alley.9f particular significance is thepresence of fossiliEed dinosaur tracks in the &ore7 ormation fig. 66$ at%eit ;eit, a few kilometers west of :erusalem Avnimelech /0J6, /0JJ$.9ver an 1 m6 1J ft6$ area, in the top of an exposed pavement of dolomite, are more than 6 footprint impressions in a continuous rowalmost 6 m JJ ft$ long fig. 6Ba$. "hey belong apparently to a single

individual. 9n both sides of this row there are more prints, smaller and lessdistinct. #ach of the footprints in the row show three toes, of which themiddle one is 6>56J cm 05/ in.$ long, while the side toes average 6 cm1 in.$ length fig. 6Bc$. "he angle between the toes is about >V. "hedistance between the successive alternate footprints is about 1 cm 2/in.$ fig. 6Bb$, so that the distance between one print and the next made bythe same foot is around /J cm J2 in.$ or /.J m @.6 ft$. #vidently theanimal was a bipedal dinosaur, with long and strong hindfeet and probablyshort forefeet. 9n the basis of these data it has been concluded that thehind legs of this theropod dinosaur were approximately /6 cm >B in.$ or /.6 m > ft$ high, and that the length of this individual?s entire body with itsbig tail and expanded neck was 6.@ m 1 ft$ or more, making its normalerect posture about 6 m J.J ft$ tall.8t is because of these fossiliEeddinosaur footprints that it is envisaged the &ore7 ormation dolomites, with

minor marls and cherts, were deposited in very shallow water under evaporitic conditions. However, such slowandgradual

depositional conditions today do not preserve footprint impressions. )or would dinosaurs have lived in shallow salty water where there was no food to eatO Foving shallow water today will degrade the LwallsM of such impressions soon after beingmade in wet dolomitic sands and muds, and any prolonged period of exposure would obliterate them. 9n the other hand,the making of these fossiliEed dinosaur footprints can be explained under the prevailing conditions during the lood&nelling 6/b$. As already indicated, the dolomitic sands and muds would have been precipitated from hot Fgcarbonaterich hydrothermal fluids, mixing with the colder lood waters. +uring a very brief tidal drop in the water level, this theropoddinosaur that had earlier been swept away in the lood waters, in which it was then floundering$ was able to walk across arapidly and temporarily exposed or semiexposed$ surface of the dolomitic sandSmud leaving its footprints behind. "hatsurface would have been firm due to the cohesiveness of the semiwet dolomite, where a chemical reaction would start toLsetM the dolomite, 4ust as occurs today in very similar manmade cement, retaining the footprint impressions. However, thiswould have occurred in the brief timeframe before the next tidal surge raised the water level again and swept away thedinosaur, and rapidly covered the footprints with more dolomitic sediments to preserve them. "his entire se7uence had tohave occurred within hours, with its rapid burial and with hardening of the dolomite pavement completed by the weight of theoverlying layers s7ueeEing the water out of it, or else these dinosaur footprints would not have been fossiliEed. )othing like

this happens under today?s conditions. And if this shallow water evaporitic depositional environment had been proximal towhere this dinosaur supposedly lived, its bones should be found buried nearby. 9n the contrary, this dinosaur was sweptaway in the lood waters to eventually perish, any trace of its bones likely being buried far away from its footprints, andmuch higher in the rapidly deposited strata se7uence %rand and lorence /016Q &nelling 60b$.

&ig. 9. ossiliEed dinosaur footprints in atrackway in an exposed pavement of &ore7 ormation dolomite middle Cretaceous:udea Group$ in the village of %eit ;eit, 4ust a few kilometers west of :erusalem. a$"hree of the 6 or more fossiliEed footprints in the trackway, a rightleftright set in thedirection of walking. b$ A closer view of two of these fossiliEed footprints, the distance

between them being about 11 cm 2@ in.$. c$ An enlarged view of one fossiliEed footprint clearly shows the three toes, themiddle toe being about 6> cm 0 in.$ long and the side toes about 6 cm 1 in.$ long. "he angle between the side toes is



about >V."o the northwest of the :udean Hills is an isolated hilly belt of :udea Group strata in the Carmel area south of Haifa fig. /$. re7uent thickness and facies changes in the strata se7uence have made mapping and stratigraphiccorrelations very difficult. "his heterogeneity of facies appears unusual, and is likely due to the area being proximal to theedge of the active deposition of these sediments. "he different defined and named rock units in the stratigraphic se7uenceof the Carmel area is shown schematically in ig. 61 &ass and %ein /016$.+olomites are again by far the dominant rockunits in the :udea Group of the eastern Carmel area, the same types as encountered in the :udean Hills, but with aproliferation of different formation names due to the fre7uent lateral and vertical facies changes fig. 61$. "hose limestonespresent consist mostly of micrites with fragments of foraminifers, and a few with skeletal fragments of other marineinvertebrates. enses @5/ m R/J>5261 ftT thick and several kilometers wide$ of chalk and marl occur in the dolomites,usually with ammonites, echinoids and oysters reund /0B1$. Claimed reef structures and LbanksM of fossilrudists,Chondrodonta and >erinea, which are large horncorallike pelecypods reund /0B1Q Foore, alicker and ischer /0@6$, are here present throughout the entire se7uence in various forms fig. 61$. urther to the west the rock units consist

mainly of limestones and chalks with some chert. "hese limestones are mostly calcareous muds calcilutites$ made up of minute allochthonous transported$ skeletal debris, and occasionally foraminifers become an abundant constituent. L%anksMof fossiliEed oysters are often interbedded in the limestones.

&ig. 9G. ithostratigraphic relationships within the middle Cretaceous :udea Group strata in the Ft. Carmel area south of Haifa after &ass and %ein /016$. "hough dominated by limestones and dolomites, there are fre7uent intertonguing lateraland vertical facies changes, locally interbedded volcanics, and some claimed Lfossil reefM structures that simply representmounds of limestone debris with fossils see figs. 60526$.8ntertonguing with the :udea Group even further to the west alongthe coast is the "alme Iafe ormation %ein and *eiler /0BJQ &ass and %ein /016$ fig. 61$. "his unit is a huge prism

shaped accumulation more than 2, m 0,1>6 ft$ thick, about 6 km /6 mi.$ wide, and at least /@ km 02 mi.$ long$ of ahomogeneous se7uence of calcareous detritus deposited primarily as calcilutites calcareous mudstones$ and laminitesturbidites$, which are made up of alternating calcilutite and fine calcarenite calcareous sandstone$ laminae. "hin cherthoriEons are 7uite abundant. "he calcareous detritus consists of minute skeletal fragments of rudistids, echinoids, abradedforaminifers and probably various molluscs, and of carbonate rock clasts. "he residue is mostly clays, and siliceous faunalremains such as sponge spicules. Calcirudites calcareous conglomerates$ are found at the base of the se7uence. "he mainextension of these sediments is found in the subsurface of the western part of the coastal plain and offshore, and a smallpart is exposed in the northwestern Carmel area. "his prism or wedge$ is interpreted as being deposited off the continentalmargin of the northwestern Arabian Craton 8srael$ on the continental slope and beyond at its base, the transport of all thiscarbonate debris from the shelf platform over the edge onto the slope probably being done by storms and tidal currents.




+ownslope movement would have been in water layers with suspended sediments debris flows$ and gravityinducedturbidity$ currents.&ig. 9H. GeneraliEed northfacing crosssection through the claimed )ahal Hame?arot Lfossil reefM complex in the upper :udea Group middle Cretaceous$ strata of the southwestern Carmel area after reund /0B1$. )ote that this is only onepossible interpretation of the outcrop. 3arstic caves are depicted in this northfacing cliff face see fig. 2/$, the most famousof which is the "abun cave where )eanderthal remains were found above stone tools in the sediments on the cave floor.

All the carbonate clastic materials and the tiny skeletal fragments in the thick "alme Iafe ormation are claimed to havebeen derived from the rudistid LreefsM built on the edge of the continental platform, often as barriers that accumulateddolomites and limestones behind them across the platform. Fany other similar examples are found around the world :amesand %our7ue /006$. %ut were these really barrier and platform reefs that therefore re7uired countless years to be built, atimeframe inconsistent with the global lood year A typical good example of one of these rudistid reef structures is found at)ahal Hame?arot, near the southern end of the Carmel Hills reund /0B1$ figs 60 and 2$. 8t is said to consist of a

rudist Chondrodonta and >erinea reef core, forereef talus, and backreef LlagoonalM dolomites %ein /0BJ$. Also present inthis example are karstic caves that were inhabited by early post%abel human settlers for example, )eanderthals in the"abun cave$ figs 60 and 2/$.

&ig. :>. "he southfacing cliff sectionthrough the claimedLfossil reefM complex,as exposed by theerosion of the )ahalHame?arot valley. a$ Aview of the actualoutcrop. b$ "hesignboard showing theinterpreted Lfossil reefM

complex. )ote that therugged outcrop withalmost vertical sides in the center of a$ is interpreted as the Lreef coreM in b$, depicted with a 4umble of fossiliEed rudists the LhornM shapes$.However, the socalled reef core is made up of a 4umbled mass of these fossiliEed rudists large horncorallike pelecypods$,in places only fragmented rudists, set in a biomicrite matrix, that is, a matrix of fine mudsiEed calcareous particlesconsisting of biological debris derived from the violent destruction of other molluscs, echinoids, ammonites, foraminifers, andmore fig. 26$. "he LforereefM talus consists of biosparites skeletal fragments set in a lime cement$ and biosparruditesconglomerates made up of biosparite clasts set in a biosparite matrix$ which are usually wellsorted and wellrounded andare considered to be reefdebris material that accumulated on the LreefM flanks &ass and %ein /016$. &uch debris bedsoften dip at about 6@V52V. 8t is also significant that these socalled reefs only consist of rudists and lack the variety of encrusting organisms inhabiting almost all modern reefs %ein /0BJQ :ames and %our7ue /006$. Iet it is claimed that theframework stability of these LreefsM was achieved solely through the Luni7ue growthpatternM of the rudists %ein /0BJ$. &ucha claim cannot be sustained by observations of the framework construction of modern reefs by numerous varieties of corals,pelecypods, sponges, echinoids and more in growth positions, compared to these rudistonly LreefsM where the rudists are

not in growth positions, but are in a 4umbled mass cemented by a matrix of biological debris. "hus the evidence emphaticallydoes not support the claim these are growninplace reefs. !ather, these are mounds of transported and piled up calcareousdebris derived from the violent destruction of other molluscs, echinoids, etc., the larger rudists having survived largely intactby the sorting action of the lood waters to be buried in these debris piles, all possibly within hours to days due to ragingwater currents during violent storms.

&ig. :8. -iew of the northfacing cliff section throughthe claimed Lfossil reefMcomplex compare with fig.60$. "he "abun cavewhere the )eanderthalremains were found is thekarstic cave on the far

right. A manmade roof structure can be seen onthe top of the hill abovethe cave to cover where

the cave roof is open.&ig. :9. ossils in the )ahal Hame?arot Lfossil reefM complex. a$ *ithin the #l *ad cave to the far lower left of the "abuncave see figs. 60 and 2/$, the interpreted Lreef coreM is exposed. &een here it consists of a 4umbled mass burial in a fossilgraveyard of large rudists, horncorallike pelecypods. b$ A closer view of the fossil rudists. "he 4umbled nature of thesehornshaped rudists is not how they lived. 8nstead, it is clear they were catastrophically buried en masse by fine mudsiEedcalcareous particles in a mounded pile. c$ A 4umbled mass burial of other molluscs in this same fossil graveyard. "his viewis of the outcrop 4ust to the right of the rugged section with almost vertical sides in the center of ig. 2a$, about halfway up

the hill, 4ust above theshadow."here was alsocontemporaneousvolcanic activity in theCarmel area and nearbyduring all this middleCretaceous carbonatesedimentation &ass/01$, which could wellhave been the source of



the hot saline waters that contributed a lot of the carbonates as precipitites. Fost of these volcanic rocks consist of maficpyroclastics, which are associated with basaltic lavas in a few cases only fig. /$. "hey form lenticular bodies at variouslevels in the :udea Group stratigraphic se7uence fig. 61$. "hree types of pyroclastics rocks have been recogniEed, eachbearing a close relationship to its distance from the eruption center and to its accumulation rate. "he first type are black andgray pyroclastics that are usually massive, agglomeratic in places, contain large volcanic bombs and xenoliths, andaccumulated in the necks of volcanoes and their immediate vicinities. )ext are the variegated pyroclastics, consisting of wellbedded tuffs, lapilli tuffs and agglomerates, containing small volcanic bombs and xenoliths. "heir inclination relative tothe underlying or overlying beds reaches up to 2V, and their original dips are away from the eruption centers, suggestingthese rocks represent the steep flanks of ancient volcanoes, up to /.5/.@ km .J5.0 mi.$ away from the vents. "hemaximum thickness of these pyroclastics does not exceed J m /0B ft$, which has been suggested was controlled by water erosion of the original cones before deposition of the overlying carbonates, meaning the waters at the time were up to J m/0B ft$ deep across this area. And the third type are yellow tuffs, forming wide, wellbedded blankets which may reach a

thickness of 6 m JJ ft$, but are usually only a few meters thick. At some locations, marine fossils are in these tuffs,consistent with their distal accumulation.8n the northern part of the mountain backbone of 8srael which extends further northinto ebanon, beyond the :udean Hills, is the Galilee region fig. /$. "he area is structurally deformed by gentle folding andintensive faulting which divides the area into a rather complex pattern of horsts, grabens and tilted blocks. "he stratigraphicse7uence in the :udea Group in the Galilee region is similar to that in the :udean Hills and the Carmel area, but there arealso differences due to facies changes. 8t is schematically shown in ig. 22 reund /0J@Q 3afri /0B6$."he lower part of these7uence, the 3esulat and Iagur ormations, consists of dolomites that are relatively homogeneous in thickness andlithology over the entire area, excluding some claimed local fossil rudist patch reefs. 9n the other hand, in the upper part of the se7uence many facies changes occurred, so the lithologies and thicknesses of the different rock units are both verticallyand laterally heterogeneous fig. 22$. "he main change is from dolomites to chalky limestones consisting of calcilutites or very finegrained limestones the !osh Hani7ra Fember of the &akhnin ormation$. "ransitional facies, either dolomitic or calcitic the Ia?ara Fember of the &akhnin ormation, and the Ianuch ormation$ are found locally. &imultaneously with thedeposition of the upper part of the dolomite section of the &akhnin ormation, a se7uence of claimed rudist reefs reund/0J@$, marls the Iirka ormation$, calcarenites calcareous sandstones$ composed of carbonate rock clasts the 3ishk

ormation$, and micrites, composed of finegrained skeletal fragments, was locally deposited.

&ig. ::. ithostratigraphic relationships within the middle Cretaceous :udea Group strata in the Galilee region after &assand %ein /016$. +olomite and chalk beds predominate."he claimed reef complexes are again open to an alternative loodinterpretation. "he long and narrow, massive Lreef coresM are surrounded by steep 6@V$ or gentle /V$ LforesetM bedsreund /0J@$. "he shells of the Lframework buildersM rudists and gastropods$ were mostly disintegrated, supposedly due tothe boring activity of sponges and algae, so that hardly any of the few rudists Furania$ found are in what might beinterpreted as the original growth position. 8t has even been admitted that these Lfossil reefsM cannot be compared withmodern coral reefs. "he Lreef coresM in fact consist of fragmental biogenic limestone, and one of them is capped by acalcareous conglomerate. "he claimed Lforeset bedsM flanking the Lreef coresM are in fact crossbedded pelletal and sandy

limestone units that are admitted to have likely formed by erosion and vigorous water currents. "hus the evidence insteadfavors the interpretation that these socalled reef complexes are in fact simply depositional features due to the rapid andvaried actions of the lood waters, vigorous currents piling up this biogenic and carbonate rock debris.'t( $copus Group u""er CretaceousJ)aleoceneF9verlying the :udea Group locally in erosional and angular unconformity on the east and west sides of the :udean Hills arethe LsoftM chalk and marl, with some chert beds, of the Ft. &copus Group. Conventionally these layers are regarded asuppermost Cretaceous to aleocene lowermost "ertiary$. "he Ft. &copus Group ranges in thickness from 5@ m 5/,J> ft$ according to the structural position on predepositional folds and fault blocks reund /0B1$. 8t averages about 2




m 01> ft$ thick. 8n :erusalem the boundary between the uppermost :udea Group limestone beds and the overlying softer chalk beds of the Ft. &copus Group dips eastward along the 3idron -alley, with the latter beds outcropping on the Fount of 9lives to the east of the old city fig. 2>$. "he chert component in this group increases southwards. "here are four formations recogniEed in the Ft. &copus Group in the )egev Garfunkel /0B1$ figs. /@ and 6/$K"he Fenuha ormation,primarily consisting of chalk, disconformably overlies the ;ihor or )eEer ormations in the )egev. "hus the stratigraphicposition of its base varies ewy /0B@$. *here the formation?s se7uence is complete, the middle part contains a bed of phosphate, somewhat sandy, which in the south contains chert and marl. "he thickness and stratigraphic scope of thisformation strongly depend on its structural position, so that in the Fakhtesh !amon area of the central )egev the formationis from 50B m 52/1 ft$ thick."he Fishash ormation lies conformably on the Fenuha ormation, or unconformably onolder beds. 8t is characteriEed by massive chert beds, accompanied by variable amounts of porcellanite, chalk, marl,claystone, fossiliferous and concretional limestone and phosphorite 3olodny /0JB$. "wo facies within the formation havebeen distinguished. "he HaroE facies, in which the formation consists of flint only, is developed in part of the northern )egev.

8t passes laterally into the Ashosh facies in which the additional lithologies are prominent. "o the west and northwest theFishash ormation passes into a continuous chalky facies lexer /0J1$."he &ayyarim ormation is the southern e7uivalentof the Fenuha and Fishash ormations fig. 2@$. A tongue of chert, marl, limestone and dolomite appears in the Fenuhaormation in the southern )egev, and near #lat sandstone sometimes 7uartEitic$ becomes important. &till farther south thedistinct identity of the Fishash ormation is also lost %artov and &teinitE /0BB$."he Ghareb ormation consists of yellowish,slightly phosphatic chalk and marl, with minor 7uantities of dolomite. "hese rocks are often bituminous. (nlike theunderlying formations, this formation?s lithologies are rather uniform over wide areas, though they wedge out over structuralhighs."he lowermost "ertiary aleocene$ "a7iye ormation is a distinct unit between the Ghareb ormation and theoverlying Avedat Group in some locations %artov et al. /0B6Q %artov and &teinitE /0BBQ lexer /0J1$. "he base of the"a7iye ormation, which is up to @ m /J> ft$ thick, is defined as the first appearance of green shales. Calcareous shalesand marls, rich in limonite concretions which have a pyritic core, gradually pass upwards into argillaceous chalks and chalky

limestones.

&ig. :. "he Fount of 9lives, :erusalem, lookingacross the 3idron -alley from beneath the wall of the 9ld City next to the "emple Fount fig. 6J$."he chalk of the Ft. &copus Group can be seenoutcropping in the foreground, 4ust above the

boundary with the :udea Group."he Ft. &copus Group commonly attains athickness of /56 m 2615J@J ft$, butvariations are common. 8t predominantly consistsof biomicritic, bituminous, poorlybedded, whiteforaminiferal chalk, which forms a characteristiclandscape of soft hills. Hard calcareous chalks,biorudites and detrital sandy limestones usuallyoccur at the base, and soft white marly chalksand shales terminate the se7uence. lint isabundant, and occurs as massive brecciatedbrown cliffs or thin continuous or nodular layers.lexer /0J1$ distinguished three lithofacieswithin the Ft. &copus Group mainly on the basis

of the distribution and 7uantity of flint within these7uence. "he #lat lithofacies in southernmost8srael, consisting of chalk alternating with flint, ischaracteriEed by large amounts of detritalcomponents, such as 7uartE sand beds,reworked 7uartEite and chert pebbles fig. 2@$."he ;in lithofacies in the )egev and northwardsbeyond the +ead &ea area to Galilee is built of chalk and flint beds which gradually intertonguewith the pure chalk se7uence of the ;efatlithofacies found right along the coastal region of 8srael northwards. Certain horiEons within the Ft.&copus Group are very rich in fossil ammonites,lamellibranchs bivalves$, gastropods and

sponges, while the chalks are built mainly of foraminiferal tests, ostracods, valves andnannoplankton plates.

&ig. :B. Composite columnar stratigraphicsection of the Ft. &copus Group in the #lat areain southernmost 8srael after lexer /0J1$. "hethree cycles depicted for the &antonian



Campanian are together named the &ayyarim ormation, the lateral e7uivalent of the Fenuha and Fishash ormations inthe Fakhtesh !amon area to the north figs. /@ and 6/$.9f particular interest are the bedded cherts and flint nodules$ withinthe chalk, and phosphorites of the Fenuha, Fishash and &ayyarim ormations in the )egev particularly 3olodny /0JB,/0J0Q &teinitE /0BB$. 8ndeed, cherts, porcellanites and silicified carbonate rocks and phosphorites form the bulk of the upper Cretaceous Fishash ormation. "he four main rock types are homogeneous chert, chert spheroids, heterogeneousbrecciated$ cherts, and porcellanites 3olodny /0J0$. "he dominant component of the homogeneous chert is micro andcryptocrystalline 7uartE. &ilicified fossils are beautifully exposed, ghosts of foraminiferal tests are common, andforaminiferal cavities are infilled with coarser 7uartE. "he chert is usually brown, with the centers of beds or nodules oftenbeing black due to the higher up to /.2W$ content of organic matter. "he spheroids vary from almost spherical to disclike,the latter lying parallel to bedding planes, their diameters varying between a few centimeters _/ in.$ and half a meter /0.Bin.$. "he concentric appearance is caused by alternation of broad 65@ cm$ _ /56 in.$ brown microcrystalline 7uartE bandswith thin ./56 mm$ .205.B0 in.$ transparent chalcedonic bands. "he heterogeneous chert consists of what appear to

be chert fragments set in a chert matrix or cement, both components being microcrystalline 7uartE. (sually the matrix isfiner grained, is much richer in pigmented materials, phosphate detritus and foraminifera, and is more enriched in "i, e, Fg,- and organic matter relative to the fragments. "he porcellanite is an impure, usually opaline rock having the texture andappearance of unglaEed porcelain. Abundant microfossils in the porcellanite are infilled by microcrystalline 7uartE. "heporcellanite consists of acrystobalite 251W$, the rest being calcite and 7uartE. hosphate minerals are abundantthroughout the entire Fishash ormation, as are interbedded carbonates usually sparse biomicrites$. "he concentration of phosphate increases from the bottom upwards and culminates in the uppermost phosphorite unit. "he ma4or phosphatemineral is francolite apatite, or calcium phosphate, with /W and appreciable C9 6$, which occurs as bone fragments andpellets. "he cement is calcite micrite or sparite$, but sometimes is siliceous.%ased on the textures observed in theseFishash cherts, 3olodny /0J0$ concluded some of the cherts formed by replacement of carbonates principally chalk$,while others precipitated as primary silica, most likely in a silicasaturated environment. &teinitE /0BB$ reported indicationsof primary or diagenetic evaporite minerals within the cherts are rare and dispersed, both stratigraphically andgeographically. "hese included the sulfate minerals gypsum and anhydrite Ca$, and celestine &r$, as well as dolomite Fg,Ca carbonate$. 8t is thus clear that saline conditions were necessary for both the cherts and these LevaporiteM minerals to

form. However, it is incorrect to assume these minerals formed by evaporation. 8nstead, these silica, sulfate and carbonateminerals readily precipitate from saline fluids, particularly hot saline fluids Hovland et al. 6J$. "hus it can be envisagedthat these cherts and associated minerals precipitated as saline to saturated hydrothermal fluids, emanating from deepmagmas and hot basement rocks via fissures, made contact and mixed with the cooler sedimentcarrying lood waterstransgressing the continental crustal surfaces &nelling 60b$."hese same hot saline to saturated hydrothermal$ fluids arealso the key to explaining the rapid lood accumulation of the chalk beds themselves &nelling /00>, 60b$. "he modernanalog for the chalk beds is the calcareous ooEe dominated by similar coccoliths now accumulating on the ocean floors at arate of 65/ cm .B05> in.$ per thousand years 3ukal /00$. At that rate, 6 m J@J ft$ thickness of Ft. &copus Groupchalk beds would have taken 65/ million years to accumulate, which has been cited as an obvious problem for loodgeology Hayward /01B$. However, even today coccolith accumulation is not steadystate but highly episodic, withsignificant increases occurring in plankton Lblooms,M red tides, and in intense white water coccolith blooms in whichmicroorganism numbers experience a two orders of magnitude increase &eliger et al. /0BQ &umich /0BJ$. "hough poorlyunderstood, the suggested reasons for these blooms include turbulence of the sea, wind, decaying fish, nutrients fromfreshwater inflow and upwelling, and temperature %allantyne and Abbott /0@BQ ingree, Holligan and Head /0BBQ *ilsonand Collier /0@@$. "here is also experimental evidence that low FgSCa ratios and high Ca concentrations in seawater,

similar to the levels in socalled Cretaceous seawater from which the chalk beds formed, promote exponential growth ratesof coccolithophores &tanley, !ies and Hardie 6@$. Puite clearly, all these necessary conditions for explosive blooming of coccolithophores would have been present during the cataclysmic global upheavals of the lood. "orrential rain, seaturbulence, decaying fish and other organic matter, and the violent volcanic eruptions on the ocean floor and on landcausing steam, carbon dioxide, Ca, and other elements and salts to be spewed into the lood waters, would have resultedin explosive blooms of coccolithophores on a large and repetitive scale. urthermore, the ocean water temperatures wouldhave been higher towards the end of the lood when these Cretaceous chalk beds were deposited because of all the heatreleased by all the catastrophic, global volcanic and magmatic activity. "hus the rapid production of the necessary 7uantitiesof calcareous ooEe to form the thick chalk beds in a matter of days to weeks toward the end of the lood year is realisticallyconceivable &nelling /00>, 60b$. 8ndeed, the extreme purity of the chalk beds, usually 0W CaC9 2 etti4ohn /0@B$,argues for their rapid deposition and formation, and the chert and the associated LevaporiteM minerals$ in them are directevidence of the hot saline to saturated fluids involved.However, investigations have shown that once these Ft. &copusGroup chalk beds were deposited the biogenetic fragments were cemented together to make chalky limestone by sparrycalcite precipitated from fresh water FagaritE /0B>$. "his evidence would seem to be contrary to the claim above that the

biogenetic debris which constitutes the chalk beds accumulated as a result of the rapid production of coccolithophores inexplosive blooms in warm lood waters being in4ected with hot saline fluids from violent volcanic eruptions and magmaticactivity on a global scale. "o the contrary, this fresh water appears to have come from the a7uifer below these chalk bedssome time after deposition of the biogenetic debris. 8t is only the lower section of the chalk beds that have been lithified intochalky limestone by the introduction of sparry calcite to infill the foraminiferal tests and pores. And the main indication thatlithification was due to sparry calcite precipitated from fresh water is the difference in the oxygen and carbon isotopecomposition, and the &r, e692 and noncarbonate contents, between the chalky limestone and the overlying chalk FagaritE/0B>$. %ut such evidence is not necessarily definitive, and such lithification occurred sometime subse7uent to the

catastrophic deposition during the lood, most likely after the lood watersretreated and the groundwater systems were established by infiltration of postlood rainfall. Avedat Group EoceneF

&ig. :. Cliffs of Avedat Group #ocene$ chalk beds on either side of *adi;in at #n Avedat, on the northern fringes of the Avedat lateau in thenorthern )egev south of %eer &heva.Conformably overlying the "a7iyeormation of the Ft. &copus Group is the Avedat Group, conventionallyassigned to the #ocene &eries figs. /@ and 6/$. Composed of >5@ m/,2/65/,J> ft$ thickness of limestone and chalk beds, the Avedat Groupalso contains marine fossils. &omewhat harder than the underlying Ft.&copus Group, it tends to form more resistant ridges and elevatedplateaus above the Ft. &copus strata. )amed after the Avedat lateau



south of %eer &heva fig. 2J$ %artov et al. /0B6$, the Avedat Group strata are especially common in structurally low areas,and remnants extend from the #lat area in the south through the )egev to northern 8srael. Cliffs of Avedat Group chalk bedsoccur near %eer &heva fig. 2B$ and also stand beside the valley of #lah fig. 21$ where Goliath challenged the army of 8srael, above the brook where +avid chose five smooth stones ! amuel !7 $.8n the #lat area all four formations within the group, as defined in the Avedat area, can be recogniEed fig. 6/$ %artov et al./0B6Q Garfunkel /0B1$. *here the group is complete here it is 7uite thick at approximately 6/ m J10 ft$, and consists of chalk, and limestone with variable amounts of chert. Characteristically it is poor in macrofossils, but is rich in planktonic andbenthonic foraminifers. arge foraminifers, like nummulites, are common. "he four formations of the Avedat Group in thiscomplete section near #lat areK"he For ormation, /@ m 2>> ft$ thick, consists mostly of white chalk with black chert occurring in thin to medium lenticular layers. Fost of the chert is homogeneous, but some is breccoidal. "he chalk often contains dolomite rhombs and phosphategrains, and is silicified. 8n places, limestone concretions are present within the chalk, their siEe varying from a few

centimeters to / m 2.2 ft$."he )iEEana ormation is J@ m 6/2 ft$ thick, and is composed of alternating yellowishbrown detrital bioclastic$ limestones,phosphoritic limestones, concretionary limestone layers and chalk, with beds and lenses of chert nodules. "he limestonesare rich in fossil fragments, and sometimes contain macrofossils. 8ntraformational conglomerates calcirudites$ and slumpstructures are common."he overlying Horsha ormation, 2@ m //@ ft$ thick, is composed of white, massive chalk beds with limonitic impregnationstopped by variegated shales, alternating with platy chalky limestones. "his marlychalky formation contains some glauconite,today found in marine environments. 8ts noncarbonate fraction contains clinoptilolite a Eeolite mineral$, opal andpalygorskite a clay mineral$ associated with montmorillonite another clay mineral$, all indicative of original volcaniccomponents, now altered."he overlying Fatred ormation is only /@ m >0 ft$ thick, and is composed of yellowish, hard, dense and coarse crystallinelimestones with abundant nummulites. Chert and some glauconite also occur. "he limestones often show crossbedding,indicative of swift watercurrent deposition of lime sand in sand waves Austin /00>$.

&ig. :. "hick, massive Avedat Group #ocene$chalk beds in a road cut

4ust to the northwest of %eer &heva. )ote thepurity of the chalk, whichis consistent with rapiddeposition andaccumulation.

&ig. :G. aminated Avedat Group #ocene$

chalk beds in the cliffs bordering the -alley of #lah, where Goliath challenged the army of 8srael. 8n the foreground is thebrook from where +avid chose five smooth stones / &amuel /B$."he Avedat Group, a >5@ m /,2/65/,J> ft$ thickse7uence of lower to middle #ocene LmarineM sediments, was deposited in preexisting synclinal basins reund /0B1$. 8t

lies unconformably, usually with green glauconite beds, on older elevated structures. 8n the eastern regions of 8srael and the)egev the group is dominated by hard limestones composed of benthonic foraminifera, while in the western regions thefacies is chalk composed of planktonic foraminifera. "his eastwest distribution occurs only in the northern part of 8srael andnot in the )egev, and towards the coastal plain the Avedat Group strata are so chalky they resemble the underlying Ft.&copus Group chalk beds. Chert is more abundant in the chalky facies in the west than in the limestones to the east andsouth.The &loodI"ost<&lood %oundary*ith the widespread deposition of the Avedat Group marine sediments completed, Lthe continuous marine se7uence of thecountry comes to an endM reund /0B1$. A ma4or regression began in the upper #ocene with the retreating of ocean watersoff the country Garfunkel /0B1$. (pper #ocene sediments are very rare, mostly being confined to the present coastal plainand bordering foothills. "he original extent of these upper #ocene sediments remains unknown, but they could haveextended 7uite a way into structural lows in the )egev &akal, !aab and !eiss /0JJ$. or example, there is a small outcropof upper #ocene PeEi?ot ormation calcareous muds and clays with marine fossils$ overlying the middle #ocene Fatredormation of the Avedat Group in the Fenuha anticline area in the southeast )egev fig. 20$. 9verlying it on an erosional

unconformity is the Fiocene HaEeva ormation. &imilarly, the PeEi?ot ormation upper #ocene$ also outcrops in thewestern Fakhtesh !amon area, where it largely consists of chalk fig. 6/$. 8n the same area the Har Agrav ormation alsoupper #ocene$ marine limestone beds overlie the PeEi?ot ormation. Again, there is then an erosional unconformity abovethese #ocene strata, with the thin continental sediments of the Fiocene HaEeva ormation overlying it."his regressionduring and after the upper #ocene was followed by a period of extensive erosion, which produced a rather flat landscapeGarfunkel and HorowitE /0JJ$. ig. 6 shows the extent of this massive erosional unconformity right across 8srael from southto north, apart from some minor continuous deposition of chalk, marl, limestone and shale through the 9ligocene on thecoastal plain ad4acent to the Fediterranean basin, to where the lood waters would have retreated. ive principal stages inthe development of the )egev have been distinguished Garfunkel and HorowitE /0JJ$, of which the first and the last weremainly erosional, while the others left Fiocene continental sedimentsDthe HaEeva ormation which interfingers withFediterranean marine sediments, the Arava Conglomerate in the deepened +ead &ea rift, and the HaFeshar ormation onwide floodplains. 8t is noteworthy that these Fiocene and later continental sediments lie on rocks which now build thelandscape, which shows that many relics of the middle "ertiary topography are still preserved Garfunkel /0B1$.



&ig. :H. GeneraliEed stratigraphic column for the"ertiary part of the strata se7uence exposed in theFenuha anticline area in the southeast )egev after &akal, !aab and !eiss /0JJ$. )ote the erosionalunconformity above the marine #ocene PeEi?otormation, the likely loodSpostlood boundarybecause the Fiocene HaEeva ormation above consistsof continental deposits.8t is because these Fiocenesedimentary rocks above the #ocene LmarineM AvedatGroup are continental in origin, are of relatively smallvolume, and are very restricted in extent, that Austin/001a$ implied they are postlood. "hese are the

same criteria, namely, continental sediments of relatively small volume and very restricted in extent, that

Austin et al. /00>$ used to place the loodSpostloodboundary globally at the CretaceousS"ertiary 3S"$boundary in the geologic record. &imilarly, *hitmoreand Garner 61$ listed criteria such as localsedimentary units, lacustrine and fluvial continental$deposits, and true desiccation cracks, evaporites andbioturbation as indicative of postlood sedimentaryrocks. 8t was using these and other$ criteria that the#ocene Green !iver ormation of *yoming was

classified as postlood 9ard and *hitmore 6JQ *hitmore 6Ja, b, cQ *hitmore and Garner 61$.However, *hitmoreand Garner 61$ also allowed for the residual deposition of marine sediments on the continents after the lood,presumably in the regressive se7uences they list as a criterion for postlood sedimentary units. Austin /001a$ also argued

for marine sediments still to be deposited on the continents in regressive se7uences as the lood waters retreated, becausehe stated thatK As the ocean retreated, nutrientrich waters allowed coccoliths to flourish as massive algal blooms contributed ooEes to theocean floor . . . so that$ marine sedimentation of chalk continued into the postlood period in 8srael."he chalksedimentation he referred to could only be the chalk beds that dominate the Ft. &copus and Avedat Groups figs. 6 and 6/$.However, these groups span the interval from the upper Cretaceous through to the upper #ocene with continuousdeposition of thick chalk beds, with some cherts and marls, and minor limestones right across 8srael fig. 6$. "hese certainlyrepresent marine sediments deposited on the continent, but their massive nature figs. 6 and 2$ and fairly uniform thicknessright across 8srael do not suggest they belong to a regressive se7uence."o the contrary, rather than placing the loodSpostlood boundary in the geologic record of 8srael at the CretaceousS"ertiary 3S"$ boundary in the middle of where there wascontinuous chalk deposition, it makes more sense to place it between the #ocene and Fiocene. At the end of the #ocenethere is a ma4or welldefined and recogniEed regression right across 8srael due to the retreating of the ocean lood$ watersoff the country Garfunkel /0B1$, followed by a period of extensive erosion in the 9ligocene Garfunkel and HorowitE /0JJ$,before the arguably postlood isolated minor continental sediments were deposited in the Fiocene fig. 6$.urthermore, theoriginally continuous AraboAfrican craton was only rifted apart in the CenoEoic to form the present plate boundaries in 8srael

and nearby countries Garfunkel /0B1$. !ifting began only in the 9ligocene in the southern !ed &ea area to begin openingit, but most of the opening of the !ed &ea was contemporaneous with the slip on the +ead &ea rift, the ma4ority of whichwas probably during the Fiocene reund, ;ak and Garfunkel /0J1$. At the same time this rifting formed the +ead &eabasin, the :ordan valley, the &ea of Galilee and the Hula basin another lakefilled depression north of Galilee$, drag andfrictional forces along the +ead &ea "ransform ault caused the thick se7uence of lood strata in central and northern8srael, including the limestone and chalk beds of the middle Cretaceous to #ocene :udea, Ft. &copus and Avedat Groups,to be arched upward to form the :udean Fountains and the ad4oining foothills to the west Austin /001a$.&ince the geologicprocesses which were occurring at catastrophic rates during the lood are still operating today at a snail?s pace for example, plate tectonics and volcanism$, it is likely that as the lood ended these geologic processes did not stop abruptly,but rapidly decelerated. "his is confirmed by the declining eruption power of postlood volcanoes Austin /001b$. "hus it islikely there were residual local catastrophes in the early postlood years that produced some sedimentary layers in localbasins and dramatically eroded some impressive landscape features. And in some places marine sediments could still havebeen deposited on continental land surfaces marginal to today?s ocean basins, because the lood waters had not then fullyretreated to today?s coastlines.8t could thus be argued from the above considerations that the loodSpostlood boundary in

the geologic record of 8srael, could still be at the CretaceousS"ertiary 3S"$ boundary within the Ft. &copus Group strata, inkeeping with the Austin et al. /00>$ positioning of the loodSpostlood boundary from a global perspective, because thelood waters had not fully retreated from off the land of 8srael. However, given that there is strong, wellrecogniEed evidenceof the ocean lood$ waters having finally retreated from off the land of 8srael to approximately the present coastlineimmediately after continuous uninterrupted$ deposition of the thick LmarineM limestone, dolomite and chalk beds of themiddle Cretaceous#ocene :udea, Ft. &copus and Avedat Groups, accompanied by subse7uent extensive erosion anddrying of the land surface, it seems more reasonable to place the loodSpostlood boundary in the geologic record of 8sraelin the 9ligocene, or at the end of it. "his placement of the boundary still re7uires some residual local geologic activity tohave rapidly occurred in 8srael tectonic ad4ustments, erosion, sedimentation and volcanic eruptions$ during the earlydecades of the postlood period before post%abel people migrated into the land ahead of Abraham?s subse7uent arrival.Conclusion"he sedimentary strata that comprise and cover most of 8srael provide an obvious record of the lood, in keeping with thegeologic evidences as outlined by Austin /00>$, &nelling 6B$, and elaborated on subse7uently for example, &nelling61a, b, c$. And the geologic record of the lood in 8srael has many similarities to that in the Grand CanyonGrand&taircase area of the (.&. &outhwest Austin /00>, /001a$."he ma4or erosion surface at the base of the sedimentary stratase7uence which was cut across the recambrian prelood$ crystalline basement rocks metamorphics and granites$, andwhich could be called the LGreat (nconformityM of 8srael, appears to mark the catastrophic passage of the lood waters asthey rose onto the prelood continental surface at the initiation of the lood event. "he ocean lood$ waters thus rose over the continental land, as evidenced by the myriads of marine organisms buried and fossiliEed in sediment layers depositedacross 8srael &nelling 61a$. Fany thousands of meters of LmarineM sediments were deposited on a vast scale. 8sraelappears to have been on the northern margin of part of the prelood continent, with an ocean basin to the north which was



a gigantic dumping ground for the northwardthickening wedge of sedimentary strata across 8srael fig. 2$ Austin /001a$.#ven Ft. Hermon, the highest elevation in 8srael, is composed of limestone beds, containing marine fossils."he accumulation of this thick sediment se7uence was rapid, as evidenced by mass graveyards of fossils &nelling 61b$,such as the ammonites now exposed in the upturned layer in Fakhtesh !amon the LAmmonite *allM$. Folluscs rudists$were not fossiliEed in a gigantic, organicallybound reef complex near Ft. Carmel, but are distributed within a matrix of finegrained lime sediment that was transported, LdumpedM in a big LheapM, and rapidly buried Austin /001a$. amination andbedding are distinctive of layering of sedimentary rocks without significant evidence of burrowing and disruption features,implying rapid sedimentation, not enormously long periods of slow accumulation.At the initiation of the lood when theocean waters catastrophically rose and advanced over the prelood supercontinent as it broke apart, eroding the crystallinebasement, the first sediment layer to be deposited in 8srael and widely across surrounding regions was a sandstone with aconglomeratic base, identical to the "apeats &andstone in the Grand Canyon whose e7uivalents were deposited rightacross )orth America. &imilarly, late in this lood inundation of 8srael the waters were nutrient rich, likely due to the addition

of chemicalrich hot waters from associated volcanism, allowing coccoliths to flourish as massive algal blooms that thenrapidly accumulated as ooEes to become thick chalk beds. "hese were not 4ust a local phenomenon, as these chalk beds in8srael can be traced west across #urope to #ngland and 8reland, and east to 3aEakhstan, with other remnants in theFidwest of the (&A and in southern *estern Australia. %oth these examples powerfully illustrate the global lood depositionof transcontinental rock layers &nelling 61c$."he formation of mountains would have re7uired powerful tectonic upheavalprocesses that overturned and upthrusted sedimentary strata. &imultaneous isostatic ad4ustments would also have resultedin restoring the continental land surfaces as the lood waters drained off into new deep ocean basins. 8n 8srael this greatregression, as the lood waters receded and widespread marine sedimentation ended, also coincided with thecommencement of the rifting that opened up the !ed &ea and the +ead &ea:ordan !iver rift valley along the +ead &ea"ransform ault, as well as the uplifting of the :udean Fountains along a northsouth axis of folding the :udean Arch$, andthe thrust faulting that created 8srael?s highest peak, Ft. Hermon 6,1/> m$ 0,626 ft$, all of which marked the end of thelood event.

#celand3s Recent L,ega<&loodM

An #llustration o the )ower o the &loodby +r. Andrew A. &nelling on :une /, /000'riginally published in Creation "!* no # +(une !---/ $&0$).

5celanders will long remember >ovember %* !--&.&hop )ow9n that day the largest flood in living memory swept from the terminus bottom end$ of &keidarr Glacier. 8celanders callsuch sudden drainage events =Hkulhlaups, literally, Lglacier bursts.M 8t is these that lead to megascale flooding withdevastating conse7uences. &itting astride the midocean ridge in the )orth Atlantic 9cean, 8celand is volcanically one of themost dynamic parts of the #arth?s surface. resh eruptions occur on average every five years. Iet, because of its highlatitude, some //W of 8celand is covered by glacial ice.6 8ndeed, the largest currently glaciated area is called -atna4[kull,meaning Lwater glacier,M so common is ma4or flooding around its margins.The mega<lood cycle"he western half of -atna4[kull covers part of a volcanic belt igure 6$, the heat from which maintains a melted lake, evenbeneath the glacial ice. 3nown as ake Grmsv[tn, the subglacial water is stored within a large, bowlshaped volcanicdepression formed by the continual heat flow and periodic eruptions. As surrounding ice melts, ake Grmsv[tn gradually

enlarges over a few years. (ltimately it melts through an ice dam at a low point in the confining landform and drains into asubglacial tunnel. "he water usually flows southwards beneath the 1.Jkm @.> mile$wide &keidarr Glacier, discharging atits margin some @ km 2 miles$ away as a megaflood>igure 6$. "he cycle starts again as the lake begins to refill.

&igure 9. "he -atna4[kull icecap covers the %rdarbungaand Grmsv[tn volcanoes.&treams radiate from theglacier?s margin, drainingnormal meltwater. "he&keidarr Glacier flowssouth. "he newly completedhighway rings 8celand. "he/00J fissure eruption filled

ake Grmsv[tn, whichdischarged by the subglacialflood route shown. "he areaflooded by the )ovember /00J =Hkulhlaup glacier burst$ is indicated."he /00Jvolcanic eruptionAt the end of /00@, fresh volcanic actionbeneath %rdarbungavolcano accelerated akeGrmsv[tn?s normal cycle.Fagma at over //VCmoved sideways. 8teventually erupted between%rdarbunga and akeGrmsv[tn on &eptember 2,/00J. A Jkm > mile$longfissure opened through the>@metre /@ feet$thick

glacier. 8n 4ust /2 days, the hot lava melted some 2 cubic km .B2 cubic miles$ of ice. As the ice melted, the water drainedrapidly along a narrow channel under the glacier into ake Grmsv[tn. Apprehension grew as the subglacial lake swelledsome J meters 6 feet$ higher than its usual trigger level.J 9ver four cubic km one cubic mile$ of water had





https://answersingenesis.org/geology/catastrophism/icelands-recent-mega-flood/#fn_2












accumulated.B 8t was inevitable that the lake would overflow and release the water, instigating a megaflood. %ut when*eeks passed as scientists and 4ournalists watched and waited.The No/em0er 8HH $kulhlau"ate on )ovember >, a steady ground vibration signaled that the glacier on the southeastern edge of ake Grmsv[tn hadmoved. ake drawdown had started.1 %eneath the &kediarr Glacier the water crept at less than walking pace down the @km 2 miles$long tunnel. However, once it emerged from the end of the glacier, about 1 AF next day, the water sweptdown the alluvial plain in a flood wave. 8n less than two days, a volume of 2.J cubic km .0 cubic miles$ discharged from theglacier, laden with sediment and transporting huge blocks of broken ice. "he )ovember /00J 4[kulhlaup was trulycatastrophic compared with the usual megafloods observed in the last J years. A normal megaflood can take /6 days topeak and last for /B days, whereas this gigantic 4[kulhlaup peaked in 6 hours and lasted 4ust two days. "he peak dischargethus reached @@, cubic meters two million cubic feet$ per second, more than five times the normal megaflood rate. 8twas the largest ever recorded in 8celand. 8t was over twenty times the flow rate of )iagara alls. 8n fact, the peak discharge

rivaled the flow of the Congo !iver, the second largest river in the world. loodwater surged from the ice margin as newoutlets developed. %locks of ice were ripped out, cutting huge chasms into the end of the glacier. 9bstructed by inade7uateflow channels behind a ma4or ridge of glacial rubble terminal moraine$ which largely blocked the flow like a wall, water levels leapt higher, overflowing along new paths. *ithin a few hours an enormous gorge was excavated through this ridge,at least doubling its previous siEe. +ownstream, a huge new channel system over 2 km 6 miles$ wide was cut into thealluvial plain.The conse4uences+uring this flood, huge volumes of iceblocks were detached from the glacier and swept along in the raging waters.+epending on their siEe, some iceblocks floated, others rotated, bounced, skipped and slid downchannel. "he biggestwere /5/@ meters 225@ feet$ high and estimated to be up to /, tonnes in weight. Fany huge 6tonne blocks werestrewn across the alluvial plain. &ediment up to 0 meters 2 feet$ thick was deposited over an area of @ s7uare km 6s7uare miles$Dall in less than two days. Collisions by moving iceblocks caused considerable damage. A /km Jmile$segment of the premier highway that rings 8celand disappeared igure 6$. "he reinforcedconcrete bridge over the Gg4a!iver was totally swept away. "he 0 meter 2 feet$ &keidar !iver %ridge was severely damaged, even though its

foundations were buried to a depth of /@ meters @ feet$ to withstand megafloods. 8celand?s main hightension powerlineswere severed, and the telephone cables ripped apart.Rele/ance8celandic history records about J such cataclysms since the -ikings arrived in the ninth century. However, scientists wereskeptical of the previous awesome descriptions of fantastic floods. )ow that this megaflood has been observed, manytimes larger than previously measured, it is considered that these stories are probably true. At @@, cubic meters twomillion cubic feet$ per second, 8celand?s deluge was of apocalyptic proportions. 8t destroyed reinforcedconcrete bridges,swept along /tonne blocks of ice, eroded 2kmwide canyons and dumped 0 meters of sediment over @ s7uare km.Fercifully, it lasted only two days. Iet, on a world scale this was only a local flood. 8t affected only a small part of one tinyisland on our planet. *hat would the global, yearlong lood have achieved 8celand?s devastating )ovember /00J

4[kulhlaup testifies to the power of the Global lood and that it can easily explain the building of the geologicalrecord.&keptics who deny the historicity of the creation account need to learn from 8celand?s latest megaflood. :ust becausepast eyewitnesses describe processes larger than we have observed does not mean they were exaggerating. *e need torecogniEe the limitations of our experience. *e have not observed all the geological processes that actually fashioned thisplanet.

Uluru and @ata T$uta= A Testimony to the &loodby +r. Andrew A. &nelling on Farch /, /001

'riginally published in Creation "6* no " +March !--)/ #&0$6.>o visit to Central ,ustralia iscomplete without seeing two of ,ustraliaIs most famouslandmarks0Aluru and Jata3=uta."hese geological formationsare stunning in their beauty,and awesome in their abruptcontrast to the surrounding flat,barren plains.

Uluru(luru rises steeply on all sides to a height of about 2> metres /,//> feet$ above the desert plain, its summit 1JB metres6,1>@ feet$ above sea level. An isolated rockmass, it measures nine kilometres @.J miles$ around its base. (luru may look

like a giant boulder sitting in the desert sand, but it isnot igure 6, below$. 8nstead, it is like the Ntip of theiceberg?, an enormous outcrop with even more of thesame rock under the ground and beneath thesurrounding desert sand.(luru consists of manylayers or beds of the same rock tilted and standingalmost up on end dipping at 151@V$. "he cumulativethickness of these exposed beds is at least 6.@kilometres /.J miles$, but the additional layers under the surrounding desert sand bring the overallthickness to almost six kilometres 2.B@ miles$.(luruconsists of a type of coarse sandstone knowntechnically as arkose, because a ma4or component isgrains and crystal fragments of the mineral feldspar."his pink mineral, along with the rusty coatings on thesand grains in the rock surface generally, gives (luru

its overall reddish colour. Closer inspection of this arkose reveals that the mineral grains are fresh in appearance,













particularly the shiny faces of feldspar crystals, some 7uite large. "he rock fabric consists of large, medium, small, and verysmall grains randomly mixed together, a condition geologists describe as Npoorly sorted? see photomicrograph$.urthermore, the grains themselves are often 4agged around their edges, not smooth or rounded.@ata T$uta

3ata "4uta, about 2 kilometres /1 miles$ west of (luru, consistsof a series of huge, rounded rocky domes igure 2, below$. "hehighest, Ft 9lga, reaches /J0 metres 2,@B feet$ above sealevel and about J metres /,0B feet$ above the desert floor.&eparated by narrow gorges, these spectacular domed rockmasses cover an area of about eight kilometres five miles$ byfive kilometres three miles$. "he rock layers here only dip atangles of /5/1V to the southwest, but are enormous. "heir total

thickness is six kilometres 2.B@ miles$, and they extend under the desert sands to other outcrops for over /@ kilometres 0.@ miles$ to the northeast and for more than > kilometres 6@miles$ to the northwest."hese rock layers making up 3ata "4uta are collectively called the Fount Currie Conglomerate,named after the outcrop at Fount Currie, about 2@ kilometres 66 miles$ northwest of 3ata "4uta. A conglomerate is a poorlysorted sedimentary rock containing pebbles, cobbles, and boulders of other rocks held together by a matrix of finer fragments and cemented sand, silt, andSor mud. 8n this one, the boulders up to /.@ metres or five feet across$, cobbles, andpebbles are generally rounded and consist mainly of granite and basalt, but some sandstone, rhyolite a volcanic rock$, andseveral kinds of metamorphic rocks are also present. "he matrix is mostly dark greyishgreen material that was once fine siltand mud, though lenses and beds of lighter coloured sandstone also occur."he (luru Arkose and the Fount CurrieConglomerate appear to be related by a common history. "hough their outcrops are isolated from one another, the evidenceclearly suggests that both rock units were formed at the same time and in the same way.

&igure 9. Crosssection through (luru showing the tilted layers of arkose continuing under the surrounding desert sand.

&igure :. Crosssection through 3ata "4uta showing the slightly tilted layers of Fount Currie Conglomerate."he evolutionary Nhistory?Fost geologists believe that between about 0 and J million years ago, much of Central Australia lay at or below sealevel, forming a depression, an arm of the sea, known as the Amadeus %asin. !ivers carried mud, sand, and gravel into thedepression, building up layers of sediment. 9ther types of sedimentary rocks also formed. "hen, they say, about @@ millionyears ago, in the socalled Cambrian eriod, the southwestern margin of the Amadeus %asin was raised above sealevel,the rocks were s7ueeEed, crumpled and buckled into folds, and fractured along faults in a mountainbuilding episode.+uringthe later stages of this episode, Nrapid? erosion carved out the etermann and Fusgrave !anges. "he (luru Arkose andFount Currie Conglomerate are the products of this erosion, being deposited in separate socalled alluvial fans igure >A$."hough uniformitarian slowandgradual$ geologists believe the arkose and conglomerate were deposited Nrelativelyrapidly?, they still allow up to @ million years for the occasional flash floods to have scoured the mountain ranges south andwest of the (luru area and carried the rubble many tens of kilometres out on to the ad4oining alluvial flats. "hus in twoseparate deposits, layer upon layer of arkose and conglomerate accumulated respectively.%y about @ million years ago, itis claimed, the region was again covered by a shallow sea and the alluvial fans of (luru Arkose and Fount CurrieConglomerate were gradually buried beneath layers of sand, silt, mud and limestone igure >%$. "hen about > million

years ago a new period of folding, faulting and uplift began and supposedly continued for around / million years. "helayers of (luru Arkose and Fount Currie Conglomerate, which had been buried by hundreds or even thousands of metres of younger Amadeus %asin sediments, were strongly folded and faulted igure >C$. "he originally horiEontal (luru Arkoselayers were rotated into a nearly vertical position, while the Fount Currie Conglomerate at 3ata "4uta was only tilted /5/1V.8t is thus believed that the (luru3ata "4uta area has probably remained above sealevel since that timeDfor some 2million years. 8nitially the land surface would have been much higher than the top of (luru and 3ata "4uta, but as erosioncontinued, today?s shapes of (luru and 3ata "4uta were gradually carved out igure >+$. %y B million years ago the areawas covered in forests indicating a very wet, tropical environment. "oday?s arid climate and desert sands have onlydeveloped since the very recent Nice age?, a few thousand years ago.)oODA recent catastrophic flood origin&igure . "he likely geological history or se7uence of events leading to the formation of 3ata "4uta and (luru irrespective of any evolutionary assumptions$.A. "he 'alluvial fans' of Fount Currie Conglomerate leftDred$ and (luru Arkose rightDyellow$ deposited on a basement of folded and eroded earlier sediments orange$ and granites greygreen$.

https://answersingenesis.org/geology/natural-features/uluru-and-kata-tjuta-a-testimony-to-the-flood/#micro

https://answersingenesis.org/geology/natural-features/uluru-and-kata-tjuta-a-testimony-to-the-flood/#micro



%. "he Fount Currie Conglomerate and(luru Arkose are buried by other sedimentsblue$.C. "he sediment layers are floded, faulted,tilted and then eroded.D. urther erosion lowers the ground surfacestill more and carves out 3ata "4uta and(luru as they are today.)ow that all soundslike an interesting story, but in fact, theevidence in these rock layers doesn?t agreewith itO At (luru particularly, the ubi7uitousfresh feldspar crystals in the arkose would

never have survived the claimed millions of years. eldspar breaks down when exposedto the sun?s heat, water, and air e.g., in ahumid tropical climate$, and relatively 7uicklyforms clays. 8f the arkose was deposited assheets of sand only centimetres an inch or two$ thick spread over many tens of s7uarekilometres to dry in the sun?s heat over countless thousands of years, then thefeldspar crystals would have decomposed toclays. ikewise, if the arkose had beenexposed to the destructive forces of erosionand tropical deep chemical weathering even

for 4ust a few million years, as is claimed, then the feldspar crystals would have long ago decomposed to clays. #ither way,

the sandstone fabric would have become weakened and then collapsed, as the clays and remaining unbound mineral grainswould have easily disintegrated and been entirely washed away, leaving no (luru at allOurthermore, sand grains which aremoved over long distances and periodically swept further and further over vast eons of time would lose their 4agged edges,becoming smooth and rounded. At the same time, the same sand grains being acted upon by the moving water over thoseclaimed long periods of time should also be sortedQ the smaller grains are carried more easily by water, so would beseparated from the larger grains. "hus if the (luru Arkose had taken millions of years to accumulate as evolutionarygeologists claim, then the rock today should have layers of either small or large grains. &o fresh, shiny feldspar crystals and

4agged, unsorted grains today all indicate that the (luru Arkose accumulated so rapidly the feldspar did not have enoughtime to decompose, nor the grains to be rounded and sorted.*hat of the Fount Currie Conglomerate #ven geologists whobelieve in slowandgradual sedimentation over millions of years have to admit that the waters which carried such largeboulders some over /.@ metres or five feet across$ had to be a swiftlyflowing, raging torrent.&uch catastrophic conditions would also need to be widespread in order to erode such a variety of rock types from the largemountainous source region, and to produce the resultant mixture of particle siEesDfrom mud pulveriEed rock$ and silt topebbles, cobbles, and boulders which, because of their siEe, were also rounded and smoothed by the violence of their rapidtransport over tens of kilometres.All this evidence is far more consistent with recent catastrophic deposition of the arkose

and conglomerate under raging flood conditions. 8n the exposures at (luru and 3ata "4uta respectively, the rockcompositions and fabrics are uniformly similar throughout 6.@ kilometres or /.J miles thick in the case of (luru$ and thelayering extremely regular and parallel. 8f deposition had been episodic over millions of years, there ought to be evidence of erosion e.g., channels$ and weathering surfaces between layers, while some compositional and fabric variations would beexpected.Staggering"he implications are absolutely staggering. 9ne only has to consider the amount and force of water needed to dump someJ, metres almost 6, feet$ thickness of sand, and a similar thickness of pebbles, cobbles, boulders, etc., probably ina matter of hours, after having transported these sediments many tens of kilometres, to realise that such an event had to bea catastrophic flood. And this traumatic event had to be recent, otherwise the feldspar crystals in the arkose would not be asfresh unweathered$ as they are today.

"he (luru Arkose as seen under a geological microscope. )ote the mixtures of grainsiEes and the 4agged edges of the grains. &ince the layers of arkose andconglomerate are now tilted, the arkose almost vertically, it is also obvious that after

being deposited these sediment layers were compressed and began to be cementedhardened$ while still watersaturated, and then pushed up by earth movements."hose experts in landscapeforming processes, who have intensively studied (luru,3ata "4uta, and other Central Australian landforms, are convinced that these shapeswere carved out by water erosion in a hot, humid tropical climate, and not by winderosion as in today?s dry desert climate."his is easily explained if the modernlandforms of (luru and 3ata "4uta developed as the same catastrophic flood waters,which dumped the arkose and conglomerate in the vast depression they occupied,began to retreat away from the emerging land surface of rising, tilted layers, erodingthe still relatively soft sediments to leave behind the shapes of (luru and 3ata "4uta.ollowing the retreat of those flood waters from the Australian continent, the

landscape began to dry out. "he chemicals in the water still trapped between grains of sand, pebbles, boulders, etc.continued to form a binding and hardening material similar to cement in concrete.Conclusion"he evidence overall does not fit the story of evolutionary geologists, with its millions of years of slowandgradualprocesses. 8nstead, the evidence in the rock layers at (luru and 3ata "4uta is much more consistent with the scientific modelbased on a recent, rapid, massive, catastrophic flood. (luru and 3ata "4uta are therefore stark testimony to the ragingwaters of the global lood.



Startling E/idence or *lo0al &lood&oot"rints and Sand 6Dunes3 in a *rand Canyon Sandstone

by +r. Andrew A. &nelling and +r. &teve Austin on +ecember /, /006'riginally published in Creation !%* no ! +Fecember !--"/ $&0%6.

ootprints and sand Kdunes2 in a Grand Canyon sandstone provide startling evidence for Gobal lood.&hop )owN"here is no sight on earth which matches Grand Canyon. "here are other canyons, other mountains and other rivers, but this Canyon excels all in scenic grandeur. Can any visitor, upon viewing Grand Canyon, grasp and appreciate thespectacle spread before him "he ornate sculpture work and the wealth of color are like no other landscape. "hey suggestan alien world. "he scale is too outrageous. "he sheer siEe and ma4esty engulf the intruder, surpassing his ability to take itin.?/ Anyone who has stood on the rim and looked down into Grand Canyon would readily echo these words as one?s breathis taken away with the sheer magnitude of the spectacle. "he Canyon stretches for 6BB miles >>J kilometres$ throughnorthern AriEona, attains a depth of more than / mile /.J kilometres$, and ranges from > miles J.> kilometres$ to /1 miles

60 kilometres$ in width. 8n the walls of the Canyon can be seen flatlying rock layers that were once sand, mud or lime. )owhardened, they look like pages of a giant book as they stretch uniformly right through the Canyon and underneath theplateau country to the north and south and deeper to the east.

igure /. A panoramic view of the Grand Canyon from the &outh !im at Iavapai oint. "he Coconino &andstone is the thickbuffcoloured layer close to the top of the canyon walls. Compare with igure 6.igure 6. Grand Canyon in crosssection showing the names given to the different rock units by geologists.The Coconino Sandstone"o begin to comprehend the awesome scale of these rock layers, we can choose any one for detailed examination. erhapsthe easiest of these rock layers to spot, since it readily catches the eye, is a thick, pale buff coloured to almost whitesandstone near the top of the Canyon walls. Geologists have given the different rock layers names, and this one is calledthe Coconino &andstone see igures / and 6$. 8t is estimated to have an average thickness of 2/@ feet 0J metres$ and,with e7uivalent sandstones to the east, covers an area of about 6, s7uare miles @/1, s7uare kilometres$ .6 "hat is

an area more than twice the siEe of the Australian &tate of -ictoria, or almost twice the area of the (& &tate of ColoradoO"hus the volume of this sandstone is conservatively estimated at /, cubic miles >/,B cubic kilometres$. "hat?s a lotof sandO

igure 2. Cross beds inclined sublayering$ within the Coconino &andstone, asseen on the %right Angel "rail in the Grand Canyon.*hat do these rock layers inGrand Canyon mean *hat do they tell us about the earth?s past or example,how did all the sand in this Coconino &andstone layer and its e7uivalents get towhere it is today"o answer these 7uestions geologists study the features withinrock layers like the Coconino &andstone, and even the sand grains themselves. Aneasily noticed feature of the Coconino &andstone is the distinct cross layers of sandwithin it called cross beds see igure 2, right$. or many years evolutionarygeologists have interpreted these cross beds by comparing them with currentlyforming sand deposits D the sand dunes in deserts which are dominated by sandgrains made up of the mineral 7uartE, and which have inclined internal sand beds.

"hus it has been proposed that the Coconino &andstone accumulated over thousands and thousands of years in an immense windy desert by migrating sanddunes, the cross beds forming on the downwind sides of the dunes as sand wasdeposited there.2

igure >K A fossiliEed 7uadruped trackway in the Coconino &andstone on display inthe Grand Canyon )atural History Association?s Iavapai oint Fuseum at the&outh !im."he Coconino &andstone is also noted for the large number of fossiliEedfootprints, usually in se7uences called trackways. "hese appear to have beenmade by fourfooted vertebrates moving across the original sand surfaces seeigure >, left$. "hese fossil footprint trackways were compared to the tracks madeby reptiles on desert sand dunes,> so it was then assumed that these fossiliEedfootprints in the Coconino &andstone must have been made in dry desert sandswhich were then covered up by windblown sand, subse7uent cementation formingthe sandstone and fossiliEing the prints.Iet another feature that evolutionarygeologists have used to argue that the Coconino &andstone represents theremains of a long period of dry desert conditions is the sand grains themselves.Geologists have studied the sand grains from modern desert dunes and under themicroscope they often show pitted or frosted surfaces. &imilar grain surfacetextures have also been observed in sandstone layers containing very thick crossbeds such as the Coconino &andstone, so again this comparison has strengthenedthe belief that the Coconino &andstone was deposited as dunes in a desert.At first




https://answersingenesis.org/bios/steve-austin/





https://answersingenesis.org/geology/grand-canyon-facts/startling-evidence-for-noahs-flood/#fn_1


http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/am/v3/n3/transcontinental-rock-layers




http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/am/v4/n2/folded-not-fractured









http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/am/v3/n3/transcontinental-rock-layers







glance this interpretation would appear to be an embarrassment to creation geologists who are unanimous in their belief thatit must have been a Global lood that deposited the flat lying beds of what were once sand, mud and lime, but are nowexposed as the rock layers in the walls of the Canyon.Above the Coconino &andstone is the "oroweap ormation and belowis the Hermit ormation, both of which geologists agree are made up of sediments that were either deposited by andSor inwater. @,J How could there have been a period of dry desert conditions in the middle of the lood year when N all the high hillsunder the whole heaven were covered? by water"his seeming problem has certainly not been lost on those, even fromwithin the Christian community, opposed to lood geologists and creationists in general. or example, +r +avis Ioung,rofessor of Geology at Calvin College in Grand !apids, Fichigan, in a recent book being marketed in Christian bookshops,has merely echoed the interpretations made by evolutionary geologists of the characteristics of the Coconino &andstone,arguing against the lood as being the agent for depositing the Coconino &andstone. He is most definite in his considerationof the desert dune modelKN"he Coconino &andstone contains spectacular cross bedding, vertebrate track fossils, and pitted and frosted sand grain

surfaces. All these features are consistent with formation of the Coconino as desert sand dunes. "he sandstone iscomposed almost entirely of 7uartE grains, and pure 7uartE sand does not form in floods = no flood of any siEe could haveproduced such deposits of sand =?BThose oot"rints"he footprint trackways in the Coconino &andstone have recently been reexamined in the light of experimental studies by+r eonard %rand of oma inda (niversity in California.1 His research program involved careful surveying and detailedmeasurements of 16 fossiliEed vertebrate trackways discovered in the Coconino &andstone along the Hermit "rail in GrandCanyon. He then observed and measured 62J experimental trackways made by living amphibians and reptiles inexperimental chambers. "hese tracks were formed on sand beneath the water, on moist sand at the water?s edge, and ondry sand, the sand mostly sloping at an angle of 6@ degrees, although some observations were made on slopes of /@degQand 6V for comparison. 9bservations were also made of the underwater locomotion of five species of salamandersamphibians$ both in the laboratory and in their natural habitat, and measurements were again taken of their trackways.Adetailed statistical analysis of these data led to the conclusion, with a high degree of probability that the fossil tracks musthave been made underwater. *hereas the experimental animals produce footprints under all test conditions, both up and

down the 6@V slopes of the laboratory Ndunes?, all but one of the fossil trackways could only have been made by the animalsin 7uestion climbing uphill. "oe imprints were generally distinct, whereas the prints of the soles were indistinct. "hese andother details were present in over 1W of the fossil, underwater and wet sand tracks, but less than /6W of the dry sand anddamp sand tracks had any toe marks. +ry sand uphill tracks were usually 4ust depressions, with no details. *et sand trackswere 7uite different from the fossil tracks in certain features. Added to this, the observations of the locomotive behaviour of the living salamanders indicated that all spent the ma4ority of their locomotion time walking on the bottom, underwater, rather than swimming.utting together all of his observations, +r %rand thus came to the conclusion that the configurations andcharacteristics of the animals trackways made on the submerged sand surfaces most closely resembled the fossiliEed7uadruped trackways of the Coconino &andstone. 8ndeed, when the locomotion behaviour of the living amphibians is takeninto account, the fossiliEed trackways can be interpreted as implying that the animals must have been entirely under water not swimming at the surface$ and moving upslope against the current$ in an attempt to get out of the water. "hisinterpretation fits with the concept of a global lood, which overwhelmed even fourfooted reptiles and amphibians thatnormally spend most of their time in the water.)ot content with these initial studies, +r %rand has continued with the help of a colleague$ to pursue this line of research.He recently published further results,0 which were so significant that a brief report of their work appeared in cience

>ews/ and Geology 3oday . //His careful analysis of the fossiliEed trackways in the Coconino &andstone, this time not only from the Hermit "rail in GrandCanyon but from other trails and locations, again revealed that all but one had to have been made by animals moving upcross bed slopes. urthermore, these tracks often show that the animals were moving in one direction while their feet werepointing in a different direction. 8t would appear that the animals were walking in a current of water, not air. 9ther trackwaysstart or stop abruptly, with no sign that the animals? missing tracks were covered by some disturbance such as shiftingsediments. 8t appears that these animals simply swam away from the sediment.%ecause many of the tracks havecharacteristics that are N4ust about impossible? to explain unless the animals were moving underwater, +r %rand suggestedthat newtlike animals made the tracks while walking under water and being pushed by a current. "o test his ideas, he andhis colleague videotaped living newts walking through a laboratory tank with running water. All 621 trackways made by thenewts had features similar to the fossiliEed trackways in the Coconino &andstone, and their videotaped behaviour whilemaking the trackways thus indicated how the animals that made the fossiliEed trackways might have been moving."heseadditional studies confirmed the conclusions of his earlier researches. "hus, +r %rand concluded that all his data suggestthat the Coconino &andstone fossil tracks should not be used as evidence for desert wind deposition of dry sand to form the

Coconino &andstone, but rather point to underwater deposition. "hese evidence from such careful experimental studies by alood geologist overturn the original interpretation by evolutionists of these Coconino &andstone fossil footprints, and thuscall into 7uestion their use by Ioung and others as an argument against the lood.Desert 6dunes35"he desert sand dune model for the origin of the Coconino &andstone has also recently been challenged by Glen -isher /6,rofessor of Geology at the (niversity of "ulsa in 9klahoma, and not a creationist geologist. -isher noted that large storms,or amplified tides, today produce submarine sand dunes called Nsand waves?. "hese modern sand waves on the sea floor contain large cross beds composed of sand with very high 7uartE purity. -isher has thus interpreted the Coconino&andstone as a submarine sand wave deposit accumulated by water, not wind. "his of course is directly contrary to Ioung?sclaims, which after all are 4ust the repeated opinions of other evolutionary geologists.urthermore, there is other evidencethat casts grave doubts on the view that the Coconino &andstone cross beds formed in desert dunes. "he average angle of slope of the Coconino cross beds is about 6@V from the horiEontal, less than the average angle of slope of sand beds withinmost modern desert sand dunes. "hose sand beds slope at an angle of more than 6@V, with some beds inclined as much as2V to 2>V, the angle of Nrest? of dry sand. 9n the other hand, modern oceanic sand waves do not have Navalanche? faces of sand as common as desert dunes, and therefore, have lower average dips of cross beds.-isher also points to other positiveevidence for accumulation of the Coconino &andstone in water. *ithin the Coconino &andstone is a feature knowntechnically as Nparting lineation?, which is known to be commonly formed on sand surfaces during brief erosional burstsbeneath fastflowing water. 8t is not known from any desert sand dunes. "hus -isher also uses this feature as evidence of vigorous water currents accumulating the sand, which forms the Coconino &andstone.&imilarly, -isher has noted that thedifferent grain siEes of sand within any sandstone are a reflection of the process that deposited the sand. Conse7uently, heperformed sand grain siEe analyses of the Coconino &andstone and modern sand waves, and found that the Coconino&andstone does not compare as favourably to dune sands from modern deserts.

























He found that not only is the pitting not diagnostic of the last rocess to have deposited the sand grains pitting can, for example, form first by wind impacts, followed by redeposition by water$, but pitting and frosting of sand grains can formoutside a desert environment./2 or example, geologists have described how pitting on the surface of sand grains can formby chemical processes during the cementation of sand.&and wave deposition

igure @. &chematic diagram showing the formation of cross beds during sand deposition by migration of underwater sandwaves due to sustained water flow.A considerable body of evidence is now available which indicates that the Coconino&andstone was deposited by the ocean, and not by desert accumulation of sand dunes as emphatically maintained by most

evolutionary geologists, including Christians like +avis Ioung. "he cross beds within the Coconino &andstone that is, theinclined beds of sand within the overall horiEontal layer of sandstone$ are excellent evidence that ocean currents moved thesand rapidly as dunelike mounds called sand waves. igure @ right$ shows the way sand waves have been observed toproduce cross beds in layers of sand. "he water current moves over the sand surface building up mounds of sand. "hecurrent erodes sand from the Nupcurrent? side of the sand wave and deposits it as inclined layers on the Ndowncurrent? sideof the sand wave. "hus the sand wave moves in the direction of current flow as the inclined strata continue to be depositedon the downcurrent side of the sand wave. Continued erosion of sand by the current removes both the upcurrent side andtop of the sand wave, the only part usually preserved being 4ust the lower half of the downcurrent side. "hus the height of the cross beds preserved is 4ust a fraction of the original sand wave height. Continued transportation of further sand willresult in repeated layers containing inclined cross beds. "hese will be stacked up on each other.&and waves have beenobserved on certain parts of the ocean floor and in rivers, and have been produced in laboratory studies. Conse7uently, ithas been demonstrated that the sand wave height is related to the water depth./@ As the water depth increases so does theheight of the sand waves which are produced. "he heights of the sand waves are approximately onefifth of the water depth.&imilarly, the velocities of the water currents that produce sand waves have been determined."hus we have the means to

calculate both the depth and velocity of the water responsible for transporting as sand waves the sand that now makes upthe cross beds of the Coconino &andstone. "he thickest sets of cross beds in the Coconino &andstone so far reported are2 feet 0 metres$ thick./J Cross beds of that height imply sand waves at least J feet /1 metres$ high and a water depth of around 2 feet between 0 and 0@ metres$. or water that deep to make and move sand waves as high as J feet /1metres$ the minimum current velocity would need to be over 2 feet per second 0@ centimetres per second$ or 6 miles per hour. "he maximum current velocity would have been almost @.@ feet per second /J@ cm or /.J@ metres per second$ or 2.B@ miles per hour. %eyond that velocity experimental and observational evidence has shown that flat sand beds only wouldbe formed.)ow to have transported in such deep water the volume of sand that now makes up the Coconino &andstonethese current velocities would have to have been sustained in the one direction perhaps for days. Fodern tides and normalocean currents do not have these velocities in the open ocean, although deepsea currents have been reported to attainvelocities of between @ cm and 6@ cm 6.@ metres$ per second through geographical restrictions. "hus catastrophicevents provide the only mechanism, which can produce high velocity ocean currents over a wide area.Hurricanes or cyclones in the southern hemisphere$ are thought to make modern sand waves of smaller siEe than those that haveproduced the cross beds in the Coconino &andstone, but no measurements of hurricane driven currents approaching thesevelocities in deep water have been reported. "he most severe modern ocean currents known have been generated during atsunami or Ntidal wave?. 8n shallow oceans tsunamiinduced currents have been reported on occasion to exceed @ cm @metres$ per second, and currents moving in the one direction have been sustained for hours. /B &uch an event would beable to move large 7uantities of sand and, in its waning stages, build huge sand waves in deep water. Conse7uently, atsunami provides the best modern analogy for understanding how largescale cross beds such as those in the Coconino&andstone could form.*o0al &lood5*e can thus imagine how the lood would deposit the Coconino &andstone and its e7uivalents$, which covers an area of 6, s7uare miles @/1, s7uare kilometres$ averages 2/@ feet 0J metres$ thick, and contains a volume of sandconservatively estimated at /, cubic miles >/,B cubic kilometres$. %ut where could such an enormous 7uantity of sand come from Cross beds within the Coconino dip consistently toward the south, indicating that the sand came from thenorth. However, along its northern occurrence, the Coconino rests directly on the Hermit ormation, which consists of siltstone and shale and so would not have been an ample source of sand of the type now found in the Coconino &andstone.Conse7uently, this enormous volume of sand would have to have been transported a considerable distance, perhaps atleast 6 or 2 miles 26 or >1 kilometres$. At the current velocities envisaged sand could be transported that distance in

a matter of a few daysO"hus the evidence within the Coconino &andstone does not support the evolutionary geologistsinterpretation of slow and gradual deposition of sand in a desert environment with dunes being climbed by wandering fourfooted vertebrates. 9n the contrary, a careful examination of the evidence, backed up by experiments and observations of processes operating today indicates catastrophic deposition of the sand by deep fastmoving water in a matter of days,totally consistent with conditions envisaged during the lood.



http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/am/v4/n1/no-slow-erosion








http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/am/v3/n4/sand-transported






http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/am/v3/n4/sand-transported



)'ATE TECTON#CSA Catastro"hic %reaku"

A Scientiic 'ook at Catastro"hic )late Tectonicsby +r. Andrew A. &nelling on Farch 6, 6B

When you look at a globe* have you ever thought that the earth looks cracked? 'r* maybe the continents have reminded you of a giant =igsaw pule* with the coastal lines of outh ,merica and ,frica seeming to fit together almost perfectly.%ut what did this LpuEEleM of land masses look like in the past *as the earth one big continent long ago *hat caused thecontinents to move to their present locations How did the global lood impact the continentsGlobal investigations of theearth?s crust reveal that it has been divided by geologic processes into a mosaic of rigid blocks called Lplates.M 9bservationsindicate that these plates have moved large distances relative to one another in the past, and that they are still moving veryslowly today. "he word LtectonicsM has to do with earth movementsQ so the study of the movements and interactions amongthese plates is called Lplate tectonics.M %ecause almost all the plate motions responsible for the earth?s current configuration

occurred in the past, plate tectonics is an interpretation or model of what geologists envisage happened to these platesthrough earth?s history igure !$.As hot mantle rock vaporiEeshuge volumes of ocean water, a linear column of supersonicsteam 4ets shoot into the atmosphere. "his moisturecondenses in the atmosphere and then falls back to the earthas intense global rain.&lowandGradual or CatastrophicFostgeologists believe that the movement of the earth?s plates hasbeen slow and gradual over eons of time. 8f today?s measuredrates of plate driftDabout .@5J in 65/@ cm$ per yearDareextrapolated into the past, it would re7uire about / millionyears for the Atlantic 9cean to form. "his rate of drift isconsistent with the estimated >.1 mi2 6 km2$ of magma thatcurrently rises each year to create new oceanic crust./9n theother hand, many observations are incompatible with the idea

of slowandgradual plate tectonics. +rilling into themagnetiEed rock of the midocean ridges shows that a matching LEebrastripedM pattern of the surface rocks does not existat depth, as igure 6 implies.6 8nstead, magnetic polarity changes rapidly and erratically down the drillholes. "his iscontrary to what would be expected with slowandgradual formation of the new oceanic crust accompanied by slowspreading rates. %ut it is 4ust what is expected with extremely rapid formation of new oceanic crust and rapid magneticreversals during the lood.

igure /K Crosssectional view of the earth

igure /K Crosssectional view through the earth. "he general principles of plate tectonics theory may be stated as followsKdeformation occurs at the edges of the plates by three types of horiEontal motionDextension rifting or moving apart$,transform faulting horiEontal shearing along a large fault line$, and compression, mostly by subduction one plate plungingbeneath another$.igure 6K Fagnetic reversals




https://answersingenesis.org/geology/plate-tectonics/a-catastrophic-breakup/#fn_1








igure 6K "he magnetic pattern on the left side of the ridge matches the pattern on the right side of the ridge. )ote there are

LbandsM of normally magnetiEed rock and LbandsM of reversely magnetiEed rock. "his se7uence of illustrations shows howthe matching pattern on each side of the midocean ridge may have formed. 8n the Catastrophic late "ectonic model, themagnetic reversals would have occurred rapidly during the lood.igure 2K Fodel of catastrophic plate tectonics after /@ daysigure 2K &napshot of 2+ modeling solution after /@ days. "he plot is an e7ualarea pro4ection of a spherical mantle surface> mi. J@ km$ below the earth?s surface in which color denotes absolute temperature. Arrows denote velocities in the plane

of the crosssection. "he dark lines denote plateboundaries where continental crust is present or boundaries between continent and ocean where bothexist on the same plate.igure >K Fodel of catastrophic plate tectonics after 6@ days

igure >K &napshot of the modeling solution after 6@days. or a detailed explanation of this calculation,see +r. %aumgardner?s paper, L"he hysics behind

the loodM in 8roceedings of the ifth5nternational Conference on Creationism, pp.//2/2J, 62.urthermore, slowandgradual subductionshould have resulted in the sediments on thefloors of the trenches being compressed,deformed, and faultedQ yet the floors of the eruChile and #ast Aleutian "renches are coveredwith soft, flatlying sediments devoid of compressional structures.2 "hese observationsare consistent with extremely rapid motion duringthe lood, followed by slow plate velocities as thefloodwaters retreated from the continents and

filled the trenches with sediment. A catastrophic model of plate tectonics asproposed by creation scientists$ easilyovercomes the problems of the slow and gradualmodel as proposed by most evolutionistscientists$. 8n addition, the catastrophic modelhelps us understand what the LmechanismM of thelood may have been.> A 2+ supercomputer









model demonstrates that rapid plate movement is possible.@ #ven though this model was developed by a creation scientist,this supercomputer 2+ plate tectonics modeling techni7ue is acknowledged as the world?s best. JCatastro"hic )late Tectonics"he catastrophic plate tectonics model of Austin et al . described in this article begins with a prelood supercontinentsurrounded by cold oceanfloor rocks that were denser heavier$ per unit volume than the warm mantle rock beneath.B"oinitiate motion, this model re7uires a sudden trigger large enough to LcrackM the ocean floor ad4acent to the supercontinent,so that Eones of cold, heavy oceanfloor rock start sinking into the upper mantle.8n this model igures # and $$, as theocean floor in the areas of the ocean trenches$ sinks into the mantle, it drags the rest of the ocean floor with it, in aconveyorbeltlike fashion. "he sinking slabs of cold ocean floor produce stress in the surrounding hot mantle rock. "hesestresses, in turn, cause the rock to become hotter and more deformable, allowing ocean slabs to sink even faster. "heultimate result is a runaway process that causes the entire prelood ocean floor to sink to the bottom of the mantle in amatter of a few weeks. As the slabs sink at rates of feetpersecond$ down to the mantleScore boundary, enormous amounts

of energy are released.1"he rapidly sinking oceanfloor slabs cause largescale convection currents, producing a circular flow throughout the mantle. "he hot mantle rock displaced by these subducting slabs wells up to the midocean rift Eoneswhere it melts and forms new ocean floor. Here, the li7uid rock vaporiEes huge volumes of ocean water to produce a linear curtain of supersonic steam 4ets along the entire >2,@ mi B, km$ of the seafloor rift Eones."hese supersonic steam

4ets capture large amounts of water as they LshootM up through the ocean into the atmosphere. *ater is catapulted highabove the earth and then falls back to the surface as intense global rain, which is perhaps the source for the Lfloodgates of heavenM.As the ocean floor warms during this process, its rock expands, displacing sea water, forcing a dramatic rise in sealevel. 9cean water would have swept up onto and over the continental land surfaces, carrying vast 7uantities of sedimentsand marine organisms with them to form the thick, fossiliferous sedimentary rock layers we now find blanketing largeportions of today?s continents. !ocks like this are magnificently exposed in the Grand Canyon, for example. &lowandgradual plate tectonics simply cannot account for such thick, laterally extensive se7uences of sedimentary strata containingmarine fossils over such vast interior continental areas high above sea level.ConclusionFany creationist geologists now believe the catastrophic plate tectonics concept is very useful as the best explanation for

how the lood event occurred within the creation framework for earth?s history. "his concept is still rather new, but itsexplanatory power makes it compelling. Additional work is underway to further refine and detail this geologic model for thelood event, especially to show that it provides a better scientific explanation for the order and distribution of the fossils andstrata globally than the failed slowandgradual belief.

Adapted and condensed from Chapter />, LCan Catastrophic "ectonics #xplain lood GeologyM >ew ,nswers 1ook by +r. Andrew &nelling, )ovember 6J.

A Short -istory o )late Tectonics Antonio &nider?s original illustration of the continents rapidlyseparating during the time of the lood.

"he formerly 4oined continents before their separation.

The continents ater the se"aration."he idea that the continents have drifted apart was first suggested in /1@0 by the rench creationist geographer Antonio&nider .0 He theoriEed a supercontinent based on his interpretation of Genesis !/-;!6 . He noticed a resemblance betweenthe coastlines of western Africa and eastern &outh America and proposed the breakup and rapid drifting of the piecescatastrophically during the lood right $. 8t wasn?t until /0/@ that the theory of continental drift was acknowledged by thescientific community, partly due to the research published by German meteorologist Alfred *egener. / However, most

geologists spurned the theory because *egener could not provide a workable mechanism to explain how the continentscould LplowM through the ocean basins.%etween /0J6 and /0J1 the current theory of plate tectonics was developed. our independent observations were citedK /$discovery of the seafloor?s dynamic topographyQ 6$ discovery of magnetic field reversals in a LEebrastripedM patternad4acent to the midocean ridges igure " $Q 2$ the LtimingM of those reversalsQ and >$ accurate pinpointing of the locationsof earth7uakes.// Fost geologists became convinced of plate tectonics during this short time because the concept elegantlyexplained these and other apparently unrelated observations.//

Can Catastro"hic )late Tectonics E!"lain &lood *eology5by +r. Andrew A. &nelling on )ovember 1, 6BQ last featured Farch 2, 6/>

ow could a massive* global flood be triggered? Fo plate tectonics provide a valid mechanism? Geologist ,ndrew nelling answers.&hop )ow2hat #s )late Tectonics5"he earth?s thin rocky outer layer 25>@ mi R@5B kmT thick$ is called Lthe crust.M 9n the continents it consists of sedimentaryrock layersDsome containing fossils and some folded and contortedDtogether with an underlying crystalline rockybasement of granites and metamorphosed sedimentary rocks. 8n places, the crystalline rocks are exposed at the earth?ssurface, usually as a result of erosion. %eneath the crust is what geologists call the mantle, which consists of dense, warmtohot but solid$ rock that extends to a depth of /,1 mi 6,0 km$. %elow the mantle lies the earth?s core, composedmostly of iron. All but the innermost part of the core is molten see igure /$.8nvestigations of the earth?s surface have revealed that it has been divided globally by past geologic processes into whattoday is a mosaic of rigid blocks called Lplates.M 9bservations indicate that these plates have moved large distances relative








http://biblia.com/bible/nkjv/Gen%201.9%E2%80%9310









https://answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/fossils.asp












https://answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/fossils.asp



to one another in the past and that they are still moving very slowly today. "he word LtectonicsM has to do with earthmovementsQ so the study of the movements and interactions among these plates is called Lplate tectonics.M %ecause almostall the plate motions occurred in the past, plate tectonics is, strictly speaking, an interpretation, model, or theoreticaldescription of what geologists envisage happened to these plates through earth?s history.

igure /. Crosssectional view throughthe earth. "he two ma4or divisions of theplanet are its mantle, made of silicaterock, and its core, comprised mostly of iron. ortions of the surface coveredwith a lowdensity layer of continentalcrust represent the continents.

ithospheric plates at the surface, whichinclude the crust and part of the upper mantle, move laterally over theasthenosphere. "he asthenosphere ishot and also weak because of thepresence of water within its constituentminerals. 9ceanic lithosphere, whichlacks the continental crust, is chemicallysimilar on average to the underlyingmantle. %ecause oceanic lithosphere issubstantially cooler, its density is higher,

and it therefore has an ability to sink into the mantle below. "he sliding of an oceanic plate into the mantle is known asLsubduction,M as shown here beneath &outh America. As two plates pull apart at a midocean ridge, material from theasthenosphere rises to fill the gap, and some of this material melts to produce basaltic lava to form new oceanic crust on the

ocean floor. "he continental regions do not participate in the subduction process because of the buoyancy of the continentalcrust."he general principles of plate tectonics theory may be stated as followsK deformation occurs at the edges of the platesby three types of horiEontal motionDextension rifting or moving apart$, transform faulting horiEontal slippage along a largefault line$, and compression, mostly by subduction one plate plunging beneath another$ ./#xtension occurs where theseafloor is being pulled apart or split along rift Eones, such as along the axes of the FidAtlantic !idge and the #ast acific!ise. "his is often called Lseafloor spreading,M which occurs where two oceanic plates move away from each other horiEontally, with new molten material from the mantle beneath rising between them to form new oceanic crust. &imilar extensional splitting of a continental crustal plate can also occur, such as along the #ast African !ift ;one."ransform faultingoccurs where one plate is sliding horiEontally past another, such as along the wellknown &an Andreas ault of California.Compressional deformation occurs where two plates move toward one another. 8f an oceanic crustal plate ismoving toward an ad4acent continental crustal plate, then the former will usually subduct plunge$ beneath the latter.#xamples are the acific and Cocos lates that are subducting beneath :apan and &outh America, respectively. *hen twocontinental crustal plates collide, the compressional deformation usually crumples the rock in the collision Eone to produce amountain range. or example, the 8ndianAustralian late has collided with the #urasian late to form the Himalayas.-istory o )late Tectonics

"he idea that the continents had drifted apart was first suggested by a creationist, Antonio &nider. 6 He observed from thestatement in Genesis !/-;!6 about God?s gathering together the seas into one place that at that point in earth history theremay have been only a single landmass. He also noticed the close fit of the coastlines of western Africa and eastern &outh

America. &o he proposed that the breakup of that supercontinent with subse7uent horiEontal movements of the newcontinents to their present positions occurred catastrophically during the lood.However, his theory went unnoticed, perhapsbecause +arwin?s book, which was published the same year, drew so much fanfare. "he year /1@0 was a bad year for attention to be given to any other new scientific theory, especially one that supported a creation view of earth history. And italso didn?t help that &nider published his book in rench.8t wasn?t until the early twentieth century that the theory of continental drift was acknowledged by the scientific community, through a book by Alfred *egener, a Germanmeteorologist.2 However, for almost @ years the overwhelming ma4ority of geologists spurned the theory, primarily becausea handful of seismologists claimed the strength of the mantle rock was too high to allow continents to drift in the manner *egener had proposed. "heir estimates of mantle rock strength were derived from the way seismic waves behave as theytraveled through the earth at that time.or this halfcentury the ma4ority of geologists maintained that continents werestationary, and they accused the handful of colleagues who promoted the drift concept of indulging in pseudoscientific

fantasy that violated basic principles of physics. "oday that persuasion has been reversedDplate tectonics, incorporatingcontinental drift, is the ruling perspective.*hat caused such a dramatic aboutface %etween /0J6 and /0J1 four main linesof independent experiments and measurements brought about the birth of the theory of plate tectonicsK >Fapping of the topography of the seafloor using echo depthsoundersQFeasuring the magnetic field above the seafloor using magnetometersQL"imingM of the northsouth reversals of the earth?s magnetic field using the magnetic memory of continental rocks and their radioactive LagesQM and+etermining very accurately the location of earth7uakes using a worldwide network of seismometers.An important fifth lineof evidence was the careful laboratory measurement of how mantle minerals deform under stress. "his measurement canconvincingly demonstrate that mantle rock can deform by large amounts on timescales longer than the few seconds typicalof seismic oscillations.@ Additionally, most geologists became rapidly convinced of plate tectonics theory because it elegantlyand powerfully explained so many observations and lines of evidenceK"he 4igsaw puEEle fit of the continents taking into account the continental shelves$Q"he correlation of fossils and fossilbearing strata across the ocean basins e.g., the coal beds of )orth America and#urope$Q"he mirror image Eebrastriped pattern of magnetic reversals in the volcanic rocks of the seafloor parallel to the midoceanrift Eones in the plates on either side of the Eone, consistent with a moving apart of the plates seafloor spreading$Q"he location of most of the world?s earth7uakes at the boundaries between the plates, consistent with earth7uakes beingcaused by two plates moving relative to one anotherQ"he existence of the deep seafloor trenches invariably located where earth7uake activity suggests an oceanic plate isplunging into the mantle beneath another plateQ

https://answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/tectonics.asp


https://answersingenesis.org/geology/plate-tectonics/can-catastrophic-plate-tectonics-explain-flood-geology/#fn_1











https://answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/geology.asp












"he obli7ue pattern of earth7uakes ad4acent to these trenches subduction Eones$, consistent with an obli7ue path of motionof a subducting slab into the mantleQ"he location of volcanic belts e.g., the acific Lring of fireM$ ad4acent to deep sea trenches and above subducting slabs,consistent with subducted sediments on the tops of downgoing slabs encountering melting temperatures in the mantleQ and"he location of mountain belts at or ad4acent to convergent plate boundaries where the plates are colliding$.Slow<and<*radual or Catastro"hic5

%ecause of the scientific community?scommitment to the uniformitarianassumptions and framework for earthhistory, most geologists take for grantedthat the movement of the earth?s plateshas been slow and gradual over long

eons. After all, if today?s measured ratesof plate driftDabout .@5J in 65/@ cm$per yearDare extrapolated uniformlyback into the past, it re7uires about /million years for the ocean basins andmountain ranges to form. And this rateof drift is consistent with the estimated>.1 mi2 6 km2$ of molten magma thatcurrently rises globally each year tocreate new oceanic crust.J9n the other hand, many other observations areincompatible with slowandgradualplate tectonics. *hile the seafloor surface is relatively smooth, Eebrastripe

magnetic patterns are obtained whenthe shiptowed instrumentmagnetometer$ observations average over milesiEed patches. +rilling into the oceanic crust of the midocean ridges hasalso revealed that those smooth patterns are not present at depth in the actual rocks. B 8nstead, the magnetic polaritychanges rapidly and erratically down the drillholes. "his is contrary to what would be expected with slowandgradualformation of the new oceanic crust accompanied by slow magnetic reversals. %ut it is 4ust what is expected with extremelyrapid formation of new oceanic crust and rapid magnetic reversal during the lood, when rapid cooling of the new crustoccurred in a highly nonuniform manner because of the chaotic interaction with ocean water.urthermore, slowandgradualsubduction should have resulted in the sediments on the floors of the trenches being compressed, deformed, and thrustfaulted, yet the floors of the eruChile and #ast Aleutian "renches are covered with soft, flatlying sediments devoid of compressional structures.1 "hese observations are consistent, however, with extremely rapid subduction during the lood,followed by extremely slow plate velocities as the floodwaters retreated from the continents and filled the trenches withsediment.8f uniformitarian assumptions are discarded, however, and &nider?s original proposal for continental LsprintM duringthe lood is adopted, then a catastrophic plate tectonics model explains everything that slowandgradual plate tectonicsdoes, plus most everything it can?t explain.0 Also, a 2+ supercomputer model of processes in the earth?s mantle has

demonstrated that tectonic plate movements can indeed be rapid and catastrophic when a realistic deformation model for mantle rocks is included./ And, even though it was developed by a creation scientist, this supercomputer 2+ platetectonics modeling is acknowledged as the world?s best.//"he catastrophic plate tectonics model of Austin et al./6 beginswith a prelood supercontinent surrounded by cold oceanfloor rocks that were denser than the warm mantle rock beneath."o initiate motion in the model, some sudden trigger LcracksM the ocean floors ad4acent to the supercontinental crustal block,so that Eones of cold oceanfloor rock start penetrating vertically into the upper mantle along the edge of most of thesupercontinent./2"hese vertical segments of oceanfloor rock correspond to the leading edges of oceanic plates. "hesevertical Eones begin to sink in conveyorbelt fashion into the mantle, dragging the rest of the ocean floor with them. "hesinking slabs of ocean plates produce stresses in the surrounding mantle rock, and these stresses, in turn, cause the rock tobecome more deformable and allow the slabs to sink faster. "his process causes the stress levels to increase and the rockto become even weaker. "hese regions of rock weakness expand to encompass the entire mantle and result in acatastrophic runaway of the oceanic slabs to the bottom of the mantle in a matter of a few weeks. />"he energy for drivingthis catastrophe is the gravitational potential energy of the cold, dense rock overlying the less dense mantle beneath it at thebeginning of the event. At its peak, this runaway instability allows the subduction rates of the plates to reach amaEing

speeds of feetpersecond. At the same time the prelood seafloor was being catastrophically subducted into the mantle,the resultant tensional stress tore apart rifted$ the prelood supercontinent see igure 6$. "he key physics responsible for the runaway instability is the fact that mantle rocks weaken under stress, by factors of a billion or more, for the sorts of stress levels that can occur in a planet the siEe of the earthDa behavior verified by many laboratory experiments over thepast forty years./@"he rapidly sinking oceanfloor slabs forcibly displace the softer mantle rock into which they aresubducted, which causes largescale convectional flow throughout the entire mantle. "he hot mantle rock displaced by thesesubducting slabs wells up elsewhere to complete the flow cycle, and in particular rises into the seafloor rift Eones to formnew ocean floor. !eaching the surface of the ocean floor, this hot mantle material vaporiEes huge volumes of ocean water with which it comes into contact to produce a linear curtain of supersonic steam 4ets along the entire >2,@ miles B,km$ of the seafloor rift Eones stretching around the globe. "hese supersonic steam 4ets capture large amounts of li7uid water as they LshootM up through the ocean above the seafloor where they form. "his water is catapulted high above the earth andthen falls back to the surface as intense global rain. igure 6a$. &napshot of 2+ modeling solution after /@ days. "he upper plot is an e7ual area pro4ection of a spherical mantle surface > mi J@ km$ below the earth?s surface in which color denotesabsolute temperature. Arrows denote velocities in the plane of the crosssection. "he dark lines denote plate boundarieswhere continental crust is present or boundaries between continent and ocean where both exist on the same plate. "helower plot is an e7uatorial crosssection in which the grayscale denotes temperature deviation from the average at a givendepth."his catastrophic plate tectonics model for earth history/J is able to explain geologic data that slowandgradual platetectonics over many millions of years cannot. or example, the new rapidly formed ocean floor would have initially been veryhot. "hus, being of lower density than the prelood ocean floor, it would have risen some 2,2 ft. /, m$ higher than itspredecessor, causing a dramatic rise in global sea level. "he ocean waters would thus have swept up onto and over thecontinental land surfaces, carrying vast 7uantities of sediments and marine organisms with them to form the thick,fossiliferous sedimentary rock layers we now find blanketing large portions of today?s continents. "his laterally extensive




https://answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/flood.asp













https://answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/history.asp






















layercake se7uence of sedimentary rocks is magnificently exposed, for example, in the Grand Canyon region of thesouthwestern (.&./B &lowandgradual plate tectonics simply cannot account for such thick, laterally extensive se7uencesof sedimentary strata containing marine fossils over such vast interior continental areasDareas which are normally wellabove sea level.urthermore, the whole mantle convectional flow resulting from runaway subduction of the cold oceanfloor slabs would have suddenly cooled the mantle temperature at the coremantle boundary, thus greatly accelerating convectionin, and heat loss from, the ad4acent outer core. "his rapid cooling of the surface of the core would result in rapid reversals of the earth?s magnetic field./1"hese magnetic reversals would have been expressed at the earth?s surface and been recordedin the Eebrashaped magnetic stripes in the new oceanfloor rocks. "his magnetiEation would have been erratic and locallypatchy, laterally as well as at depth, unlike the pattern expected in the slowandgradual version. 8t was predicted that similar records of Lastonishingly rapidM magnetic reversals ought to be present in thin continental lava flows, and such astonishinglyrapid reversals in continental lava flows were subse7uently found./0"his catastrophic plate tectonics model thus provides apowerful explanation for how the cold, rigid crustal plates could have moved thousands of miles over the mantle while the

ocean floor subducted. 8t predicts relatively little plate movement today because the continental LsprintM rapidly deceleratedwhen all the prelood ocean floor had been subducted.

igure 6b$. &napshot of the modeling solutionafter 6@ days. Grayscale and arrows denote thesame 7uantities as in igure 6a$. or a detailedexplanation of this calculation, see %aumgardner,62.Also, we would thus expect the trenchesad4acent to the subduction Eones today to befilled with undisturbed latelood and postloodsediments. "he model provides a mechanism for the retreat of the floodwaters from off thecontinents into the new ocean basins, when atthe close of the lood, as plate movementsalmost stopped, the dominant tectonic forces

resulted in vertical earth movements. lateinteractions at plate boundaries during thecataclysm generated mountains, while cooling of the new ocean floor increased its density, whichcaused it to sink and thus deepen the new oceanbasins to receive the retreating

floodwaters.Aspects of modeling the phenomenon of runaway behavior in themantle6 have beenindependently duplicatedand verified.6/ "he samemodeling predicts that sincerunaway subduction of thecold oceanf loor slabs

occurred only a fewthousand years ago duringthe lood, those cold slabswould not have had sufficienttime since the catastrophe tobe fully LdigestedM into thesurrounding mantle.#vidence for these relativelycold slabs 4ust above the

coremantle boundary, to which they would have sunk, therefore should still be evident today, and it is see igure2$.66igure 2. +istribution of hot lightshaded surfaces$ and cold darkershaded surfaces$ regions in today?s lower mantleas determined observationally by seismic tomography imaging using recordings of seismic waves$, viewed from a$ /1Vlongitude and b$ V longitude. "he very low temperature inferred for the ring of colder rock implies that it has beensubducted 7uite recently from the earth?s surface. "he columnar blobs of warmer rock have been s7ueeEed together and

pushed upward as the colder and denser rock settled over the core. igure courtesy of Alexandro orte$Foreover, whether at the current rate of movementDonly > in / cm$ per yearDthe force and energy of the collision between the 8ndian

Australian and #urasian lates could have been sufficient to push up the Himalayas like two cars colliding, each onlytraveling at .> inSh R/ mmShT$ is 7uestionable. 8n contrast, if the plate movements were measured as feetpersecond, liketwo cars each traveling at J6 mph / kmSh$, the resulting catastrophic collision would have rapidly buckled rock strata topush up those high mountains.ConclusionFany creationist geologists now believe the catastrophic plate tectonics concept is very useful as the best explanation for how the lood event occurred within the biblical framework for earth?s history. #ven though Genesis does not specificallymention this concept, it is consistent with the creation account, which implies an original supercontinent that broke up duringthe lood, with the resultant continents obviously then having to move rapidly LsprintM$ into their present positions."his concept is still rather new, and of course radical, but its explanatory power makes it compelling. Additional work is nowbeing done to further detail this geologic model for the lood event, especially to show that it provides a better explanationfor the order and distribution of the fossils and strata globally than the failed slowandgradual belief.

Catastro"hic )late Tectonics= A*lo0al &lood ,odel o Earth -istoryby +r. arry -ardiman, +r. Andrew A.&nelling, +r. :ohn %aumgardner , 3urt*ise, and +r. &teve Austin on 9ctober

6B, 6/A0stract











https://answersingenesis.org/bios/larry-vardiman/




https://answersingenesis.org/bios/john-baumgardner/


https://answersingenesis.org/bios/kurt-wise/










https://answersingenesis.org/bios/larry-vardiman/









5n !)%- ,ntonio nider proposed that rapid* horiontal divergence of crustal plates occurred during lood. Modern platetectonics theory is now conflated with assumptions of uniformity of rate and ideas of continental Ddrift. Catastrophic platetectonics theories* such as nider proposed more than a century ago* appear capable of e4plaining a wide variety of data9including creationists and geologic data which the slow tectonics theories are incapable of e4plaining. We would like to propose a catastrophic plate tectonics theory as a framework for Earth history. Geophysically* we begin with a pre0lood earth differentiated into core* mantle* and crust* with the crust horiontally differentiated into sialic craton and mafic oceanfloor. 3he lood was initiated as slabs of oceanic floor broke loose and subducted along thousands of kilometers of pre0lood continental margins. Feformation of the mantle by these slabs raised the temperature and lowered the viscosity of themantle in the vicinity of the slabs. , resulting thermal runaway of the slabs through the mantle led to meters0per0second mantle convection. Cool oceanic crust which descended to the coreBmantle boundary induced rapid reversals of the earth2smagnetic field. arge plumes originating near the coreBmantle boundary e4pressed themselves at the surface as fissureeruptions and flood basalts. low induced in the mantle also produced rapid e4tension along linear belts throughout the sea

floor and rapid horiontal displacement of continents. Apwelling magma =ettisoned steam into the atmosphere causing intense global rain. @apid emplacement of isostatically lighter mantle material raised the level of the ocean floor* displacing ocean water onto the continents. When virtually all the pre0lood oceanic floor had been replaced with new* less0dense*less0subductable* oceanic crust* catastrophic plate motion stopped. ubse:uent cooling increased the density of the new ocean floor* producing deeper ocean basins and a reservoir for post0lood oceans. edimentologically* we begin with asubstantial reservoir of carbonate and clastic sediment in the pre0lood ocean. Furing the lood hot brines associated withnew ocean floor added precipitites to that sediment reservoir* and warming ocean waters and degassing magmas added carbonates9especially high magnesium carbonates. ,lso during the lood* rapid plate tectonics moved pre0lood sediments toward the continents. ,s ocean plates subducted near a continental margin* its bending caused upwarping of sea floor* and its drag caused downwarping of continental crust* facilitating the placement of sediment onto the continental margin. 'nce there* earth:uake0induced sea waves with ocean0to0land movement redistributed sediment toward continental interiors. @esulting sedimentary units tend to be thick* uniform* of unknown provenance* and e4tend over regional* inter0regional* and even continental areas.&hop )ow

"his paper was originally published in the 8roceedings of the 3hird 5nternational Conference on Creationism* pp.

J05J/6/00>$ and is reproduced here with the permission of the Creation &cience ellowship of ittsburgh www.csfpittsburgh.org$.@eywordsK catastrophe, lood model, plate tectonics, subduction, thermal runaway, convection, spreading, fountains of thegreat deep, windows of heaven, volcanoes, earth7uakes, sediments, precipitites, magnetic reversals, isostasy, climate, 8ce

Age#ntroduction#arly in the history of geology, it was common to appeal to the lood described in Genesis to explain the origin of most or allrocks and fossils for example, %urnet,/ &teno,6 *histon,2 *oodward>$. 8n such theories the lood was typicallyrecogniEed as a catastrophic event of global proportions. "he earth?s crust was typically pictured as dynamic and capable of rapid vertical and horiEontal motions on local, regional, and global scales. However, especially with the influential works of Hutton@,J and then yell,B the lood began to play an increasingly less important role in historical geology during thenineteenth century. "heories of gradualism increased in popularity as theories of catastrophism waned. 8deas of pastcatastrophic geology were replaced with ideas of constancy of present gradual physical processes. 8deas of globalscaledynamics were replaced with ideas of local erosion, deposition, extrusion, and intrusion. 8deas of rapid crustal dynamicswere replaced by ideas of crustal fixityDwith only imperceptibly slow vertical subsidence and uplift being possible. &o

complete was the success of gradualism in geology that ideas of flood geology were nowhere to be found among the#nglishspeaking scientists of the world by /1@0,1 or rarely found at best.09ne of the last holdouts for flood geology was alittleknown work published by Antonio &niderellegrini/Dironically enough the same year +arwin published the 'rigin of pecies. 8ntrigued by the reasonably good fit between land masses on either side of the Atlantic ocean, &nider proposedthat the earth?s crust was composed of rigid plates which had moved horiEontally with respect to one another. &nider mayhave been the first to propose some of the main elements of modern plate tectonics theory. &nider also proposed that thehoriEontal divergence had been rapid and had occurred during the lood. 8t appears, then, that the first elaboration of platetectonics theory was presented in the context of catastrophic flood geology. 8t also seems that a substantial amount of thetwentieth century opposition to plate tectonics was due to the fact that geologists were, by then, firmly predisposed tobelieve that the earth?s crust was horiEontally fixed. "he catastrophism school of geology was the first to propose platetectonicsQ the gradualist school was the first ma4or opponent to plate tectonics. However, by the time plate tectonics wasfinally accepted in the (nited &tates in the late /0Js, gradualism had become a part of plate tectonics theory as well.!ather than &nider?s rapid horiEontal motion an the scale of weeks or months, modern geology accepted a plate tectonicstheory with horiEontal motion on the scale of tens to hundreds of millions of years.%ecause of the enormous explanatory and

predictive success of the plate tectonics model reviewed in *ise//,

/6$, we feel that at least some portion of plate tectonicstheory should be incorporated into the creation model. 8t appears that taking the conventional plate tectonics model andincreasing the rate of plate motion neither deprives plate tectonics theory of its explanatory and predictive success, nor doesit seem to contradict any passages of Genesis. "herefore, following the example of Antonio &nider we would like to proposea model of geology which is centered about the idea of rapid, horiEontal divergence of rigid crustal plates that is, rapid platetectonics$ during the lood. *e feel that this model is not only capable of the explanatory and predictive success of conventional plate tectonics, but is also capable of clarifying a number of scriptural claims and explaining some physicaldata unexplained by conventional plate tectonics theory.8t is important to note, however, that our model is still in its formative stages, and is thus incomplete. *hat is presented hereis a basic framework upon which more theory can be built. *e anticipate that a substantial amount of work is still needed toexplain all the salient features of this planet?s rocks and fossils. Additionally, although the authors of this paper have all hadsome association with the 8nstitute for Creation !esearch 8C!$, the model presented in this paper is a compositeperspective of the authors and not necessarily that of the 8C!.)re<&lood *eology

Any flood model must begin by speculating on the nature of the prelood world. -irtually every flood event and product is insome way or another affected by characteristics of the prelood world. A partial list of flood events determined at least inpart by prelood conditions would includeK global dynamics of the crust by the prelood structure and nature of the earth?sinterior$Q magnetic field dynamics by the prelood nature of the magnetic field$Q tectonic activity and associatedearth7uakes by the prelood structure and dynamics of the crust$Q volcanic activity and emplaced igneous rocks by theprelood nature of the earth?s interior$Q formation of clastic sediments by the prelood sediments available for redepositionand rocks available for erosion$Q formation of chemical sediments by the prelood ocean chemistry$Q formation of fossilsby the nature of the prelood biota$Q distribution of sediments and fossils by the prelood climate and biogeography$Q and


https://answersingenesis.org/geology/plate-tectonics/catastrophic-plate-tectonics-global-flood-model-of-earth-history/#fn_1


































the dynamics of the inundation itself by prelood topography$. "he more that is determined about the nature of the prelood world, the more accurate and specific our flood models can be. 9ur initial inferences about the prelood worldinclude the following.)re<&loodI&lood 0oundary*e agree with many previous theorists in flood geology that the preloodSlood boundary should stratigraphically lie atleast as low as the recambrianSCambrian boundary for example, &teno/2, *hitcomb and Forris/>$. Currently there isdiscussion about how close Austin and *ise/@, *ise/J$ or far &nelling/B$ below the Cambrian rocks this boundary shouldbe located. or our purposes here, it is provisionally claimed that at least many of the Archean sediments are prelood inage.)re<&lood earth structure*e believe that the prelood earth was differentiated into a core, mantle, and crust, very much as it is today. *e concludethis for two ma4or reasons. "he first is that under any known natural conditions, coreSmantle differentiation would destroy all

evidence of life on earth completely. "he current earth has a coreSmantleScrust division according to the successively lower density of its components. 8f this differentiation had occurred by any natural means, the gravitational potential energyreleased by the heavier elements relocating to the earth?s interior would produce enough heat to melt the earth?s crust andvaporiEe the earth?s oceans. 8f differentiation of the earth?s elements did occur with its associated natural release of energy,it is reasoned that it most certainly occurred before the creation of organisms at the latest +ay 2 of the Creation week$.&econdly, even though such a differentiation could have been performed without the LnaturalM release of gravitationalpotential energy, the alreadydifferentiated earth?s interior also provides a natural driving mechanism for the rapid tectonicsmodel here described."he earth?s mantle appears to have been less viscous than it seems to be at present%aumgardner /1,/0,6$. "his is to allow for the thermal runaway instability which we believe produced the rapid platetectonic motion we are proposing.6/*ith regard to the earth?s crust, we believe that there was a distinct horiEontaldifferentiation between oceanic and continental crust, very much as there is today. irst, we believe that before the loodbegan, there was stable, sialic, cratonic crust. *e have three ma4or reasons for this conclusionKmuch Archean sialic material exists which probably is below the preloodSlood boundary. "his would indicate that sialicmaterial was available in prelood timesQ

the existence of lowdensity, low temperature LkeelsM beneath existing cratons66 implies that the cratons have persistedmore or less in their present form since their differentiation. 8t also argues that little or no mantle convection has disturbedthe upper mantle beneath the cratonsQ andif the prelood cratons were sialic and the prelood ocean crust was mafic, thenbuoyancy forces would provide a natural means of supporting craton material above sea levelDthus producing dry land onthe continents.&econd, we believe that the prelood ocean crust was maficDmost probably basaltic. 9nce again threereasons exist for this inferenceKprelood basaltic ocean crust is suggested by ophiolites containing pillow basalts and presumed ocean sediments$ whichare thought to represent pieces of ocean floor and obducted onto the continents early in the loodQif, as claimed above, the prelood craton was sialic, then buoyancy forces would make a mafic prelood ocean crust into anatural basin for ocean water. "his would prevent ocean water from overrunning the continentsQ andif, as claimed above, the continents were sialic, mafic material would be necessary to drive the subduction re7uired in our lood model.)re<&lood sediments*e believe that there was a significant thickness of all types of sediments already available on the earth by the time of thelood. *e have three reasons for this positionK

biologically optimum terrestrial and marine environments would re7uire that at least a small amount of sediment of eachtype had been created in the Creation weekQ

Archean probable prelood$ and roteroEoic sediments contain substantial 7uantities of all types of sedimentsQ andit may not be possible to derive all the lood sediments from igneous andSor metamorphic precursors by physical andchemical processes in the course of a single, yearlong lood.*e believe that substantial 7uantities of very fine detrital carbonate sediment existed in the prelood oceans. "his isdeduced primarily from the fact that not enough bicarbonate can have been dissolved in the prelood ocean andSor provided by outgassing during the loodDsee below$ to have produced the lood carbonates.&uch 7uantities of carbonate as we believe to have existed in the prelood ocean would mean that there was a substantialbuffer in the prelood oceanDperhaps contributing to a very stable prelood ocean chemistry. "he existence of large7uantities of mature or nearly mature prelood 7uartE sands might explain the otherwise somewhat mysterious clean,mature nature of early aleoEoic sands.&lood Dynamics#nitiation

"here has been considerable discussionDboth reasonable and fancifulDabout what event might have initiated the lood.Considerations range fromthe direct hand of 8ntelligent +esigner %aumgardner 62,6>, Forton6@,6J,6B,61,60,2,2/$Qthe impact or nearmiss of an astronomical ob4ect or ob4ects such as asteroids,26 meteorites,22 a comet,2>,2@ a comet or -enus,2J -enus and Fars,2B Fars,21 Fars, Ceres, and :upiter,20 another moon of earth,> and a star Q>/some purely terrestrial event or events, such as fracturing of the earth?s crust due to drying>6 or radioactive heatbuildup,>2 rapid tilting of the earth due to gyro turbulence >> or ice sheet buildup,>@ and natural collapse of rings of iceQ>J,>B or various combinations of these ideas.*e feel that the lood was initiated as slabs of oceanic crust broke loose and subducted along thousands of kilometers of prelood continental margins. *e are, however, not ready at this time to speculate on what event or events might haveinitiated that subduction. *e feel that considerable research is still needed to evaluate potential mechanisms in the light of how well they can produce global subduction.Su0duction

At the very beginning of plate motion, subducting slabs locally heated the mantle by deformation, lowering the viscosity of the mantle in the vicinity of the slabs. "he lowered viscosity then allowed an increase in subduction rate, which in turnheated up the surrounding mantle even more. *e believe that this led to a thermal runaway instability which allowed for meterspersecond subduction, as postulated and modeled by %aumgardner .>1,>0 8t is probable that this subductionoccurred along thousands of kilometers of continental margin. "he bending of the ocean plate beneath the continent wouldhave produced an abrupt topographic low paralleling the continental margin, similar to the ocean trenches at the eastern,northern, and western margins of the acific 9cean.















































































































%ecause all current ocean lithosphere seems to date from lood or postlood times,@ we feel that essentially all preloodocean lithosphere was subducted in the course of the lood. Gravitational potential energy released by the subduction of this lithosphere is on the order of /61

:.@/ "his alone probably provided the energy necessary to drive &lood dynamics."he continents attached to ocean slabs would have been pulled toward subduction Eones. "his would produce rapidhoriEontal displacement of continentsDin many cases relative motion of meters per second. Collisions of continents atsubduction Eones are the likely mechanism for the creation of mountain foldandthrustbelts, such as the Appalachians,Himalayas, Caspians, and Alps. !apid deformation, burial, and subse7uent erosion of mountains possible in the loodmodel might provide the only ade7uate explanation for the existence of highpressure, lowtemperature minerals such ascoesite for example, Chopin,@6 Hsu,@2 &hutong, 9kay, &houyuan, and &engor ,@> &mith,@@ *ang, iou, and Fao@J$ inmountain cores.,antle<2ide low

As %aumgardner @B,@1 assumed in order to facilitate his modeling, rapid subduction is likely to have initiated largescale flow

throughout the entire mantle of the earth. &eismic tomography studies for example, +Eiewonski,@0 and as reviewed by#ngebretson, 3elley, Cushman, and !eynoldsJ$ seem to confirm that this in fact did occur in the history of the earth. 8nsuch studies velocity anomalies interpreted as cooler temperature Eones$ lie along theoriEed paths of past subduction."hese anomalies are found deep within the earth?s mantleDwell below the phase transition Eones thought by some to bebarriers to mantlewide subduction. 8n fact, the velocity anomalies seem to imply that not only did flow involve the entiredepth of the mantle, but that ocean lithosphere may have dropped all the way to the coreSmantle boundary.9ne importantconse7uence of mantlewide flow would have been the transportation of cooler mantle material to the coreSmantle boundary."his would have had the effect of cooling the outer core, which in turn led to strong core convection. "his convectionprovided the conditions necessary for Humphreys? model of rapid geomagnetic reversals in the core.J/,J6 As the lowelectrical conductivity oceanic plates subducted, they would be expected to have split up the lower mantle?s highconductivity. "his in turn would have lessened the mantle?s attenuation of core reversals and allowed the rapid magneticfield reversals to have been expressed on the surface. Humphreys?J2,J> model not only explains magnetic reversalevidence as reviewed in HumphreysJ@$ in a youngage Creation timescale, but uni7uely explains the low intensity of paleomagnetic and archeomagnetic data, the erratic fre7uency of paleomagnetic reversals through the haneroEoic, and,

most impressively, the locally patchy distribution of seafloor paleomagnetic anomalies.JJ 8t also predicted and uni7uelyexplains the rapid reversals found imprinted in lava flows of the )orthwest. JB,J1,J0,BS"reading

As ocean lithosphere subducted, it would have produced rapid extension along linear belts on the ocean floor tens of thousands of kilometers long. At these spreading centers upwelling mantle material would have been allowed to rise to thesurface. "he new, molten mantle material would have degassed its volatilesB/ and vaporiEed ocean water B6,B2 to producea linear geyser of superheated gases along the whole length of spreading centers. "his geyser activity, which would have

4ettisoned gases well into the atmosphere. As evidenced by volatiles emitted by Fount 3ilauea in Hawaii,B> the gasesreleased would be in order of abundance$ water, carbon dioxide, sulfur dioxide, hydrogen sulfide, hydrogen fluoride,hydrogen, carbon monoxide, nitrogen, argon, and oxygen. As the gases in the upper atmosphere drifted away from thespreading centers they would have had the opportunity to cool by radiation into space. As it cooled, the waterDboth thatvaporiEed from ocean water and that released from magmaDwould have condensed and fallen as an intense global rain. 8tis this geyserproduced rain which we believe is primarily responsible for the rain which remained a source of water for up to/@ days of the lood."he rapid emplacement of isostatically lighter mantle material raised the level of the ocean floor along the spreading

centers. "his produced a linear chain of mountains called the midocean ridge F9!$ system. "he now warmer and morebuoyant ocean floor displaced ocean water onto the continents to produce the inundation itself.Continental modiication"he events of the lood would have made substantial modifications to the thickness of the prelood continental crust. "hiswould have been effected through the redistribution of sediments, the moving of ductile lower continental crust bysubducting lithosphere, addition of molten material to the underside of the continental lithosphere underplating$, stretchingfor example, due to spreading$, and compression for example, due to continental collision$. "hese rapid changes in crustalthickness would produce isostatic dise7uilibrium. "his would subse7uently lead to largescale isostatic ad4ustments withtheir associated earth7uakes, frictional heating, and deformation. &ince many of those tectonic events would have involvedvertical rock motions, "yler?sB@ tectonicallycontrolled rock cycle might prove to be a useful tool in understanding late loodand postlood tectonics.Atmos"here"he magma at spreading centers degassed, among other things, substantial 7uantities of argon and helium into the earth?satmosphere. %oth of these elements are produced and accumulated due to radioactive decay. However, the current 7uantity

of helium in the atmosphere is less than that which would be expected by current rates of radioactive decay production over a four to five billion years of earth history,BJ,BB,B1,B0,1,1/ so perhaps what is currently found in the atmosphere is due todegassing of mantle material during the lood. "he same may also be found to be true about argon .16&lood waters&everal sources have been suggested for the water of the lood. &ome creationists12,1> have proposed that the Lwatersabove the firmamentM in the form of an upper atmosphere water canopy provided much of the rain of the lood. However,!ush and -ardiman1@,1J and *alters1B argue that if the water was held in place by forces and laws of physics with whichwe are currently familiar, > feet of water is not possible in the canopy. erhaps, they argue, the canopy could have held amaximum of only a few feet of water. "his is insufficient water to contribute significantly to even > days of rain, let alone amountaincovering global flood. A second source suggested by *hitelaw11 and %aumgardner 10,0 is condensing water from spreading center geysers. "his should provide ade7uate water to explain up to /@ days of open Lwindows of heaven.M

Another substantial source of water suggested by this model is displaced ocean water.0/,06 !apid emplacement of isostatically lighter mantle material at the spreading centers would raise the ocean bottom, displacing ocean water onto thecontinents. %aumgardner 02 estimates a rise of sea level of more than one kilometer from this mechanism alone.Cooling of new ocean lithosphere at the spreading centers would be expected to heat the ocean waters throughout thelood. "his heating seems to be confirmed by a gradual increase in /19S/J9 ratios from the preloodSlood boundarythrough the Cretaceous for example, -ardiman0>$.Sedimentary "roductionrecipititesDsediments precipitated directly from supersaturated brinesDwould have been produced in association withhoriEontal divergence of ocean floor rocks. !ode0@ and &oEansky0J have noted rock salt and anhydrite deposits inassociation with active seafloor tectonics and volcanism and have proposed catastrophist models for their formation.































































































































%esides rock salt and anhydrite, hotrockSoceanwater interactions could also explain many bedded chert deposits and finegrained limestones.Contri0utions to &lood car0onates "ro0a0ly came rom at least our sources=carbon dioxide produced by degassing spreading center magmasQdissolved prelood bicarbonate precipitated as ocean temperatures rose during the lood given that carbonate dissolutionrates are inversely related to temperature$Qeroded and redeposited prelood carbonates a dominant prelood sediment$Q andpulveriEed and redeposited preloodshell debris. recipitation of carbonate may explain the origin of micrite,0Bso ubi7uitous in lood sediments, but of anotherwise unknown origin.01 (ntil prelood ocean magnesium was depleted by carbonate precipitation, highmagnesiumcarbonates would be expected to be fre7uent products of early lood activity see Chillinger 00 for interesting data on thissub4ect$.Sedimentary trans"ort

As Forton/ points out, most lood sediments are found on the continents and continental margins and not on the oceanfloor where one might expect sediments to have ended up. 9ur model provides a number of mechanisms for thetransportation of ocean sediments onto the continents where they are primarily found today. irst, subducting plates wouldtransport sediments toward the subduction Eones and thus mostly towards the continents in a conveyorbelt fashion.&econd, as the ocean plates were forced to 7uickly bend into the earth?s interior, they would warp upward outboard of thetrench. "his would raise the deep sea sediments above their typical depth, which in turn reduces the amount of workre7uired to move sediments from the oceans onto the continents. "hird, rapid plate subduction would warp the continentalplate margin downward. "his again would reduce the amount of energy needed to move sediments onto the continent fromthe ocean floor. ourth, as more and more of the cold prelood ocean lithosphere was replaced with hotter rock from below,the ocean bottom is gradually elevated. "his again reduces the work re7uired to move sediments from the oceans to thecontinents. ifth, as ocean lithosphere is subducted, ocean sediments would be scraped off, allowing sediments to beaccreted to andSor redeposited on the continent. &ixth, wave for example, tsunami$ refraction on the continental shelf wouldtend to transport sediments shoreward. &eventh, it is possible that some amount of tidal resonance may have beenachieved.//,/6,/2 "he resulting easttowestdominated currents would tend to transport sediments accumulated on

eastern continental margins into the continental interiors. !esulting sedimentary units have abundant evidence of catastrophic deposition/>, and tend to be thick, uniform, of unknown provenance, and extending over regional, interregional, and even continental areas./@(olcanic acti/ity"he volcanism associated with rapid tectonics would have been of unprecedented magnitude and worldwide extent, butconcentrated in particular Eones and sites. At spreading centers magma would rise to fill in between plates separating atmeters per second, producing a violent volcanic source tens of thousands of kilometers in length./J%ased upon twodimensional experimental simulation/B,/1 and threedimensional numerical simulation, subductioninduced mantle flowwould generate mantle plumes whose mushroom heads would rise to and erupt upon the earth?s surface. "hese plumeswould be expected to produce extensive flood basalts through fissure eruptions, such as perhaps the plateau basalts of &outh Africa, the +eccan "raps of 8ndia, the &iberian flood basalts,/0 and the 3armutsen %asalt of

AlaskaSCanada.// Correlations between plume formation and flood basalts have already been claimed for example,*einstein///$. At the same time, the heating and melting of subducted sediments should have produced explosive sialicvolcanism continentward of the subduction Eone such as is seen in the Andes Fountains of &outh America, the CascadeFountains of the (nited &tates, and the Aleutian, :apanese, 8ndonesian, and )ew ;ealand 8slands of the acific$.

Earth4uake acti/ity"he rapid bending of elastic lithosphere and rapid interplate shear of plates at subduction Eones as well as abrupt phasetransitions as subducting plates are rapidly moved downward would be expected to produce fre7uent, highintensityearth7uakes at the subduction Eones. "here is also earth7uake activity associated with explosive volcanism, isostaticad4ustment, continental collision, etc. "his earth7uake activity would facilitate thrust and detachmentfaulting by providingenergy to aid in breaking up initially coherent rock blocksQan acceleration to aid in the thrusting of rock blocksQ andvibration which reduces the frictional force resisting the motion and thrusting of rock blocks.Termination*hen virtually all the prelood oceanic floor had been replaced with new, lessdense, lesssubductable rock, rapid platemotion ceased. "he lack of new, hot, mantle material terminated spreadingcenterassociated geyser activity, so the globalrain ceased. "his is very possibly the /@day point in the Genesis chronology when it appears that the Lfountains of thegreat deep were stopped and the windows of the heaven were closedM.After the rapid horiEontal motion stopped, coolingincreased the density of the new ocean floor producing gradually deepening oceans //6Deventually producing our current

ocean basins. As the waters receded the LGreat !egressionM$ from off of the land the most superficialDand least lithifiedDcontinental deposits were eroded off the continents. "his would leave an unconformity on the continent not reflected inocean stratigraphy. "he absence of these most superficial continental deposits may explain the absence of human as wellas most mammal and angiosperm fossils in lood sediments.//2 &heet erosion from receding lood waters would beexpected to have planed off a substantial percentage of the earth?s surface. &uch planar erosion features as the Canadianshield and the 3aibab and Coconino plateaus might well be better explained by this than by any conventional erosionalprocesses.)ost<&lood Dynamics&loodI"ost<&lood 0oundary"he definition of the loodSpostlood boundary in the geologic column is a sub4ect of considerable dispute amongcreationists. #stimates range from the Carboniferous//> to the leistocene.//@,//J or our purposes here we would like todefine the loodSpostlood boundary at the termination of globalscale erosion and sedimentation. %ased upon a 7ualitativeassessment of geologic maps worldwide, lithotypes change from worldwide or continental in character in the FesoEoic tolocal or regional in the "ertiary. "herefore, we tentatively place the loodSpostlood boundary at approximately theCretaceousS"ertiary 3S"$ boundary. *e believe further studies in stratigraphy, paleontology, paleomagnetism, andgeochemistry should allow for a more precise definition of this boundary.)ost<&lood geology

After the global effects of the lood ended, the earth continued to experience several hundred years of residualcatastrophism.//B A cooling lithosphere is likely to have produced a pattern of decreasing incidence//1 and intensity of volcanism such as appears to be evidenced in CenoEoic sialic volcanism in the *estern (nited &tates. //0 "he largechanges in crustal thicknesses produced during the lood left the earth in isostatic dise7uilibrium. lsostatic read4ustmentswith their associated intense mountain uplift, earth7uake, and volcanic activity would have occurred for hundreds of years































































after the global affects of the lood ended for example, !ugg/6$. 8n fact, considering the current nature of the mantle,there has not been sufficient time since the end of the lood for complete isostatic e7uilibrium to be attained. As a result,current geologic activity can be seen as continued isostatic read4ustments to lood events. Fodern earth7uake and volcanicactivity is in some sense relict lood dynamics.%ecause of the fre7uency and intensity of residual catastrophism after thelood, postlood sedimentary processes were predominantly rapid. "he local nature of such catastrophism, on the other hand, restricted sedimentation to local areas, explaining the basinal nature of most CenoEoic sedimentation.)ost<&lood climate%y the time lood waters had settled into the postlood basins, they had accumulated enough heat to leave the oceans asmuch as twenty or more degrees centigrade warmer than today?s oceans fig. /$. "hese warmer oceans might be expectedto produce a warmer climate on earth in the immediate postlood times than is experienced on earth now. /6/ Forespecifically, a rather uniform warm climate would be expected along continental margins,/66,/62,/6>permitting wider latitudinal range for temperaturelimited organisms/6@Dfor example, mammoths for example, &chweger et al. /6J$, froEen

forests for example, elix/6B$, and trees./61 "his avenue in turn may have facilitated postlood dispersion of animals./60,/2 Also expected along continental margins would be a rather high climatic gradient running from the oceantoward the continental interior./2/,/26 "his might explain why some CenoEoic communities near the coasts includeorganisms from a wider range of climatic Eones than we would expect to see todayDfor example, communities in the

leistocene/22,/2> and the Gingko etrified orest in9regon./2@

&ig. 8. Cooling of polar bottom water after the lood after -ardiman/20$. +ata from 3ennett et al./> and &hackletonand 3ennett./>/9ard/2J,/2B,/21 suggested that within the first millenniumfollowing the lood, the oceans and earth$ would havecooled as large amounts of water were evaporated off of theoceans and dropped over the cooler continental interiors.

Although 9ard?s model needs substantial modification for example, to include all the CenoEoic$, 7uantification, andtesting, we feel that it is likely to prove to have considerableexplanatory and predictive power. "he predictedcooling/>6,/>2 seems to be confirmed by oxygen isotoperatios in CenoEoic foraminifera of polar bottom/>>,/>@,/>J fig. /$, polar surface, and tropical bottom

waters, and may contribute to increased vertebrate body siEe Cope?s aw/>B$ throughout the CenoEoic. 9ard/>1 suggeststhat the higher rates of precipitation may provide a uni7ue explanation for a wellwatered &ahara of thepast,/>0,/@,/@/ rapid erosion of caves, and the creation andSor maintenance of large interior continental lakes of theCenoEoic. #xamples of the latter include Puaternary pluvial lakes, /@6,/@2 akes Hopi and Canyonlands, which may havecatastrophically drained to produce Grand Canyon,/@>,/@@,/@J and the extensive lake which produced the #ocene Green!iver deposits. *e would expect floral and faunal communities to have tracked the cooling of the oceans and thecorresponding cooling and drying of the continents. &uch a tracking seems to explain the trend in CenoEoic plantcommunities to run from woodland to grassland and the corresponding trend in CenoEoic herbivores to change from

browsers to graEers.According to 9ard?s/@B,/@1 model, by about five centuries after the lood, the cooling oceans had ledto the advance of continental glaciers and the formation of polar ice caps see also -ardiman /@0$. 9ard/J suggests thatrapid melting of the continental ice sheets in less than a century$ explains the underfitness of many modern rivers /J/ andcontributed to the megafaunal extinctions of the leistocene./J6,/J2,/J> 8t may also have contributed to the production of otherwise enigmatic leistocene peneplains.Conclusion*e believe that rapid tectonics provides a successful and innovative framework for youngage creation modeling of earthhistory. *e feel that this model uni7uely incorporates a wide variety of creationist and noncreationist thinking. 8t explainsevidence from a wide spectrum of earth science fieldsDincluding evidence not heretofore well explained by any other earthhistory models.)redictionsThis model1 like many &lood models1 "redicts the ollowing=a consistent, worldwide, initiation event in the geologic columnQmost body fossils assigned to lood deposits were deposited allochthonously including coal, forests, and reefs$Q

most ichnofossils assigned to lood deposits are graEing, moving, or escape evidences, and not longterm living tracesQ andsediments assigned to the lood were deposited suba7ueously without longterm unconformities between them.&ince lood models are usually tied to youngearth creationism, they also claim that it is possible on a short timescale toexplainthe cooling of plutons and ocean plate materialQregional metamorphism see, for example, &nelling/J@,/JJ$Qcanyon and cave erosionQsediment production and accumulation including speleothems and precipitites$Qorganismal accumulation and fossiliEation including coal, fossil forests, and reefs$Qfine sedimentary lamination including varves$Q andradiometric data."his particular model also predictsa lower earth viscosity in prelood timesQdegassingassociated suba7ueous precipitate production during the loodQpossibly$ easttowest dominated current deposition during the loodQpossibly$ degassingproduced atmosphere argon and helium levelsQa decrease in magnitude and fre7uency of geologic activity after the loodQflood basalts that correlate with mantle plume eventsQa sedimentary unconformity at the loodSpostlood boundary on the continents not reflected in ocean sedimentsQcurrent geologic activity is the result of relict, isostatic dynamics, not primary earth dynamicsQ anda single ice age composed of a single ice advance.uture research































































































































"he lood model presented here suggests a substantial number of research pro4ects for youngearth creationists. %esidesthe further elaboration and 7uantification of the model, the predictions listed above need to be examined. Fost significantly,we still need to solve the heat problem/JB,/J1 and the radiometric dating problem./J0 As creationists we could also use theservices of a geochemist to develop a model for the origin of carbonates and precipitites during the lood. 8t is alsoimportant that we reevaluate the evidence for multiple ice ages as begun by Hughes/B and 9ard/B/$ and multiple iceadvances as begun by Foln/B6 and 9ard/B2,/B>$.8n addition to testing claims of the model, there are a number of other studies which could help us expand and refine the model. &uccessful studies on the nature of the prelood world, for example, are likely to aid us in placing better parameters on our model. #vents and factors postulated in the initiation of thelood also need to be reexamined to determine which are capable of explaining the available data and the beginning of plate subduction. 8t is also important that we evaluate the role of extraterrestrial bombardment in the history of the earth andlood, since it was most certainly higher during and immediately after the lood than it is now Gibson/B@, *hitelaw/BJ$."he suggestion that the earth?s axial tilt has changed for example, )oone,/BB 9vern,/B1 &etterfield/B0$ needs to be

examined to determine validity andSor impact on earth history. 8t is also important that we determine how many *ilsoncycles are needed to explain the data of continental motion Fann and *ise, /1 *ise, &tambaugh, and Fann/1/$, andthus whether more than one phase of runaway subduction is necessary. Fore than one cycle may be addressed by partialseparation and closure during one rapid tectonics event, andSor renewed tectonic motion after cooling of ocean floor allowedfor further rapid tectonics. inally, it will also be important to determine more precisely the geologic position of the initiationand termination of the lood around the world in order to identify the geologic data relevant to particular 7uestions of interest.

SED#,ENTSSedimentation E!"eriments= Nature &inally Catches U"

by +r. Andrew A. &nelling on August /, /00B 'riginally published in (ournal of Creation !!* no " +,ugust !--7/ !"%0!"&.

A0stract

@eaders of >ature could have read all about it morethan a decade ago in theCreation E4 >ihilo 3echnical (ournal.%ack in /011 wepublished in this 4ournal the#nglish translation of asignificant paper / that wasoriginally presented to therench Academy of &ciences

in aris on )ovember 2, /01J and then published in the Academy?s 8roceedings.6 "his was followed with our publication of a subse7uent paper 2 in /00 that had also been initially presented to the rench Academy of &ciences in aris on ebruary1, /011 and published in the Academy?s 8roceedings.>"he author on both occasions was Guy %erthault, and his importantexperiments have demonstrated how multiple laminations form spontaneously during sedimentation of heterogranular mixtures of sediments in air, in still water, and in running water see igure /$. 8n subse7uent research %erthault has teamed

up with rofessor irre :ulien in the #ngineering !esearch Center of the Civil #ngineering +epartment at Colorado &tate(niversity, ort Collins (&A$. *e published their results in /00>,@ after their research had been published by theGeological &ociety of rance.J "heir sedimentation experiments are continuing.

&igure 8= #xperimental multiple lamination of a heterogranular mixture of sediments due to dry flow at a constant rate.&igure 9= ine layering was produced within hours at F" &t Helens on :une /6,/01 by hurricane velocity surging flows from the crater of the volcano. "he 6@footthick B.J m$, :une /6 deposit is exposed in the middle of the cliff. 8t is overlain bythe massive, but thinner, Farch /0,/016 mudflow deposit, and is underlain by theairfall debris from the last hours of the Fay /1, /01, ninehour eruption."he significance of this research has been repeatedly pointed out by creationistgeologists. 9n :une /6, /01 a 6@ foot B.J m$ thick stratified pyroclastic layer accumulated within a few hours below the Ft &t Helens volcano *ashington, (&A$as a result of pyroclastic flow deposits amassed from groundhugging, fluidised,

turbulent slurries of volcanic debris which moved at high velocities off the flank of the volcano when an eruption plume collapsed see igure 6$.B Close examinationof this layer revealed that it consisted of thin laminae of fine and coarse pumiceash, usually alternating, and sometimes crossbedded. "hat such a laminateddeposit could form catastrophically has been confirmed by %erthault?ssedimentation experiments and applied to a creationist understanding of the looddeposition of thinly laminated shale strata of the Grand Canyonse7uence.1 %erthault?s experimental work and its implications have also beenfeatured on videos.0,/)ow >ature has finally caught upO "hat is, the weekly

international science 4ournal >ature, arguably the world?sleading scientific publication, has 4ust published andcommented upon the results of experiments similar to thoseperformed by %erthault,//,/6 thus finally acknowledging what acreationist researcher has been demonstrating for more thanten years. However, not surprisingly, %erthault?s work is neither mentioned nor referenced in the >ature articles.And what didthe >ature authors discover Fakse et al . found that mixturesof grains of different siEes spontaneously segregate in theabsence of external perturbationsQ that is, when such a mixtureis simply poured onto a pile, the large grains are more likely tobe found near the base, while the small grains are more likelynear the top./2 urthermore, when a granular mixture is


























https://answersingenesis.org/geology/sedimentation/sedimentation-experiments-nature-finally-catches-up/#fn_1






https://answersingenesis.org/geology/sedimentation/sedimentation-experiments-nature-finally-catches-up/#figure1






















































poured between two vertical plates, the mixture spontaneously stratifies into alternating layers of small and large grainswhenever the large grains have a larger angle of repose than the small grains. ApplicationDthe stratification is related to theoccurrence of avalanches.ineberg agrees./> %oth the stratification and segregation of a mixture of two types of grains canbe observed to occur spontaneously as the mixture is poured into a narrow box, the mixture flowing as the slope of theNsandpile? formed steepens. *hen the angle of repose of the larger grains is greater than that of the smaller grains, the flowcauses spontaneous stratification of the medium to occur, and alternating layers composed of large and small particles areformed, with the smaller and Nsmoother? lower angle of repose$ grains found below the larger and Nrougher? grains therewas a beautiful colour photo in >ature$. #ven within the layers, siEe segregation of the grains occurs, with the smaller grainstending to be nearer the top of the pile.*e are naturally heartened by this Nhighprofile? confirmation of %erthault?sexperimental results, but readers of >aturecould have read all about it more than a decade ago in the Creation E4 >ihilo3echnical (ournal . However, what this also confirms is that creation scientists do undertake original research, in this case,research on sedimentation that is applicable to the catastrophic processes of deposition during the lood, contrary to the

establishment?s uniformitarian slowandgradual$ interpretation of the formation of such sedimentary strata. Andfurthermore, creation scientists not only do original research applicable to lood geology even if >ature doesn?t recogniseit$, but the type of research they do is valid and good enough to be published in peerreviewed secular scientific 4ournals.

Regional ,etamor"hism within a Creation &ramework= 2hat *arnet Com"ositions Re/ealby +r. Andrew A. &nelling on :une 62, 6/

A0stractKey)ords* regional metamorphism*grade ones* garnets* compositional oning* sedimentary precursors 3his paper was originally published in the8roceedings of the 3hird 5nternational

Conference on Creationism* pp.

$)%;$-& +!--$* and is reproduced here with the permission of theCreation cienceellowship of 8ittsburgh +www.csfpittsburgh.org.

"he LclassicalM model for regional metamorphic Eones presupposes elevated temperatures and pressures due to deep burialand deformationStectonic forces over large areas over millions of yearsDan apparent insurmountable hurdle for thecreationist framework. 9ne diagnostic metamorphic mineral is garnet, and variations in its composition have long beenstudied as an indicator of metamorphic grade conditions. &uch compositional variations that have been detected betweenand within grains in the same rock strata are usually explained in terms of cationic fractionation with changing temperatureduring specific continuous reactions involving elemental distribution patterns in the rock matrix around the crystalliEinggarnet. Garnet compositions are also said to correlate with their metamorphic grade. However, contrary evidence has beenignored. Compositional patterns preserved in garnets have been shown to be a reflection of compositional Eoning in theoriginal precursor minerals and sediments. Compositional variations between and within garnet grains in schists that are

typical metapelites at 3oongarra in the )orthern "erritory, Australia, support this minority viewpoint. %oth homogeneous andcompositionally Eoned garnets, even together in the same hand specimen, display a range of compositions that wouldnormally reflect widely different metamorphic grade and temperature conditions during their supposed growth. "hus thema4ority viewpoint cannot explain the formation of these garnets. 8t has also been demonstrated that the solidsolidtransformation from a sedimentary chlorite precursor to garnet needs only low to moderate temperatures, whilecompositional patterns only reflect original depositional features in sedimentary environments. "hus catastrophicsedimentation, deep burial and rapid deformationStectonics with accompanying low to moderate temperatures and pressuresduring, for example, a global lood and its aftermath have potential as a model for explaining the LclassicalM Eones of progressive regional metamorphism.#ntroduction9f the two styles of metamorphism, contact and regional, the latter is most often used to argue against the youngearthcreationlood model. 8t is usually envisaged that sedimentary strata over areas of hundreds of s7uare kilometers weresub4ected to elevated temperatures and pressures due to deep burial and deformationStectonic forces over millions of years."he resultant mineralogical and textural transformations are said to be due to mineral reactions in the original sediments

under the prevailing temperaturepressure conditions.9ften, mapping of metamorphic terrains has outlined Eones of stratacontaining mineral assemblages that are believed to be diagnostic and confined to each Eone respectively. 8t is assumedthat these mineral assemblages reflect the metamorphic transformation conditions specific to each Eone, so that bytraversing across these metamorphic Eones higher metamorphic grades due to former higher temperaturepressureconditions$ are progressively encountered. Amongst the metamorphic mineral assemblages diagnostic of each Eone arecertain minerals whose presence in the rocks is indicative of each Eone, and these are called index minerals. Garnet is oneof these key index minerals. Across a metamorphic terrain, the line along which garnet first appears in rocks of similar composition is called the garnet isograd Lsame metamorphic gradeM$ and represents one boundary of the garnet Eone. *ithincreasing metamorphic grade and in other Eones, garnet continues to be an important constituent of the mineralassemblages.*arnet Com"ositions-ariation in garnet compositions, particularly their Fn9 content, was for a long time used as an estimator of regionalmetamorphic grade. Goldschmidt/ first noted an apparent systematic decrease in Fn9 content with increase inmetamorphic grade, a relationship which he attributed to the incorporation of the ma4or part of the rock Fn9 in the earliestformed garnet. Fiyashiro6 and #ngel and #ngel2 also followed this line of thought, Fiyashiro suggesting that the larger Fn6 ions were readily incorporated in the garnet structure at the lower pressures, whereas at higher pressures smaller e6 and Fg6 were preferentially favored. "hus it was proposed that a decrease in garnet Fn9 indicated an increase ingrade of regional metamorphism. ambert> produced corresponding evidence for a decrease in garnet Ca9 with increasingmetamorphic grade. &turt@ demonstrated in somewhat pragmatic fashion what appeared to be a general inverserelationship between Fn9

Ca9$ content of garnet and overall grade of metamorphism, a scheme which was taken up andreinforced by )andi.J)ot all investigators, however, agreed with this line of thinking. 3retE B demonstrated the possibleinfluence of coexisting minerals on the composition of another given mineral. -ariation in garnet composition was seen to



http://www.csfpittsburgh.org/




https://answersingenesis.org/geology/regional-metamorphism-what-garnet-compositions-reveal/#fn_1
























depend not only on pressuretemperature variation but also to changes in the compositions of the different componentswithin its matrix as these responded to changing metamorphic grade. Albee,1 like 3retE and rost,0 examined elementaldistribution coefficients in garnetbiotite pairs as possible grade indicators, but concluded that results were complex ande7uivocal, and suggested that metamorphic e7uilibrium was fre7uently not attained. &imilarly, #vans/suggested caution inthe interpretation of increasing garnet Fg9 as indicating increasingly higher pressures of metamorphism. He pointed outthat the volume behavior of Fge exchange relations between garnet and other common silicates indicates that, for givenbulk compositions, the Fge ratios in garnet will decrease with pressure.*ith the advent of the electron probemicroanalyEer, it became possible to detect compositional variations even within mineral grains including garnet, whereoften it was found that traversing from cores to rims of grains, the Fn9 and Ca9 contents decreased with a concomitantincrease in e9 and Fg9.// Hollister /6 concluded that this Eoning arose by partitioning of Fn9 in accordance with the!ayleigh fractionation model between garnet and its matrix as the former grew. erhaps more importantly he drew attentionto the preservation of such Eones that remained unaffected by diffusion, and hence une7uilibrated, throughout the later

stages of the metamorphism that was presumed to have induced their growth. Concurrently, Atherton and#dmunds/2 suggested that the Eoning patterns reflected changing garnetmatrix e7uilibrium conditions during growth andSor polyphase metamorphism, but that, once formed, garnet and its Eones behaved as closed systems unaffected by changes inconditions at the periphery of the growing grain."hrough his own work, and that of Chinner /> andHutton,/@ Atherton/J drew attention to the presence of garnets of 7uite different compositions in rocks of similar grade, andsometimes in virtual 4uxtaposition. His conclusion was that the Fn9 content, and indeed the whole divalent cationcomponent, of garnet was substantially a reflection of host rock composition and that any simple tie between garnetcomposition and metamorphic grade was unlikely. &ubse7uently Atherton/B suggested that Eoning and progressivechanges in garnet compositions were due to changes in distribution coefficients of the divalent cations with increase ingrade, and considered that Lanomalies in the se7uence were$ explicable in terms of variations in the compositions of thehost rock.MFller and &chneider /1 found that the Fn9 content of garnet reflected not only metamorphic grade andchemistry of the host rocks, but also their oxygen fugacity. "hey re4ected Hollister?s !ayleigh fractionation model andconcluded that decrease in Fn, and concomitant increase in e, in garnet with increasing grade stemmed from aprogressive reduction in oxygen fugacity. Hsu,/0 in his investigation of phase relations in the AlFne&i9H system, had

found that the stability of the almandine endmember is strongly dependent on oxygen fugacity, and is favored byassemblages characteriEed by high activity of divalent e. 8n contrast, the activity of divalent Fn is less influenced by higher oxygen fugacity. "hus Fller and &chneider 6 concluded that the observed decrease in Fn in garnet with increasingmetamorphic grade is due to the buffering capacity of graphite present near nucleating garnets. *ith increasing grade thegraphite buffer increasingly stabiliEes minerals dependent on low oxygen fugacity, that is, almandine is increasingly formedinstead of spessartine. Fller and &chneider also noted that some of their garnets were not Eoned, but exhibitedinhomogeneities distributed in irregular domains throughout the garnet grains.Fiyashiro and &hido, 6/ in a substantiallytheoretical treatment, concluded that the principal factor controlling successive garnet compositions is the amount andcomposition of the garnet already crystalliEed, since the matrix will be correspondingly depleted in the oxides present in theearlierformed garnet. Also using a theoretical approach, Anderson and %uckley66 showed that, for Lreasonable diffusioncoefficients and boundary conditions,M observed Eoning profiles in garnets could be explained 7uite ade7uately by diffusionprinciplesK that given original homogeneities in the parent rock, the interplay of diffusion phenomena could explain variationof Eoning profiles in separate grains of an individual mineral species in domains as small as that of a hand specimen."racy,!obinson, and "hompson62 noted that garnets from metamorphosed pelitic assemblages show, in different metamorphicEones,element distribution patterns that are complex functions of rock bulk composition, specific continuous reactions in

which garnet is involved, " history of the rock, homogeneous diffusion rates with garnet, and possibly also the availabilityof metamorphic fluids at the various stages of garnet development."hey applied preliminary calibrations of garnetbiotite and garnetcordierite eFg exchange reactions and several eFgFn continuous mineral reactions to the results of very detailed studies of Eoned garnets in order to evaluate changing "conditions during prograde and retrograde metamorphism in central Fassachusetts (&A$.&tanton,6>,6@,6J,6B in his studiesof %roken Hill )ew &outh *ales, Australia$ banded iron formations, suggested that the garnets represented insitu transformation of somewhat manganiferous chamositic septachlorite, and that any Eoning reflected the original ooliticstructure of the sedimentary chamosite. 8n a further study, &tanton and *illiams 61concluded that, because compositionaldifferences occur on a fine /56 mm$ scale in garnets within a simple onecomponent matrix 7uartE$, garnet compositionsmust faithfully reflect original compositional variations within the chemical sediments, and not represent variations inmetamorphic grade.FcAteer 60 demonstrated the presence in a garnetmica schist of two compositionally and texturallydistinct garnet types, which she attributed to a se7uence of mineral reactions that proceeded with changing thermal historyof the rock. 9f the two types, one was coarsegrained and Eoned Fn9 and Ca9 decreasing towards grain margins$, whilethe other was finegrained and essentially uniform in composition. Attainment of chemical e7uilibrium between all garnets

and their rock matrix, but maintenance of dise7uilibrium within large garnets, appears to have been assumed.8n a review of research on compositional Eoning in metamorphic minerals, "racy2 ignored &tanton?s demonstration that the compositionalEoning in garnets can only be explained in some metamorphic rocks as faithful reflections of original compositionalvariations within the precursor minerals and sediments, and not as a function of variations in metamorphic grade or cationicsupply during crystal growth. 8nstead, "racy summariEed the various models already proposedDcationic fractionationparticularly of Fn resulting in variations in the supply of cations$ with changing temperatures during progressivemetamorphism, and reaction partitioning of cations which depends upon the exact mineralogical composition of the reservoir or matrix surrounding any one garnet grain, especially relative proportions of matrix minerals that are in direct reactionrelation with a garnet grain. "hese models both correlate changes in garnet composition with increasing metamorphic grade,relying on mineral reactions and diffusion of cations to explain compositional Eoning trends, which it is envisaged change asmineral reactions and temperatures change."his is still the consensus viewpoint. oomis,2/ &pear,26 and &pear, 3ohn,lorence, and Fenard,22 for example, insist that metamorphic garnets undergo a form of fractional crystalliEation whichinvolves fractionation of material into the interior of a crystalliEing garnet grain with conse7uent change in the effective bulkcomposition, the Eoning profile preserved in the garnet being a function of the total amount of material that has fractionated.urthermore, &pear insists that because intracrystalline diffusion is so slow at these conditions, the interior of the garnet iseffectively isolated from chemical e7uilibrium with the matrix. &pear then points to the work of Iardley 2> to insist that withincreasing temperatures intracrystalline diffusion within garnet grains becomes more rapid until eventually all chemicalEoning is erased. 8ndeed, Iardley claimed to have found that at the temperatures of staurolite and sillimanite grademetamorphism internal diffusion of cations within garnet grains is sufficient to eliminate the Eoning that developed duringearlier growth.Iardley also rightly pointed out that the fractionation models for garnet Eoning assume that that diffusion isnegligible at lower metamorphic grades. "hat there is negligible cationic diffusion in garnet at lower grades is amplydemonstrated in the garnets described by 9lympic and Anderson,2@ whose pattern of chemical Eoning coincided with











































































textural optical$ Eones, clearly representing distinct presumed growth stages. )evertheless, even where textural optical$Eones are not evident, there may still be chemical Eoning, as found by "uccillo, #ssene, and van der lui4m.2J8ndeed,confusing the picture somewhat, "uccillo, #ssene, and van der lui4m found that the chemical Eoning in their garnets under study, though from a highgrade metamorphic terrain, was not only preserved but was the reverse in terms of cations to thatnormally expected, and this they attributed to a diffusional retrograde effect.However, the work of &tanton and*illiams,2B who found marked compositional changes from one garnet to the next on a scale of /56 mm in finely beddedbanded iron formations in the highgrade metamorphic terrain at %roken Hill )ew &outh *ales, Australia$, has beenignored. "hey found thatin view of the minuteness of the domains involved it appears evident that compositional variationcannot be attributed to variations in metamorphic pressures, temperatures or oxygen fugacities. )either can they beattributed to variation in garnetmatrix partition functions, as most of the garnets occur in one simple matrixD7uartE.They thereore concluded thatin spite of the high sillimanite$ grade of the relevant metamorphism, any e7uilibration of garnet compositions, and hence

any associated intergrain metamorphic diffusion, has been restricted to a scale of less than /

mmQ that garnet compositionshere reflect original rock compositions on an ultrafine scale, and have no connotations concerning metamorphic gradeQ that,hence, the garnets must arrive from a single precursor material, earlier suggested to be a manganiferous chamositicseptachloriteQ and that the betweenbed variationK withinbed uniformity of garnet composition reflects an original pattern of chemical sedimentationDa pattern preserved with the utmost delicacy through a period of approximately /1 ^ /J yearsand a metamorphic episode of sillimanite grade.21"hese findings are clearly at odds with the claims of other investigators, yet &tanton 20,> has amassed more evidence tosubstantiate his earlier work. "o test these competing claims, therefore, a suitable area of metamorphic terrain with schistscontaining garnet porphyblasts was chosen for study.The @oongarra Area"he 3oongarra area is 6@ km east of +arwin )orthern "erritory, Australia$ at latitude /6V@6& and longitude /26V@#. "heregional geology has been described in detail by )eedham and &tuart&mith>/ and by )eedham,>6,>2while&nelling>> describes the local 3oongarra area geology."he Archean basement to this metamorphic terrain consists of domes of granitoids and granitic gneisses the )anambu Complex$, the nearest outcrop being @

km to the north. &ome of

the lowermost overlying ower roteroEoic metasediments were accreted to these domes during amphibolite grade regionalmetamorphism estimated to represent conditions of @51 kb and @@5J2 VC$ at /15/1B Fa. Fultiple isoclinal recumbentfolding accompanied metamorphism. "he ower roteroEoic Cahill ormation flanking the )anambu Complex has beendivided into two members. "he lower member is dominated by a thick basal dolomite and passes transitionally upwards intothe psammitic upper member, which is largely feldspathic schist and 7uartEite. "he uranium mineraliEation at 3oongarra isassociated with graphitic horiEons within chloritiEed 7uartEmica \feldspar \garnet$ schists overlying the basal dolomite inthe lower member.9wing to the isoclinal recumbent folding of metasedimentary units of the Cahill ormation, the typical rockse7uence encountered at 3oongarra is probably a tectonostratigraphy from youngest to oldest$KDmuscovitebiotite7uartEfeldspar schist at least /1 m thick$Dgarnetmuscovitebiotite7uartE schist 05/

m thick$Dsulfiderich graphitemica7uartE schist \garnet$ about 6@ m thick$Ddistinctive graphite7uartEchlorite schist marker unit @51 m thick$D7uartEchlorite schist \illite, garnet, sillimanite, muscovite$ @ m thick$Dcontains the mineraliEed Eoneolyphase deformation accompanied metamorphism of the original sediments that were probably dolomite, shales, andsiltstones. :ohnston>@ identified a +6 event as responsible for the dominant &6 foliation of the schist se7uence, which dips at

@@V to the southeast at 3oongarra.&uperimposed on the primary prograde metamorphic mineral assemblages is a distinct and extensive primary alterationhalo associated with the uranium mineraliEation at 3oongarra. "his alteration extends for up to /.@ km from the ore in adirection perpendicular to the disposition of the host 7uartEchlorite schist unit, because the mineraliEation is essentiallystratabound. "he outer Eone of the alteration halo is most extensively developed in the semipelitic schists and is manifestedby the pseudomorphous replacement of biotite by chlorite, rutile, and 7uartE, and feldspar by sericite. Fetamorphicmuscovite, garnet, tourmaline, magnetite, pyrite, and apatite are preserved. 8n the inner alteration Eone, less than @

m fromore, the metamorphic rock fabric is disrupted, and 7uartE is replaced by pervasive chlorite and phengitic mica, and garnet bychlorite. !elict metamorphic phases, mainly muscovitic mica, preserve the & 6foliation. Coarse chlorite after biotite may alsobe preserved.

@oongarra *arnetsGarnets are fairly common in the garnetmuscovitebiotite7uartE schist unit at 3oongarra, being usually fresh andpresent in large 7uantities, often grouped, within various

macroscopic layers. *ithin the inner alteration halo and the7uartEchlorite schist hosting the mineraliEation most of thegarnets have largely been pseudomorphously replaced bychlorite. 9ccasionally garnet remnants remain within thepseudomorphous chlorite knots, or the common boxworktextures within these pseudomorphous chlorite knotsconfirm that the chlorite is pseudomorphously replacinggarnets."he garnets are always porphyroblastic, andsometimes idioblastic, indicative of prekinematic growth."hey may be up to 6

cm in diameter, but most are typicallyabout .@ cm across. 9ften, the garnets also show somedegree of rolling and sygmoidal traces of inclusions. "hesefeatures are usually regarded as evidence for synkinematicgrowth.>J 8n a few of these cases, rolling is minimal and

inclusion traces pass out uninterrupted into the surroundingschist. "he schistosity is often draped around these garnetporphryblasts and sometimes the latter are slightlyflattened. "hus the last stages of garnet growth occurredduring the final stages of the +6 deformation of the progrademetamorphic layering &/, that is, during the development of the predominant &6 schistosity. "his, in turn, implies that































garnet development and growth took place before and during the deformation of the earlier & / schistosity, that is, pre andsynkinematic to the &6schistosity and +6 deformation.

&ig. 8. lot of Ca9 Fn9$ versus e9 Fg9$ variations in all analyEed 3oongarra garnets, after the style of )andi.>B His line of best fit for his data is shown, plus his boundaries between garnet compositions of each metamorphicEone. "he line of best fit through the 3oongarra data is shown, as are the sampleSgarnet numbers of all the homogeneousgarnets. "he analytical data are from &nelling.>1"hirteen garnetcontaining samples were chosen from three of the schistunitsK the orehosting 7uartEchlorite schist three samples$, the sulfiderich graphitemica7uartE schist five samples$, andthe garnetmuscovitebiotite7uartE schist five samples$. "hese /2 samples contained a total of 22 garnets that were allanalyEed using an electron probe microanalyEer. Composite point analyses were made where garnets were of uniformcomposition, while traverses revealed compositional Eoning when present. All results are listed in &nelling. >0 All the garnetsare essentially almandine, the e6 endmember, with varying amounts of spessartine Fn6$, pyrope Fg6$ and grossularite

Ca6

$ structural unitsSendmembers substituting in the crystal lattices. "ucker @ reported an analysis of a 3oongarra erichgarnet with an e62 content of J.66W, implying that the substitution of the andradite e2$ endmember may be 7uitesubstantial. "he compositional variations in e, Fn, Ca, and Fg both between and within the analyEed garnets were plottedin ternary diagrams, and from these it was determined that two principal substitutions have occurredDFn for e and Fg for Ca, though the latter is very minor compared to the former. )evertheless, these 3oongarra garnets revealed the generalinverse relationship between Ca9 Fn9$ and e9 Fg9$, which can be seen clearly in ig. /.9f the 22 garnets analyEed, 66 had homogeneous compositions and only // were compositionally Eoned. 8n the threesamples from the orehosting 7uartEchlorite schist unit, five garnets were analyEed and all were compositionallyhomogeneous, whereas in the overlying sulfiderich graphitemica7uartE schist unit, the five selected samples contained /Jgarnets, analyses of which revealed that // were compositionally homogeneous and the other five were compositionallyEoned. urthermore, four of the ten samples from the two garnetbearing schist units overlying the orehosting 7uartEchlorite schist contain both compositionally homogeneous and Eoned garnets in a ratio of six Eoned to eight homogeneous,without any textural evidence to distinguish between the two. "he other samples in these schist units either had allcompositionally homogeneous garnets or all compositionally Eoned garnets.

&ig. 9. A line profile across a Eoned garnet grain in sample /B2 from the garnetmuscovitebiotite7uartE schist unit at3oongarra, showing the variations in e9, Ca9, Fg9, and Fn9. +ata from &nelling.@/







https://cdn-assets.answersingenesis.org/img/articles/aid/v5/metamorphism-fig3.gif

https://cdn-assets.answersingenesis.org/img/articles/aid/v5/metamorphism-fig2.gif








&ig. :. lan view of a compositionally Eoned garnet grain in sample // from the sulfiderich graphitemica7uartE schist unitat 3oongarra showing the e9, Fg9, Fn9, and Ca9 contents at each analyEed point. Compositional contours have beendrawn in for e9 and Fn9. "he data are from &nelling.@6"raverses of point analyses across the compositionally Eoned garnets enabled the compositional Eoning to be 7uantified."he most pronounced Eoning is with respect to Fn9, with cores generally having higher Fn9 relative to rims, and as e9substitutes for Fn9, e9 follows an inverse trend figs. 6 and 2$. ;onation with respect to Ca9 and Fg9 is not pronounced,but generally Ca9 follows the Fn9 trend and Fg9 follows e9. "his is understandable in terms of the ionic radii for the ionsinvolved.@2 ig. > shows the geochemical trends of all the analyEed Eoned garnets from cores to rims, the strongcompositional differences following the same inverse relationship between Ca9 Fn9$ and e9 Fg9$ as thecompositionally homogeneous garnets.DiscussionGarnets analyEed in the 3oongarra schists are typical of garnets from metapelites, the compositional trends between and

within garnet grains being almost identical to those obtained from garnets in metapelites in metamorphic terrains in other parts of the world.@> "he Ca9 Fn9$ versus e9 Fg9$ plot in ig. / has marked on it the line of best fit andcompositional subdivisions based on the typical Eones of progressive regional metamorphic grade as determined by)andi.@@ "he 3oongarra data are distributed along their own line of best fit and straddle the garnet, kyanite, and sillimaniteEones of )andi?s data.)andi?s contention was that Ca9 Fn9$ content of garnets decreased with increasing metamorphicgrade, as originally proposed by &turt@Jbut challenged by %ahnemann.@B %ahnemann studied garnet compositions ingranulite facies gneisses of the Fessina district in the impopo olded %elt of )orthern "ransvaal and found compositionalvariations that were comparable to those found by )andi, but which scattered across the metamorphic Eones of )andi?sdiagram. However, %ahnemann was able to show, from earlier work on the same rocks@1,@0and by using Currie?s cordieritegarnet geothermometer,J that whatever the precise temperaturepressure conditions may have been during the formationof the garnets, they were high and uniform over much of the Fessina district. "hus %ahnemann concluded that the Ca9

Fn9$ versus e9 Fg9$ trends on the plot reflected host rock chemistry, and that metamorphic isograds cannot beinferred from the position of points on such a line. %ahnemann nevertheless noted that his line of best fit differed slightlyfrom that of )andi and suggested that his own line may be characteristic for the garnets from the area he had studied.

&ig. . lot of Ca9

Fn9$ versus e9

Fg9$variations in all analyEed Eoned garnets at3oongarra after the style of )andi.J/ Again, his lineof best fit for his data is shown, plus his boundariesbetween garnet compositions of each metamorphicEone. Core to rim compositions are plotted with lineslinking them between their intermediatecompositions. &ampleSgarnet numbers are shown."he data are from &nelling.J6"he Ca9 Fn9$versus e9

Fg9$ plots of the garnets at3oongarra igs. / and >$ also define a line of bestfit that differs from that of )andi. "he 3oongarraschists contain some graphite, which could be anadditional factor in the growth of the Eoned garnets,the ironrich rims presumably being produced by

graphite buffering as the temperature of metamorphism increased. However, in four of thethirteen samples there are both homogeneous andcompositionally Eoned garnets sidebyside.urthermore, in one instance sample /B2$ there is acompositionally Eoned garnet with a core that hasalmost three times the Ca9 Fn9$ content of itsrim, yet the latter?s composition is very similar to thetwo other ad4oining homogeneous garnet grains. 8f the presence of graphite buffering the metamorphicreactions was needed to produce the Eoned garnet,then why the ad4oining homogeneous garnets A far more logical explanation is that the Eonation and

compositional variations are due to chemical variations in the original precursor minerals and sedimentary rocks, as

suggested by &tanton.J2,

J>*hen )andi produced his original plot, he used compositional data of 1> samples of garnetsbelonging to different grades of regionally metamorphosed pelitic rocks that he compiled from six papers in the then currentliterature. 9ne of these, &turt,J@ drew on some of the same data, which comes from metamorphic terrains such as the&tavanger area of )orway, the Gosaisyo"akanuki area of :apan, the Adirondacks of the (&A, and the Foine and +alradianof &cotland. *hen garnet porpyroblasts of 7uite different compositions from the different metamorphic terrains were plottedon a Ca9 Fn9$ versus e9 Fg9$ diagram )andi found that they grouped along a line of best fit in subdivisions thatreflected the different metamorphic grade Eones from which they cameDgarnet, kyanite, and sillimanite see igs. / and >$.)andi showed virtually no overlap in the compositions of garnets from different grades at the boundaries he drew across hisline of best fit, yet on &turt?s similar plot with garnet data from the same and other metamorphic terrains, there wasconsiderable overlap of compositions between garnets from the different metamorphic grades. urthermore, those garnetsthat &turt recorded as coming from garnet grade metapelites almost exclusively plotted in )andi?s kyanite grade grouping,so the picture is far from being clearcut as )andi originally reported it. 8n other words, these data do not show that garnetcompositions systematically change with increasing metamorphic grade.As %ahnemann found in the impopo olded %elt,where garnets from a number of different granulite facies hostrocks showed a wide range of composition yet reflected the

same general pressuretemperature conditions of metamorphism, the data here from the 3oongarra schists show widelydivergent garnet compositions, even within individual grains, yet the schists are typical metapelites of a classical garnetEone within an amphibolite grade metamorphic terrain. "he presence of garnet in these schists without either kyanite andSor sillimanite confirms that these schists fall within the garnet Eone, although kyanite has been observed with staurolite ine7uivalent Cahill ormation schists to the south.JJ )evertheless, it is inconceivable that there would be any appreciablevariation in metamorphic temperaturepressure conditions over the approximate 2B m of strike length and 0 m of stratigraphic range from which the studied samples came. 8ndeed, even in the stratigraphically lowermost orehosting7uartEchlorite schist unit, the five compositionally homogeneous garnets in the three samples at that stratigraphic level








































almost spanned the complete compositional range in ig. /, from extremely high Ca9 Fn9$ content in the supposedlylower temperature end of the garnet Eone to a lower Ca9 Fn9$ and high e9 Fg9$ content at the supposedly hightemperature end of the kyanite Eone.Iet if any of these schist units at 3oongarra should have been at a higher progrademetamorphic temperature, it would have been this 7uartEchlorite schist unit, because it is stratigraphically closer to the)anambu Complex basement towards which the metamorphic grade increased, causing some of the metasedimentsclosest to it to be accreted to it. &imilarly, one of the samples from the sulfiderich graphitemica7uartE schist unit sample//$ has in it a garnet whose core could be regarded as being of garnet Eone composition, while its rim is supposedlyindicative of the sillimanite Eone."hese numerous LanomaliesM must indicate that garnet compositions are substantially areflection of compositional domains within the precursor sediments andSor minerals, and not metamorphic grade.&tantonJB,J1 has shown that diffusion during regional metamorphism has been restricted to relatively minute distances _/

mm$ and that there is no clear, direct evidence of prograde metamorphic mineral reactions, so that metamorphic e7uilibriumdoes not appear to have been attained through even very small domains. #ven though the ma4ority of researchers maintain

that compositional Eoning in garnets has been due to mineral reactions and cationic fractionation, and that at higher gradesthe compositional Eoning is homogeniEed by diffusion, &tanton and *illiams J0 have clearly shown at %roken Hill that at thehighest grades of metamorphism the compositional Eoning in garnets is neither homogeniEed nor the result of either mineralreactions or cationic fractionation, but an accurate preservation of compositional Eoning in the original precursor oolites inthe precursor sediment. )evertheless, while their conclusion is not 7uestioned, their timescale is, because it strains credulityto suppose that the original pattern of chemical sedimentation could have been preserved with the Lutmost delicacyM througha presumed period of /.1 billion years.*hat is e7ually amaEing is the discovery by &tanton B of distinctly hydrous L7uartEM inwellbedded 7uartEmuscovitebiotitealmandinespinel rocks also in the %roken Hill metamorphic terrain. He comments thatit seems LremarkableM that this silica should still retain such a notably hydrous nature after /.1 billion years that includedrelatively highgrade that is, high temperaturepressure$ metamorphismO )ot only does this discovery confirm thatmetamorphic 7uartE has been produced by dehydration and transformation in situ of precursor silica gel andSor chert, butthat the temperatures, pressures and timescales normally postulated are not necessarily re7uired.&tantonB/ maintains thatit has long been recogniEed that particular clays and Eeolites derive in many instances from specific precursors. ikewise, itis selfevident and unavoidable that many metamorphosed bedded oxides including 7uartE$, together with carbonates and

authigenic silicates, such as the feldspars, have derived from sedimentarySdiagenitic precursors, and the establishmentthereby of this precursor derivation for at least some regional metamorphic minerals is a principle, not an hypothesis. *hat&tanton then proceeds to show is how this principle applies to the broader spectrum of metamorphic silicates, includingalmandine garnet.He points to his earlier evidenceB6,B2 that almandine has derived directly from a chamositic chloritecontaining very finely dispersed chemical &i96, and suggests that dehydration and incorporation of this silica into the chloritestructure induces in situ transformation to the garnet structure. urthermore, instability induced by Fn, and perhaps small7uantities of Ca, in the structure may predispose the chlorite to such transformation. Any silica in excess of the re7uirementsof this process aggregates into small rounded particles within the garnet grainDthe 7uartE LinclusionsM that are almost acharacteristic feature of the garnets of metapelites, including the garnets at 3oongarra. &tanton then supports his contentionwith electron microprobe analyses of several hundred chlorites, from metamorphosed stratiform sulfide deposits in Canadaand Australia, and of almandine garnets immediately associated with the chlorites. "hese analyses plot sidebyside onternary diagrams, graphically showing the compositional similarities of the chlorites in these original chemical sediments tothe garnets in the same rock that have been produced by metamorphism. "his strongly suggests that the process was oneof a solidsolid transformation, with excess silica producing 7uartE Linclusions.M As &tanton insists, why should theseinclusions be exclusively 7uartE if these garnets had grown from mineral reactions within the rock matrix, because the latter

contains abundant muscovite, biotite, and other minerals in addition to 7uartE, minerals that should also have beenLincludedM in the growing garnet grains&tanton and *illiamsB> have conclusively demonstrated that the compositionalEones within individual garnet porphyroblasts reflect compositional Eoning in precursor sedimentary mineral grains. "hus, if primary depositional$ compositional features have led to a mimicking of metamorphic grade,B@,BJ then it has beenshownBB,B1,B0 that the classical Eones of regional metamorphic mineral assemblages may instead reflect facies of clay andclaychlorite mineral sedimentation, rather than variations in pressuretemperature conditions in subse7uent metamorphism.&tanton1goes on to say that if regional metamorphic silicates do develop principally by transformation and grain growth,the problem of the elusive metamorphic reaction in the natural milieu is resolved. "here is no destabiliEing of large chemicaldomains leading to extensive diffusion, no widespread reaction tending to new e7uilibria among minerals. "raditionally it hasbeen supposed that as metamorphism progressed each rock unit passed through each successive grade, but the commonlack of evidence that LhighgradeM Eones have passed through all the mineral assemblages of the LlowergradeM Eones cannow be accounted for. "he real metamorphic grade indicators are then not the hypothetical intermineral reactions usuallypostulated, but the relevant precursor transformations, which may be solidsolid or in some cases gelsolid. &tantonconcludes that it would be going too far to maintain that there was no such thing as a regional metamorphic mineral

reaction, or that regional metamorphic e7uilibrium was never attained, but the role of metamorphic reactions in generatingthe bulk of regional metamorphic mineral matter is Lprobably, 7uite contrary to present belief, almost vanishingly small.M"heother key factor in elucidating regional metamorphic grades, Eones, and mineral compositions besides precursor mineralSsediment compositions would be the temperatures of precursor transformations, rather than the temperatures of presumed LclassicalM metamorphic mineral reactions. 8t is thus highly significant that dehydration and incorporation of silicainto the chlorite structure induces in situ transformation to garnet at only low to moderate temperatures and pressures thatare conceivable over short timescales during catastrophic sedimentation, burial, and tectonic activities. 8ndeed, therealiEation that the LclassicalM Eones of progressive regional metamorphism are potentially only a reflection of variations inoriginal sedimentation, as can be demonstrated in continental shelf depositional facies today, provides creationists with apotential scientifically satisfying explanation of regional metamorphism within their time framework, which includescatastrophic sedimentation, deep burial and rapid deformationStectonics with accompanying low to moderate temperaturesand pressures during, for example, the global lood and its aftermath.1/ConclusionsGarnets in the amphibolite grade schists at 3oongarra show wide compositional variations both within and between grains,even at the thin section scale, a pattern which is not consistent with the current consensus on the formation of metamorphicgarnets. !ather than elevated temperatures and pressures being re7uired, along with fractionational crystalliEation,elemental partitioning, and garnetmatrix reaction partitioning, the evidence at 3oongarra and in other metamorphic terrainsis consistent with solidsolid transformation at moderate temperatures of precursor sedimentary chlorite, complete withcompositional variations due to precursor oolites, into garnet such that the compositional variations in the precursor chloriteare preserved without redistribution via diffusion. "hese compositional variations in garnets contradict the LclassicalM viewthat particular compositions represent different metamorphic grade Eones, since at 3oongarra the compositional variationseven in single garnets span wide ranges of presumed metamorphic temperatures and grades. "hus the LclassicalM











































explanation for progressive regional metamorphism, different grade Eones being imposed on original sedimentary strataover hundreds of s7uare kilometers due to elevated temperatures and pressures resulting from deep burial anddeformationStectonic forces over millions of years, has to be seriously 7uestioned. A feasible alternative is that these Eonesrepresent patterns of original precursor sedimentation, such as we see on continental shelves today. Creationists may thusbe able to explain regional metamorphism within their time framework on the basis of catastrophic sedimentation, deepburial and rapid deformationStectonics, with accompanying low to moderate temperatures and pressures, during, for example, the global lood and its aftermath.

Thirty ,iles o Dirt in a Dayby +r. Andrew A. &nelling on August 6J, 61Q last featured August 6@, 61

&hop )ow8t may come as a surprise to some, but not all rock layers were laid down during lood. 8n fact, the evidence indicates thatmore geologic layers may have been formed during Creation than during the lood.2hat Do 2e See in the *eologic Record5*hen most people visit Grand Canyon in northern AriEona, their eyes are riveted on the spectacular walls, which displayabout >, feet /.6 km$ of flatlying sedimentary rock layers limestones, sandstones, and shales$ igure /$. 6illed withthe buried remains of plants and animals, these layers must have been deposited during the lood.

&igure 8. *rand Canyon8n northern AriEona, the flatlying sedimentary rocklayers of Grand Canyon sit on top of tilted sedimentaryand volcanic rock layers, sitting on top of folded andmetamorphosed layers of both sedimentary andvolcanic rocks schists$ intruded by granites.(nderneaththese layersDnear the bottom of the canyonDare manyother layers that do not contain plant or animal fossils.

-iolent processes, including volcanoes and rapidlymoving mud and sand, must have created these layers.Fany tilted sedimentary and volcanic rock layers about/2, feet R> kmT thick$ sit on top of other folded andmetamorphosed layers of both sedimentary andvolcanic rocks estimated to have been originally about>, feet R/6 kmT, thick$.2 After these metamorphicrocks formed, hot granites from deeper in the earth musthave intruded into them igure /$.

%ecause the folded and metamorphosed sedimentary layers, and most of the tilted sedimentary layers above them, containno plant or animal fossils, it is likely these were nearly all deposited catastrophically during the erosion and deposition of Creation event.>

&igure9.Australia

Almost twothirds of Australia consists of thick sedimentary layersbelow the fossilbearing sedimentary layers deposited by thelood.2 8n two of these basins, the Hamersley and %angemall%asins, the total cumulative thickness of the se7uence of successive sedimentary and volcanic layers is approximately astaggering //@,@ feet almost 66 miles$O>8n Australia, as well as elsewhere around the globe, geologistshave found even thicker sedimentary layers below the fossilbearing layers deposited by the lood. 8ndeed, almost twothirds of the Australian continent consists of such rocks igure 6$, sitting ona basement of metamorphic rocks and granites.@"hese thick, fossilfree sediment layers have been preserved indepositional basins places where volcanic eruptions and moving

sediment deposited layers in se7uences, one basin on top of the previous one$. 8n 4ust two locations in *estern Australia,the Hamersley and %angemall %asins igure 6$, the total cumulative thickness of the layers is approximately a staggering//@,@ feet almost 66 miles R2@ kmT$OJSo 2hy 2ould the Designer 'ay Down Thirty ,iles o Sediment in a Day5"here is at least one good reason we know of. "hese rock layers contain enormous resources of metals that man has usedto carry out the Godgiven dominion mandate. 8n Australia?s Hamersley %asin, and similar sedimentary basins elsewhere,are special layers called banded iron formations that contain countless billions of tons of iron ore from which we make steel,one of the basic components of our world?s infrastructure. Fuch of the world?s gold comes from sediment layers in &outh



https://answersingenesis.org/geology/sedimentation/thirty-miles-of-dirt-in-a-day/#fn_2




















Africa?s *itwatersrand %asin. And we also find copper deposits, which even our prelood ancestors must have utiliEed tocraft utensils and tools.

The Case o the 6,issing3 *eologic Timeby +r. Andrew A. &nelling on :une /, /006

'riginally published in Creation !$* no # +(une !--"/ #60#%.3raditional evolutionary geology maintains that the deposition of sediments to form ma=or rock layers often takes long periodsof time.9nce deposited, the

sedimentation period involvedis believed to have closed witha ma4or change in climateandSor uplift of the ocean floor to form a new land surface."here often then followed, it is

claimed, a lengthy time in which erosion of that land surface may have then removed large amounts of the previouslydeposited sediments. &uch an eroded surface should be evidenced by gullies, stream and river canyons and valleys, andsuch like at the top of each ma4or rock layer or layers."hen it is supposed a new climatic regime began andSor the landsubsided to again be covered by the ocean. "hus a new rock layer of perhaps an entirely different kind of sediment wasthen deposited. "his new layer would be expected to bury and preserve much of the previously eroded surface at theinterface between the lower rock layer and this newly deposited layer above.#n the *rand Canyon"herefore, this accepted scenario for earth history involves many uplifts and subsidences of land surfaces. &o where the

rock layers of the earth?s surface are exposed to view, as they are in the Grand Canyon of )orthern AriEona (&A$, wherethere are numerous different sedimentary rock layers laid down one upon another, there ought to be many buried erosionsurfaces found at the boundaries between the various individual rock layers. 8ndeed, the display on the Grand Canyon in theFuseum of )orthern AriEona in lagstaff diagrammatically shows how the land surface in the Grand Canyon area must havesubsided, been covered by the sea while sediments were being deposited, and then uplifted again with erosion taking place."his is depicted as happening at least five times during the development of the >, feet /,66 metres$ of horiEontalsedimentary rock layers now exposed in the walls of the Grand Canyon.Creationists do recogniEe significant erosionsurfaces between rock strata in the Grand Canyon, but unlike evolutionary geologists have concluded that these erosionbreaks do not represent large time breaks. 8ndeed, evolutionists currently assign more time to these erosion breaks, wherestrata may have been eroded away on these erosion surfaces and therefore are now missing, than to all the >, feet/,66 metres$ of horiEontal rock strata present in the Grand Canyon todayO*here erosion can clearly be seen to haveoccurred at these breaks between rock strata in the Grand Canyon, creationists maintain that the erosion was very rapid,facilitated in many cases by erosion occurring in soft, Nnonhardened? rock. Conse7uently, rather than having a land surfaceexposed for enormous periods of time after an ocean retreated, the same lood processes responsible for depositing thesedimentary layers were also capable of eroding significant thicknesses of both loose sediment and consolidated rock."he

nature of the debate concerning these socalled erosion breaks technically known as unconformities$ is brought into sharpfocus in statements made by representatives of each viewpoint. or example, +r. +avis Ioung, rofessor of Geology atCalvin College, Grand !apids, Fichigan, a Christian geologist who opposes the special creationSlood approach,writesKN"he presence of each unconformity is physical evidence that the Colorado lateau the area taking in the GrandCanyon$ experienced consolidation of sediments, uplift, and possibly gentle tilting, weathering of the uplifted surface to formsoil, and erosion by streams and wind before the sediments of the next formation rock layer$ were deposited. "here musthave been several of these episodes of consolidation, uplift, weathering, and erosionDa conclusion clearly at variance withthe theory that the sediments were deposited during a yearlong global flood. '/9n the other hand, +r. Ariel !oth, +irector of the Geoscience !esearch 8nstitute at oma inda (niversity, California, has writtenKN"he difficulty with the extended timeproposed for these gaps is that one cannot have deposition, nor can one have much erosion. *ith deposition, there is nogap, because sedimentation continues. *ith erosion, one would expect abundant channelling and the formation of deepgullies, canyons and valleysQ yet, the contacts are usually jnearly planar.j 9ver the long periods of time envisaged for theseprocesses, erosion would erode the underlying layers and much more. 9ne has difficulty envisaging little or nothing at allhappening for millions of years on the surface of our planet. "he gaps seem to suggest less time= "he assumed gaps in

the sedimentary layers witness to a past that was very different from the present. 8n many ways, that difference is readilyreconciled with catastrophic models such as the Global flood that proposes the relatively rapid deposition of these layers.? 6&igure 8. Grand Canyon in crosssection showing the names given to the different rock units by geologists.

The Redwall<,ua/ Contact9ne of the most dramatic of these so called erosional breaks inthe Grand Canyon strata is that between the !edwall imestoneand the Fuav imestone beneath see igure /$. "he !edwallimestone is assigned by evolutionary geologists to the socalledFississippian eriod or the ower Carboniferous to #uropeansand Australians$, said to have been 2/2@@ million yearsago,2 whereas the Fuav imestone is said to belong to the socalled Cambrian eriod, believed to be @/@B million yearsago.> "hat means that where the !edwall imestone restsdirectly on top of the Fuav imestone there is said to be a timegap of at least /@@ million years during which the land surfacewas supposed to have been exposed to the forces of weatheringand erosion.8n many parts of the Grand Canyon and upstream in FarbleCanyon there is a thin limestone layer known as the "emple%utte imestone lying at this socalled erosion surface betweenthe !edwall imestone and the Fuav imestone. "he boundary

between the !edwall and the "emple %utte is generally planar that is, Nflat? like the top of a table$, and the "emple %utte




https://answersingenesis.org/geology/rock-layers/the-case-of-the-missing-geologic-time/#fn_1
















imestone has been assigned by evolutionists to the (pper +evonian eriod, said to be 2@@ 2B@ million years ago.@ 9n theother hand, there is often good evidence of erosion, such as gullies and stream channels at the boundary between the"emple %utte and the Fuav, as depicted in igure / and illustrated in igure 6. )ote that there is an alleged time gapbetween the "emple %ulk and Fuav imestones of over /2@ million years during which the Fuav land surface is alleged tohave been exposed to those forces of erosion which made the channels and gullies. "his raises 7uestions as to why the"emple %utte imestone is in channels and gullies in the Fuav imestone in some places, is a thin bed with planar boundaries with both the !edwall imestone and Fuav imestone in other places, and yet is totally absent in many other places. #volutionists would of course argue that where the "emple %utte is absent it has been eroded away beforedeposition of the !edwall imestone.On the North @ai0a0 Trail

&igure 9. A channel eroded into the Fuav limestone and filledwith "emple %utte imestone. "he !edwall imestone can be

seen above the channelfilled "emple %utte imestone FarbleCanyon, upstream from Grand Canyon$.However, there is one place in the Canyon where diligentsearch has failed to find any evidence of erosion between the!edwall and Fuav imestones. "he supposed /@@ millionyears of geological time is not only Nmissing?, but appears tohave never existedO "he site is found on the )orth 3aibab "rail,which starts at hantom !ange on the Colorado !iver andclimbs northward up to the )orth !im of the Canyon. "he trailcrosses the boundary between the !edwall imestone and theFuav imestone, the spot being signposted by the )ationalark &ervice. "he sign readsK

An (nconformityN!ocks of 9rdovician and &ilurian eriods are missing in Grand

Canyon. "emple %utte imestone of +evonian age occurs in scattered pockets. !edwall imestone rests on these +evonianrocks or on Fuav imestone of much earlier Cambrian age.?"he sign also indicates by arrow that at this locality on the )orth 3aibab "rail the !edwall imestone lies directly on Fuavimestone, the "emple %utte imestone appearing to be absent.+r. Clifford %urdick was the first to point to the problems for evolutionists at this locality.J &ubse7uently, a team sponsored by the Creation !esearch &ociety visited the area in /01J toconduct investigations, and their report was published in the Creation !esearch &ociety Puarterly.B"hey concluded that thesupposed unconformity between !edwall imestone and Fuav imestone is not at all apparent when one attempts to tracethe contact along the )orth 3aibab "rail. 8ndeed, commencing from an area approximately / metres north of the )ationalark &ervice sign and investigating southwards about / metres past the sign, the two rock layers seemingly interfinger with one another. "heir findings are summariEed diagrammatically in igure 2.

Click on image to enlarge.&igure :. "he Contact between the !edwall imestone and the Fuav imestone on the )orth 3aibab "rail, Grand Canyon,as surveyed by *aisgerber, Howe and *illiams !eference B$.8f in fact this time break of more than /@@ million years hadoccurred between the deposition of the Fuav and !edwall imestones, during which time erosion had taken place includingthe deposition and removal of the "emple %utte imestone that appears at this boundary in other parts of the Grand

Canyon$, then some or all of the following features should be in evidenceKobvious erosion features incised into the top of the Fuav imestoneQboulders and cobbles of eroded Fuav imestone at the base of the !edwall imestoneQthe layering bedding$ in the Fuav imestone dipping at an angle to the layering in the overlying !edwall imestoneQthe layering in the Fuav imestone being somewhat more folded than the layering in the !edwall imestoneKmore complex 4oint systems developed in the Fuav imestone than in the !edwall imestoneQmore faulting that is, fracturing and displacement of the layering along fractures$ in the Fuav imestone than in the !edwallimestoneQ anda noticeable difference in the sedimentary material within each of the two limestones due to changes in theregional environments between the times of deposition of each of these two limestones.&o what is observed at the boundary between the Fuav and !edwall imestones on the )orth 3aibab "rail As shown inigure 2, below the signposted boundary layers of Fuav imestone occur within further layers of !edwall imestone, as wellas mottled Fuav imestone and a micabearing shale. urthermore, the interlayered micabearing shale. Fuav and !edwallimestones grade abruptly southwards into other layers which are obviously Fuav imestone, by descriptive definition, andwithout any telltale signs of faulting that would have meant the Fuav imestone had been Npushed? into that position. 9n the

contrary, not even one of the seven expected features listed above can be seen at this supposed boundary. 8nstead, theactual observational evidence in the field supports the contention that continuous deposition occurred as the !edwallimestone was deposited on top of the Fuav imestone, there being some interfingering and fluctuations during thepostulated Nchangeover? period. "here is no buried erosion surface evident, so the facts strongly suggest that the !edwallimestone was deposited immediately after, and about the same time as, the Fuav imestone. Conse7uently, at least /@@million years of geological time are Nmissing? at this location.%aled E/olutionary *eologists






https://cdn-assets.answersingenesis.org/img/articles/cm/v14/i3/Unconformity.gif






)ow if it is apparent from the observational evidence that there is no break here at all, then what have geologists said aboutthis boundary in the geological literature %eing on a longestablished, wellused trail which is signposted by the )ationalark &ervice, one would have expected that a lot has been written about this location in the geological literature. However,only a few scattered remarks and one closeup diagram can be easily located.*alcott in /111 wrote, concerning variousplaces where he saw !edwall imestone resting directly on what today is called the Fuav imestone, thatKN"he line of unconformity is slight and often none exists except to the eye of the geologists looking at that exact horiEon for it.?1)otice the frank admission that no unconformity exists except to the geologist who is looking for itDanother way of sayingthat often there is no unconformity at allO&chuchert claimed in /0/1 thatK N"he !edwall usually reposes disconformably onthe Fuav member of the "onto formation of Cambrian age=?0.)ote that a disconformable relationship exhibits many of theseven features listed previously, but none is evident here on the )orth 3aibab "rail.Fc3ee and Gutschick in /0J0/ merely 7uoted &toyanow?s /0>1 one sentence statementK

N"he overlap of the !edwall imestone on the Cambrian platform is well shown in the Grand Canyon sections.? //Fc3ee and Gutschick published a diagram of the )orth 3aibab Fuav!edwall contact showing a surface with wavyundulations, claiming that it was an Nunconformity? with an Nirregular wavy surface of Fuav imestone? having Nrelief of /6feet in areas of channelling?./6 Iet field observations made by *aisgerber, Howe, and *illiams indicate no such irregular wavy surface or chanelling relief ./2&ossil Dating at &ault8t would be very surprising if this !edwallFuav contact on the )orth 3aibab "rail has not been studied by other geologists.However, no other reference to this location can easily be found in the geological literature. &o why then do theseevolutionary geologists insist there is a time break between these two limestones of at least /@@ million years "he answer is, of course, that the !edwall and Fuav imestones have been dated according to the fossils they contain, which havealready been assigned an evolutionary age. +unbar and !odgers stateKN"he relative importance of a hiatus is immediately evident if the beds above and below bear fossils by which they can beassigned their proper position in the instances this is the final and the only criterion that gives 7uantitative results for thelarge unconformities. 8n the Grand Canyon walls, for example, where !edwall limestone can be dated as ower

Fississippian and the underlying Fuav limestone as Fiddle Cambrian, we know that the paraconformity Rthat is. thesuspected erosion surfaceDA.A.&.T represents more than three geologic periods, yet the physical evidence for the break isless obvious than for that which separates the "oroweap and the 3aibab limestones, both of which are Fiddle ermian.Fany large unconformities would never be suspected if it were not for such dating of the rocks above and below.? />&imilarly, )oble in /0/> experienced great difficulty trying to determine 4ust where the Cambrian strata stopped and theFississippian began in %ass Canyon a side canyon to Grand Canyon$ because fossil and rock data failed to suggest anunconformityKN%ecause of the lack of fossils and the failure to detect the line of erosion that would mark a division between the Fuavimestone and the !edwall in %ass Canyon it has been necessary to fix tentatively the base of the !edwall by means of lithology Rrock typeDA.A.&.T. "he Fuav imestone is here overlain by alternating layers of calcareous RlimebearingDA.A.&.Tsandstone and dense bluegrey crystalline limestone, which have a thickness of // feet. "hese layers are taken arbitrarilyas the base of the !edwall.?/@No *eological 6Ages31 Kust A *lo0al &lood8t is obvious that in %ass Canyon, as well as along the )orth 3aibab "rail, this contact line is not easily discerned. 8ndeed, if it wasn?t for the fossil content being interpreted as indicative of evolutionary ages, then line field evidence would

overwhelmingly indicate that at these locations in Grand Canyon deposition of the !edwall imestone followed immediatelyon from deposition of the Fuav imestone and thus at least /@@ million years of socalled geological time is Nmissing?,because it never occurredOurthermore, if this is the case in these two locations in Grand Canyon, that is, if there was nosignificant time break between deposition of the Fuav imestone and the !edwall imestone above it, then in those placesthroughout the rest of the Grand Canyon where the "emple %utte imestone occurs between the Fuav and the !edwall, the"emple %utte imestone must have been deposited rapidly. &imilarly, where there is evidence of erosion at the boundarybetween the Fuav and "emple %utte, and the "emple %utte and !edwall, elsewhere through the Grand Canyon, then theforces of erosion responsible must e7ually have been of short duration.N"hus the observational evidence firmly indicates thatat least /@@ million years of socalled geological time never happened, invalidating the evolutionists? whole concept of thegeological column and the evolutionary progression of life. 9n the other hand, this evidence confirms the conclusions of creationists that these breaks and boundaries between rock layers in Grand Canyon represent very little time at all, and insome cases continuous deposition, as would be expected of events during the yearlong lood.Acknowledgements8 am indebted to the 8nstitute for Creation !esearch for several opportunities to visit the Grand Canyon to study the strata

first hand. 8C! rofessor of Geology +r. &teve Austin has been of particular assistance, as has been his field guide, Grand Canyon/ Monument to Catastrophe 8C! ield &tudy "our Guidebook$, which 8 thoroughly recommend.

The &irst Atmos"here7*eological E/idences and Their #m"licationsby +r. Andrew A. &nelling on )ovember /, /01

'riginally published in Creation #* no $ +>ovember !-)6/ $&0%".5n E4 >ihilo +v#n#* ,ugust !-)6 Favid Fenner discussed the composition of the Earth2s primitive atmosphere as advocated by evolutionists.-e concluded that="he reason for the widespread adherence to the belief in a primitive reducing atmosphere, in spite of much evidence to thecontrary, is the same reason for which it was postulated. 8f you are to believe many of the theories of chemical evolution atall, you simply have to believe the #arth?s atmosphere was once radically different from its composition today.Fostgeologists accept the assertion that the early #arth had a reducing atmosphere. "he concept that the Archaean 6.2 billion

Arbitrary Geologic Iears A.G.Ir.2$ atmosphere contained practically no free oxygen has had its roots in the threefolddivision of the geological column based on abundance of macrofossilsK haneroEoic Cambrian to !ecent$, 9roteroEoic, and

Archaean. ack of obvious Archaean life has popularly been attributed to a hostile environment rich in toxic, reducedvolcanic gases. ack of Archaean sulfates and red beds has similarly been attributed to peculiar atmospheric andhydrospheric compositions. "hese arguments have been convincingly presented by scientists such as Cloud, /, 6 #rikssonand "ruswell,2 and &chidlowski.> "he strongest support for an oxygenpoor Archaean atmosphere came withHolland?s@ calculation of the maximum partial pressure of oxygen for uraninite (9 6$ stability, and his interpretation that the

Archaean uraninite placer deposits of the *itwatersrand, &outh Africa, and #lliot ake, Canada, could not have formedunder a significantly oxidiEing atmosphere. "his was followed by a variety of genetic models for the formation of the




















https://answersingenesis.org/age-of-the-earth/the-first-atmosphere-geological-evidences-and-their-implications/#fn_1



























ubi7uitous Archaean banded iron formations, such models depending upon an oxygenpoor atmosphere.J, B, 1, 0However,there is now substantial evidence against these interdependent concepts. +imroth and 3imberley/une7uivocally stateK8n general, we find no evidence in the sedimentary distributions of carbon, sulfur, uranium or iron, that an o4ygen0freeatmosphere has e4isted at any time during the span of geological history recorded in well preserved sedimentary rocksemphasis mine$.They went on to e!"lain that="he sedimentary distributions of carbon, sulfur, uranium, and ferric and ferrous iron depend greatly upon ambient oxygenpressure and should reflect any ma4or change in proportion of oxygen in the atmosphere or hydrosphere. "he similar distributions of these elements in sedimentary rocks of all ages are here interpreted to indicate the existence of arecambrian atmosphere containing much oxygen.Elsewhere88 they concluded=*e know of no evidence which proves ordersofmagnitude differences between Fiddle Archaean and subse7uent

atmospheric compositions, hydrospheric compositions, or total biomasses.&edimentary carbonDimroth and @im0erley8> ound that=9rganic carbon contents and distributions are similar in recambrian and Puaternary sedimentary rocks and sediments,although distributions in both would have been sensitive to variations in rates of organic productivity and atmosphericoxygen pressure.Car0on occurs in two ways in sedimentary rocks=aF within the carbonate radical of carbonate minerals, and0F in a myriad of organic compounds. "he latter is termed organic carbon and is the decay product of living matter. 8t isfound even in Archaean rocks.// 9rganic carbon compounds are found in virtually all well preserved shales and mudstonesof any age./ Abundant Archaean organic carbon is a residual product of photosynthetic oxygen production. Ficroorganismshave been reported from carbonaceous rocks of the ig "ree Group of &waEiland 2.> billion A.G.Ir. old$ /6 and bluegreenalgae remains occur in the 6.J billion A.G. Ir. old -eal !eef Carbon &eam of the *itwatersrand &e7uence./2 Archaean andower roteroEoic shales and mudstones sampled to date average .B wt W and /.J wt. W organic carbon

respectively./> "his compares with the average amount of .@ wt. W organic carbon in haneroEoic shales andmudstones./@urthermore the spatial pattern of ArchaeanDcarbon distribution does not differ in any obvious way from thatof the ate recambrian or haneroEoic.// "his rules out the possibility that Archaean sediments repeatedly survivedweathering and resedimentation cycles as a result of any postulated low rate of atmospheric oxygen production. An evenstronger argument against this recycling of organic carbon is the strong correlation, obvious in the field, between organiccarbon and pyrite e&6$ contents in all recambrian sedimentary rocks, particularly in Archaean rocks./ &ince diageneticpyrite formation depends upon the presence of readily metaboliEable organic compounds,/J it is clear that this organiccarbon was in organic matter not long dead at the time of deposition.)ot only is the mass distribution of carbon betweenorganic molecules and carbonate minerals relevant to atmospheric oxygen levels but also isotopic fractionation betweenthese two reservoirs./B 8n the hydrosphereatmosphere system comparable organic and carbonate carbon isotopic ratios insedimentary rocks of all ages would indicate a consent rate of separation between the two reservoirs, and hence anunchanging rate of free oxygen production. Available analyses indeed indicate constancy with time for the isotopic ratios of sedimentary carbonate and organic carbon./1, /0, 6, 6/ After discounting the effects of additional carbon supplied in volcanicemissions, +emroth and 3imberley/ still concluded thatK"he constancy of carbon isotopic fractionation in sedimentaryrocks is, in fact, an indication of relative constancy of freeoxygen production.And thus the composition of the Archaean

atmosphere was similar to that of the present day atmosphere.Sedimentary sulur @im0erley and Dimroth88 ound that="he distribution of sulfur in Archaean and roteroEoic rocks is similar to that in haneroEoic rocks of comparable type."he distribution of sulfur in recent sediments, like that of organic carbon, is largely a function of primary and diageneticredox reactions/J and is correspondingly sensitive to variations in atmospheric oxygen pressure. "here are two ma4or sources of sulfide sulfur in presentday sedimentsDseawater sulfate reduced bacterially and organic sulfur released duringdecayQ and two minor sourcesDvolcanically exhaled sulfur and detrital pyrite."he preservation potential of detrital pyrite inpresent day sedimentary environments is now being eliminated largely by biochemical oxidation and oxidative corrosion. 8na few cases, detrital pyrite may survive diagenesis, provided deposition is rapid and reducing biogenic conditions areestablished rapidly after deposition. %y contrast, pyrite should have been a consistent and important component of sediments deposited under a hypothetical oxygendeficient atmosphere. yrite is common in all source rocks but detritalpyrite is 4ust as rare in roteroEoic and Archaean sedimentary rocks as it is in present day sediments. Absence of pyrite frommany roteroEoic and Archaean sandstones, for instance, despite the common presence of the mineral in the source rocks,

is evidence for oxidation during transport andSor diagenesis.)art TwoFost sulfide sulfur in recent sediments has formed by the action of sulphatereducing bacteria and is closely associated withbituminous and carbonaceous shales. &edimentary pyrite is almost invariably closely associated with organic carbon insedimentary rocks of any age. &ome recambrian pyrite occurs as laminae like some of the recent diagenetic pyrite, /J butmuch is nodular, more obviously diagenetic. Carbonaceous snares and mudstones of all ages are richly pyritic and basalsandstones of all elastic se7uences are commonly cemented by pyrite.// yrite content increases linearly with increasingorganic carbon content in Archaean shales and mudstones, a similar relationship to that seen in sulfur and carboncontents./> "his consistency of the sulfide sulphurcarbonaceous shaleSmudstone association, which is so characteristic of recambrian as well as haneroEoic rock associations, is evident forKaF the continually abundant presence of sulfate in the oceans and0F the continual diagenetic bacterial reduction of that sulfate, since deposition of the earliest known recambriansediment./-olcanic exhalations generally include hydrogen sulfide gas. (nder present conditions most of the exhaled hydrogen sulfideis rapidly oxidiEed and precipitation of heavy metal sulfides occurs only under exceptional conditions. 8n the presence of atmospheric oxygen, the products of volcanic exhalation would have differed, particularly if it is assumed most of theprimordial ocean had been saturated with respect to siderite eC92$.B, 1, 0 All hydrogen sulfide exhaled by submarinevolcanos would have precipitated as iron sulfide close to the volcanic vents. -olcanoaenic sulfide deposits should be manyorders of magnitude more voluminous in recambrian volcanic se7uences than in haneroEoic volcanic se7uences, andthey should occur around all Archaean submarine volcanic centers. 8n fact, none of these or other inferred differencesbetween volcanogenic sulfide deposits of recambrian and haneroEoic age are consistently found. / Fassive sulfidedeposits certainly did not form around every Archaean volcanic center nor do Archaean sulfide deposits appear to be more
































































































voluminous than sulfide deposits in comparable haneroEoic volcanic belts. "he distribution of volcanic exhalation sulfidedeposits in Archaean terrains does not appear to differ substantially from the haneroEoic distribution, and the hypothesisthat the #arly recambrian primordial ocean was saturated with respect to siderite is similarly unsubstantiated. /&carcity of recambrian evaporites has been cited as evidence against substantial sulfate concentrations in sea water and an oxidiEingatmosphere. However, most Archaean sedimentary rocks are in se7uences which do not normally contain evaporites. Fost

Archaean sedimentation apparently occurred on tectonically active, steep slopes surrounding volcanic piles, a setting notconducive to evaporite deposition or preservation./ 9n the other hand, there is now abundant evidence that evaporiteswere present in many roteroEoic se7uences, for example, in )orthern Australia.66,62 &urvival of the actual evaporiteminerals is claimed to be rare in recambrian sediments because presently exposed rocks have been fairly close to thesurface since the end of recambrian time and have experienced prolonged groundwater flow. 8n conclusion, the apparentdisproportionate distribution of evaporites between Archaean, roteroEoic, and haneroEoic sedimentary se7uences cannotbe used as an argument in favor of a primitive reducing atmosphere.

Uranium9ne of the strongest arguments used to support the theory of a primitive reducing atmosphere is the character of uraniumdeposition, which is presumed to have changed with time, resulting in the apparent timerelated or timebound occurrence of the various types of uranium deposits.6>, 6@%ased on Holland?s@ calculation of the maximum partial pressure of oxygen for uraninite (96$ stability, it was concluded that the Archaean uraninite placer deposits of the *itwatersrand, &outh Africa and#lliot ake, Canada could not have formed under a significantly oxidiEing atmosphere. *hile controversy regarding theorigin of these two deposits has raged for many years, most geologists now accept the placer hypothesis whereby detritaluraninite was deposited in the 7uartE pebble conglomerates of alluvial fan or placer under reducing atmospheric conditions.8t is argued that because the uraninite appears to be detrital and only stable under reducing conditions, then atmosphericconditions, at the time of transport and deposition must have been reducing. 6@,6J However, the remarkable similaritybetween the subeconomic concentrations of detrital uraninite in the present day 8ndus -alley6B and that of the*itwatersrand, as well as other evidence, invalidates any such concept.8t would appear 7uite unnecessary to postulate areducing atmosphere for the transportation of detrital uraninite.61urthermore, 3imberley and +imroth/, // presentevidence against this placer hypothesis, comparing many of the characteristics of other ma4or uranium occurrences

undisputably deposited under oxygenrich atmospheric conditions to those of the *itwatersrand and #lliot ake ores. +irectevidence of mobility of uranium in solution has been found in uranitereplaced organisms within *itwatersrandores,60 which negates the case for a reducing atmosphere put by !obertson et al ,6@ as seen in the diagram.

6@+imroth and 3imberley concludeK

Although it is thermodynamically possiblethat this mobility could have occurred atexceedingly low oxygen pressures, it is morelikely that the carbonaceous replacementsindicate an oxygenic groundwater atmosphere system more like that atpresent./&imilarly &impson and%owles61 stateK"he retention of sulfate and uranyl ions insolution . . . suggests that the atmosphere

was oxidiEing at the time of deposition.8nreality, therefore, the distribution of uraniumdeposits within sediments of all ages hasnothing to do with changes in atmosphericconditions which were oxidiEing throughoutthe haneroEoic, roteroEoic and the

Archaean. !ather the distribution is dependent on the availability of uranium in the sediment source rocks."he high uraniumcontent of crystalline Archaean source rocks is the probable main reason for uranium concentrations in the ower roteroEoic, "ertiary mantles on uplifted, crystalline recambrian rocks like the &hirley %asin of *yoming are similarly rich instratiform deposits of uraninite.//Conclusion and im"lications+imroth and 3imberley/ concluded that the distributions of carbon, sulfur, uranium and iron in recambrian sedimentaryrocks are similar to those in haneroEoic sedimentary rocks, and that therefore the earth?s atmosphere has always beenoxidiEing. "his conclusion is devastating to all theories of chemical evolution which re7uire a reducing atmosphere, and it

has important implications for the creationflood model.irst and foremost the abundance of organic carbon in socalled Archaean and roteroEoic sedimentary rocks is initially surprising, but also suggests that these rocks, including manymetamorphic exsedimentary$ rocks, were also deposited during the lood. *e must remember that the geological columnand associated timescale is itself assumptive, so that flood geology need not be bound to the same depositional order of strata and certainly cannot adopt the same nomenclature and terminology. "hese organic carbonrich Archaean androteroEoic sedimentary rocks contain the remains of life, albeit microscopic life by the myriads, and algae, destroyed in thesame catastrophe as the invertebrates and vertebrates of the socalled haneroEoic. "he terms Archaean and roteroEoiconly place these rocks early within the evolutionary timescale, a position re4ected by flood geologists.&econdly, the similar distribution of carbon, sulfur, uranium and iron within sedimentary rocks of all uniformitarian geological ages is in fact morecompatible with the flood geology model in which all fossiliferous sedimentary rocks and associated strata were depositedduring the lood and since. %ecause the created atmosphere has always been oxygen rich in the Garden of #den as wellas during the lood$ it is to be expected that the nature and chemistry of the lood sediments would reflect this."hirdly, sincerecambrian sedimentary and metamorphic rocks contain globally important ore deposits these same ores were either deposited as an integral part of the enclosing sediments during the lood, or, as in the case of some uranium ores, formedduring or after the lood following deposition of the sediments which enclose them.inally, these conclusions andimplications are in direct conflict with the uniformitarian geological time scale. "his conflict is highlighted by the manyradiometric age dates for these rocks and ores particularly uranium ores$. *hat 8 am asserting is that all ma4or fossiliferousstrata, regardless of their geologic age, were deposited during the lood about @, years ago or conse7uent to it, and thatthe evidence is entirely consistent with this thesis.




























































T-E &OSS#' RECORD

Doesn3t the Order o &ossils in the Rock Record &a/or 'ong Ages5by +r. Andrew A. &nelling on &eptember 0, 6/Q last featured ebruary 6@, 6/>

3he fossil record is hardly Dthe record of lifein the geologic past that so many scientistsincorrectly espouse* assuming a long prehistory for the earth and life on it.&hop )owossils are the remains, traces, or imprints of plants or animals that have been preserved

in the earth?s nearsurface rock layers atsome time in the past./ 8n other words,

fossils are the remains of dead animals and plants that were buried in sedimentary layers that later hardened to rock strata.&o the fossil record is hardly Lthe record of life in the geologic pastM that so many scientists incorrectly espouse, 6 assuminga long prehistory for the earth and life on it. 8nstead, it is a record of the deathsof countless billions of animals and plants.

The &ossil Recordor many people, the fossil record is still believed to be Lexhibit AM for evolution. *hy %ecause most geologists insist thesedimentary rock layers were deposited gradually over vast eons of time during which animals lived, died, and then wereoccasionally buried and fossiliEed. &o when these fossiliEed animals and plants$ are found in the earth?s rock se7uences ina particular order of first appearance, such as animals without backbones invertebrates$ in lower layers followedprogressively upward by fish, then amphibians, reptiles, birds, and finally mammals e.g., in the Colorado lateau region of the (nited &tates$, it is concluded, and thus almost universally taught, that this must have been the order in which theseanimals evolved during those vast eons of time.However, in reality, it can only be dogmatically asserted that the fossil recordis the record of the order in which animals and plants were buried and fossiliEed. urthermore, the vast eons of time are

unproven and unproveable, being based on assumptions about how 7uickly sedimentary rock layers were deposited in theunobserved past. 8nstead, there is overwhelming evidence that most of the sedimentary rock layers were deposited rapidly.8ndeed, the impeccable state of preservation of most fossils re7uires the animals and plants to have been very rapidlyburied, virtually alive, by vast amounts of sediments before decay could destroy delicate details of their appearance andanatomy. "hus, if most sedimentary rock layers were deposited rapidly over a radically short period of time, say in acatastrophic global flood, then the animals and plants buried and fossiliEed in those rock layers may well have all lived atabout the same time and then have been rapidly buried progressively and se7uentially.urthermore, the one thing we canbe absolutely certain of is that when we find animals and plants fossiliEed together, they didn?t necessarily live together inthe same environment or even die together, but they certainly were buried together, because that?s how we observe themtodayO "his observational certainty is crucial to our understanding of the many claimed mass extinction events in the fossilrecord. )evertheless, there is also evidence in some instances that the fossils found buried together may represent animalsand plants that did once live together see later$.

,ass E!tinctions8n the present world, when all remaining living members of a particular type of animal die, that animal or plant$ is said tohave become extinct. Fost scientists incorrectly$ regard the fossil record as a record of life in the geologic past. &o, when in

the upward progression of strata the fossils of a particular type of animal or plant stop occurring in the record and there areno more fossils of that animal or plant in the strata above, or any living representatives of that animal or plant, mostscientists say that this particular creature went extinct many years ago. &adly, there are many animals and plants that areextinct, and we only know they once existed because of their fossiliEed remains in the geologic record. erhaps the mostobvious and famous example is the dinosaurs."here are distinctive levels in the fossil record where vast numbers of animalsand plants$ are believed to have become extinct. #volutionists claim that all these animals and plants$ must have died,been buried, and become extinct all at the same time. &ince this pattern is seen in the geologic record all around the globe,they call these distinctive levels in the fossil record mass extinctions. urthermore, because something must have happenedglobally to wipe out all those animals and plants$, the formation of these distinctive levels in the fossil record are calledmass extinction events. However, in the context of catastrophic deposition of the strata containing these fossils, this patternwould be a preserved conse7uence of the lood.)ow geologists have divided the geologic record into time periods,according to their belief in billions of years of elapsed time during which the sedimentary strata were deposited. "hus, thosesedimentary strata that were supposedly deposited during a particular time period are so grouped and named accordingly."his is the origin of names such as Cambrian, 9rdovician, &ilurian, +evonian, Carboniferous, ermian, "riassic, :urassic,

Cretaceous, and more."here are some /B mass extinction events in the fossil record recogniEed by geologists, from in thelate recambrian up until the late )eogene, L4ust before the dawn of written human history.M However, only eight of those areclassed as ma4or mass extinction eventsDend9rdovician, late+evonian, endermian, end"riassic, early:urassic, end:urassic, middleCretaceous, and endCretaceous. Fost people have probably heard about the endCretaceous massextinction event, because that?s when the dinosaurs are supposed to have been wiped out, along with about a 7uarter of allthe known families of animals. However, the endermian mass extinction event was even more catastrophic, because B@percent of amphibian families and 1 percent of reptile families were supposedly wiped out then, along with B@ to 0 percentof all preexisting species in the oceans.

Asteroid #m"acts and (olcanic Eru"tions&o what caused these mass extinction events #volutionary geologists are still debating the answer. "he populariEedexplanation for the endCretaceous mass extinction event is that an asteroid hit the earth, generating choking dust cloudsand giant tsunamis socalled tidal waves$ that decimated the globe and its climate, supposedly for a few million years. Alayer of clay containing a chemical signature of an asteroid is pointed to in several places around the globe as one piece of evidence, and the /6>mile 6 km$ wide Chicxulub impact crater in Fexico is regarded as Lthe scene of the crime.MHowever, at the same level in the geologic record are the massive remains of catastrophic outpourings of staggering7uantities of volcanic lavas over much of 8ndia, totally unlike any volcanic eruptions experienced in recent human history."he inatubo eruption in the hilippines in /00/ blasted enough dust into the atmosphere to circle the globe and cool thefollowing summer by /56VC, as well as gases which caused acid rain. Iet that eruption was only a tiny firecracker comparedto the massive, catastrophic 8ndian eruption. urthermore, volcanic dust has a similar chemical signature to that of anasteroid. 8nterestingly, even more enormous 7uantities of volcanic lavas are found in &iberia and coincide with the endermian mass extinction event.

The Creationists )ers"ecti/e



https://answersingenesis.org/fossils/fossil-record/doesnt-order-of-fossils-in-rock-favor-long-ages/#fn_1








*hat then should creationists make of these interpretations of the fossil and geologic evidence 9f course, we first need torecogniEe that both creationists and evolutionists start with presupposed assumptions, which they then use to interpret thepresently observed evidence. &o this difference of interpretations cannot be Lreligion vs. science,M as it is so oftenportrayed.urthermore, it needs to be noted that in the geologic record there are very thick se7uences of rock layers, foundbelow the main strata record containing prolific fossils, which are either totally devoid of fossils or only contain very rarefossils of microorganisms and minor invertebrates. 8n the creation framework of earth history, these strata would beclassified as creation and preflood. Also, a few fossils may also have been formed since the flood due to localiEed, residualcatastrophic depositional events, so flood geologists do not claim all fossils were formed during the flood.As already noted,the only dogmatic claim which can be made is that the geologic strata record the order in which animals and plants wereburied and fossiliEed. 8ndeed, fossiliEation under presentday conditions is exceedingly rare, so evolutionary geologistsapplying Lthe present is the key to the pastM have a real problem in explaining how the vast numbers of fossils in thegeologic record could have formed. "hus, the global destruction of all the prelood animals and plants by the yearlong

lood cataclysm alone makes sense of this fossil and geologic evidence though as noted above, a small percent of thegeological and fossil evidence is from postlood residual catastrophism$.8ndeed, not only did the animals and plants haveto be buried rapidly by huge masses of watertransported sediments to be fossiliEed, but the general vertical order of burialis also consistent with the flood. "he first fossils in the record are of marine animals exclusively, and it is only higher in thestrata that fossils of land animals are found, because the lood began in the ocean basins Lthe fountains of the great deepburst openM$ and the ocean waters then flooded over the continents. How else would there be marine fossils in sedimentarylayers stretching over large areas of the continents Added to this, Lthe floodgates of heavenM were simultaneously opened,and both volcanism and earth movements accompanied these upheavals.8n a global watery cataclysm, therefore, therewould be simultaneous wholesale destruction of animals and plants across the globe. "he tearing apart of the earth?s crustwould release stupendous outpourings of volcanic lavas on the continental scale found in the geologic record. "he resultantLwavesM of destruction are thus easily misinterpreted as mass extinction events, when these were 4ust stages of the single,yearlong, catastrophic global flood.8t is also significant that some fossiliEed animals and plants once thought to be extincthave in fact been found still alive, thus demonstrating the total unreliability of the evolutionary time scale. "he last fossiliEedcoelacanth a fish$ is supposedly J@ million years old, but coelacanths are still here, so where did they LhideM for J@ million

years "he *ollemi pine?s last fossil is supposedly /@ million years old, but identical living trees were found in /00>. "herecent burial and fossiliEation of these animals and plants, and the extinction of many other animals and plants, during thesingle flood thus makes better sense of all the fossil and geologic evidence.

Accounting or the Order o &ossils in the Rock Record#ven though the order of strata and the fossils contained in them sometimes extrapolated and interpolated$ has been madethe basis of the accepted millionsofyears system of geochronology and historical geology, the physical reality of the strataorder and the contained fossils is generally not in dispute. +etails of local strata se7uences have been carefully compiled byphysical observations during field work and via drillholes. Careful correlations of strata of the same rock types have thenbeen made between local areas and from region to region, often by physical means, so that the robustness of the overallfossil order and strata se7uence of the geologic record has been clearly established.8ndeed, it is now well recogniEed thatthere are at least six thick se7uences of fossilbearing sedimentary strata, known as megase7uences, which can be tracedright across the )orth American continent and beyond to other continents.2&uch globalscale deposition of sediment layerse.g., chalk and coal beds$ is, of course, totally inexplicable to uniformitarian longages$ geologists by the application of onlytoday?s slowandgradual geologic processes that only operate over local to regional scales. %ut it is powerful evidence of catastrophic deposition during the global flood. "hus, it is not the recogniEed order of the strata in the geologic record that is

in dispute, but rather the millionsofyears interpretation for the deposition of the sedimentary strata and their containedfossils.8t is true that the complete geologic record is hardly ever, if at all, found in any one place on the earth?s surface.(sually several or many of the strata in local se7uences are missing compared to the overall geologic record, but usuallyover a given region there is more complete preservation of the record via correlation and integration. However, 7uitecommonly there is little or no physical or physiographic evidence of the intervening period of erosion or nondeposition of the missing strata systems, suggesting that at such localities neither erosion nor deposition ever occurred there. Iet this isexactly what would be expected based on the creation account of the flood and its implications. 8n some areas onese7uence of sedimentary strata with their contained fossil assemblages would be deposited, and in other areas entirelydifferent strata se7uences would be deposited, depending on the source areas and directions of the water currentstransporting the sediments. &ome strata units would have been deposited over wider areas than others, with erosion insome areas but continuous deposition in others, even when intervening strata units were deposited elsewhere. "hus, as aresult of the complex interplay of currents, waves, and transported sediments with their entombed organisms, a variety of different types of sedimentary rocks and strata se7uences would have been laid down directly on the prelood stratase7uences and the crystalline basement that probably dates back to the creation itself. "hus the pattern of deposition of the

strata se7uences and their contained fossils is entirely consistent with the strata record the lood might be expected to haveproduced. 8n contrast, by using the present to interpret the past, evolutionary geologists have no more true scientificcertainty of their version of the unobservable, uni7ue historic events which they claim produced the geologicrecord.)evertheless, if the general order of the strata and their contained fossil assemblages is not generally in dispute,then that order in the strata se7uences still must reflect the geological processes and their timing responsible for theformation of the strata and their order. 8f, as is assiduously maintained here, the order in the fossil record does not representthe se7uence of the evolutionary development of life, then the fossil record must be explainable within the context of thetempo of geologic processes burying these organisms in the sediment layers during the global flood cataclysm. 8ndeed, boththe order of the strata and their contained fossils could well provide us with information about the prelood world, andevidence of the progress of different geological processes during the lood event. "here are a number of factors that havebeen suggested to explain the order in the fossil record in terms of the lood processes, rather than over the claimed longages.

)re<&lood %iogeogra"hy8f we look at today?s living biology, we find that across mountains such as the &ierra )evada of California, or in a trip fromthe &outh !im of the Grand Canyon down to the Colorado !iver, there are distinct plant and animal communities in differentlife or ecology Eones that are characteristic of the climates at different elevations. "hus, we observe cacti growing in desertEones and pines growing in alpine Eones rather than growing together. "herefore, 4ust as these lifeSecology Eones today canbe correlated globally all deserts around the world have similar plants and animals$, so too some fossil Eones and fossilcommunities may be correlated globally within the geologic record of the lood."hus it has been suggested that there couldwell have been distinct biological communities and ecological Eones in the prelood world that were spatially andgeographically separated from one another and that that were then se7uentially inundated, swept away, and buried as thelood waters rose. "his ecological Eonation model for the order of fossils in the geologic record > would argue that the lower







fossiliferous layers in the strata record must therefore represent the fossiliEation of biological communities at lower elevations and warmer climates, while higher layers in the geologic record must represent fossiliEation of biologicalcommunities that lived at higher elevations and thus cooler temperatures.%ased on the vertical and horiEontal distribution of certain fossil assemblages in the strata record, it has been concluded that the prelood biogeography consisted of distinctand uni7ue ecosystems which were destroyed by the lood and did not recover to become reestablished in the postloodworld of today. "hese include a floatingforest ecosystem consisting of uni7ue trees called lycopods of various siEes thatcontained large, hollow cavities in their trunks and branches and hollow rootlike rhiEomes, with associated similar plants. 8talso includes some uni7ue animals, mainly amphibians, that lived in these forests that floated on the surface of the prelood ocean.@ &patially and geographically separated and isolated from this floatingforest ecosystem were stromatolitereefs ad4acent to hydrothermal springs in the shallow waters of continental shelves making up a hydrothermalstromatolitereef ecosystem.J8n the warmer climates of the lowland areas of the prelood land surfaces, dinosaurs lived wheregymnosperm vegetation naked seed plants$ was abundant, while at high elevations inland in the hills and mountains where

the climate was cooler, mammals and humans lived among vegetation dominated by angiosperms flowering plants$.B "husthese gymnospermdinosaur and angiospermmammalman ecosystems or biomes$ were spatially and geographicallyseparated from one another on the prelood land surfaces. 8n chapter 6, the river coming out of the Garden of #den isdescribed as dividing into four rivers, which may imply the Garden of #den with its fruit trees and other angiosperms,mammals, and man$ was at a high point geographically, the rivers flowing downhill to the lowland swampy plains borderingthe shorelines where the gymnosperms grew and the dinosaurs lived. "his would explain why we don?t find human anddinosaur fossil remains together in the geologic record, dinosaurs and gymnosperms only fossiliEed together, andangiosperms only fossiliEed with mammals and man higher in the record separate from the dinosaurs and gymnosperms.8tcan therefore be argued that in a very general way the order of fossil LsuccessionM in the geologic record would reflect thesuccessive burial of these pre lood biological communities as the lood waters rose up onto the continents. "he loodbegan with the breaking up of the fountains of the great deep the breaking up of the prelood ocean floor$, so there wouldhave been a sudden surge of strong ocean currents and tsunamis picking up sediments from the ocean floor and movinglandward that would first of all have overwhelmed the stromatolite reefs in the shallow seas fringing the shorelines. "hisdestruction of the protected lagoons between the stromatolite reefs and the shorelines by these severe storms would have

then caused the strange animals that probably were uni7ue to these stromatolite reefs to be buried and thus preserved inthe lowermost lood strata directly overlaying the burial of the stromatolites.8ncreasing storms, tidal surges, and tsunamisgenerated by earth movements, earth7uakes, and volcanism on the ocean floor would have resulted in the progressivebreaking up of the floatingforest ecosystem on the ocean surface, and thus huge rafts of vegetation would have been sweptlandward to be beached with the sediment load on the land surfaces being inundated. "hus, the floatingforest vegetationwould have been buried higher in the strata record of the lood, well above the stromatolites and the strange animals thatlived with them. 9nly later, in the first /@ days of the lood, as the waters rose higher across the land surface, would thegymnospermdinosaurs ecosystem be first swept away and buried, followed later by the angiospermmammalmanecosystem that lived at higher elevations. eople would have continued to move to the highest ground to escape the risinglood waters, and so would not necessarily have been buried with the angiosperms and mammals. "hus the existence of these geographically separated distinct ecosystems in the prelood world could well explain this spatial separation andorder of fossiliEation in the geologic record of the lood.

Early %urial o ,arine Creatures"he vast ma4ority by number of fossils preserved in the strata record of the lood are the remains of shallowwater marineinvertebrates brachiopods, bivalves, gastropods, corals, graptolites, echinoderms, crustaceans, etc.$.1 8n the lowermost

fossiliferous strata Cambrian, 9rdovician, &ilurian, and +evonian$, the contained fossils are almost exclusively shallowwater marine invertebrates, with fish and amphibian fossils only appearing in progressively greater numbers in the higher strata.0 "he first fish fossils are found in 9rdovician strata, and in +evonian strata are found amphibians and the firstevidence of continentaltype flora. 8t is not until the Carboniferous Fississippian and ennsylvanian$ and ermian stratahigher in the geologic record that the first traces of land animals are encountered.%ecause the lood began in the oceanbasins with the breaking up of the fountains of the great deep, strong and destructive ocean currents were generated by theupheavals and moved swiftly landward, scouring the sediments on the ocean floor and carrying them and the organismsliving in, on, and near them. "hese currents and sediments reached the shallower continental shelves, where the shallowwater marine invertebrates lived in all their prolific diversity. (nable to escape, these organisms would have been sweptaway and buried in the sediment layers as they were dumped where the waters crashed onto the land surfaces beingprogressively inundated farther inland. As well as burying these shallowwater marine invertebrates, the sediments washedshoreward from the ocean basins would have progressively buried fish, then amphibians and reptiles living in lowland,swampy habitats, before eventually sweeping away the dinosaurs and burying them next, and finally at the highestelevations destroying and burying birds, mammals, and angiosperms.

-ydrodynamic Selecti/ity o ,o/ing 2ater Foving water hydrodynamically selects and sorts particles of similar siEes and shapes. "ogether with the effect of thespecific gravities of the respective organisms, this would have ensured deposition of the supposedly simple marineinvertebrates in the firstdeposited strata that are now deep in the geologic record of the lood. "he wellestablished LimpactlawM states that the settling velocity of large particles is independent of fluid viscosity, being directly proportional to thes7uare root of particle diameter, directly proportional to particle sphericity, and directly proportional to the difference betweenparticle and fluid density divided by fluid density./ Foving water, or moving particles in still water, exerts LdragM forces onimmersed bodies which depend on the above factors. articles in motion will tend to settle out in proportion mainly to their specific gravity or density$ and sphericity.8t is significant that the marine organisms fossiliEed in the earliest lood strata,such as the trilobites, brachiopods, etc., are very LstreamlinedM and 7uite dense. "he shells of these and most other marineinvertebrates are largely composed of calcium carbonate, calcium phosphate, and similar minerals which are 7uite heavyheavier than 7uartE, for example, the most common constituent of many sands and gravels$. "his factor alone would haveexerted a highly selective sorting action, not only tending to deposit the simpler that is, the most spherical andundifferentiated$ organisms first in the sediments as they were being deposited, but also tending to segregate particles of similar siEes and shapes. "hese could have thus formed distinct faunal Lstratigraphic horiEons,M with the complexity of structure of deposited organisms, even of similar kinds, increasing progressively upward in the accumulating sediments.8t is7uite possible that this could have been a ma4or process responsible for giving the fossil assemblages within the stratase7uences a superficial appearance of LevolutionM of similar organisms in the progressive succession upward in the geologicrecord. Generally, the sorting action of flowing water is 7uite efficient, and would definitely have separated the shells andother fossils in 4ust the fashion in which they are found, with certain fossils predominant in certain stratigraphic horiEons, andthe supposed complexity of such distinctive, socalled LindexM fossils increasing in at least a general way in a progressivese7uence upward through the strata of the geologic record of the lood.9f course, these very pronounced LsortingM powers





















of hydraulic action are really only valid generally, rather than universally. urthermore, local variations and peculiarities of turbulence, environment, sediment composition, etc., would be expected to cause local variations in the fossil assemblages,with even occasional heterogeneous combinations of sediments and fossils of a wide variety of shapes and siEes, 4ust as wefind in the complex geological record.8n any case, it needs to be emphasiEed that the socalled LtransitionalM fossil forms thatare true LintermediatesM in the strata se7uences between supposed ancestors and supposed descendants according to theevolutionary model are exceedingly rare, and are not found at all among the groups with the best fossil records shallowmarine invertebrates like mollusks and brachiopods$.// 8ndeed, even evolutionary researchers have found that thesuccessive fossil assemblages in the strata record invariably only show trivial differences between fossil organisms, thedifferent fossil groups with their distinctive body plans appearing abruptly in the record, and then essentially staying thesame stasis$ in the record./6

%eha/ior and -igher ,o0ility o the (erte0rates"here is another reason why it is totally reasonable to expect that vertebrates would be found fossiliEed higher in the

geologic record than the first invertebrates. 8ndeed, if vertebrates were to be ranked according to their likelihood of beingburied early in the fossil record, then we would expect oceanic fish to be buried first, since they live at the lowestelevation./2 However, in the ocean, the fish live in the water column and have great mobility, unlike the invertebrates thatlive on the ocean floor and have more restricted mobility, or are even attached to a substrate. "herefore, we would expectthe fish to only be buried and fossiliEed subse7uent to the first marine invertebrates.9f course, fish would have inhabitedwater at all different elevations in the prelood world, even up in mountain streams, as well as the lowland, swampyhabitats, but their ranking is based on where the first representatives of fish are likely to be buried. "hus it is hardlysurprising to find that the first vertebrates to be found in the fossil record, and then only sparingly, are in 9rdovician strata.&ubse7uently, fish fossils are found in profusion higher up in the +evonian strata, often in great Lfossil graveyards,Mindicating their violent burial.A second factor in the ranking of the likelihood of vertebrates being buried is how animals wouldreact to the lood. "he behavior of some animals is very rigid and stereotyped, so they prefer to stay where they are used toliving, and thus would have had little chance of escape. Adaptable animals would have recogniEed something was wrong,and thus made an effort to escape. ish are the least adaptable in their behavior, while amphibians come next, and then arefollowed by reptiles, birds, and lastly, the mammals."he third factor to be considered is the mobility of land vertebrates.

9nce they become aware of the need to escape, how capable would they then have been of running, swimming, flying, or even riding on floating debris Amphibians would have been the least mobile, with reptiles performing somewhat better, butnot being e7ual to the mammals? mobility, due largely to their low metabolic rates. However, birds, with their ability to fly,would have had the best expected mobility, even being able to find temporary refuge on floating debris."hese three factorswould tend to support each other. 8f they had worked against each other, then the order of vertebrates in the fossil recordwould be more difficult to explain. However, since they all do work together, it is realistic to suggest that the combination of these factors could have contributed significantly to producing the general se7uence we now observe in the fossil record.8ngeneral, therefore, the land animals and plants would be expected to have been caught somewhat later in the period of rising lood waters and buried in the sediments in much the same order as that found in the geologic record, asconventionally depicted in the standard geologic column. "hus, generally speaking, sediment beds burying marinevertebrates would be overlain by beds containing fossiliEed amphibians, then beds with reptile fossils, and, finally, bedscontaining fossils of birds and mammals. "his is essentially in the orderK8ncreasing mobility, and therefore increasing ability to postpone inundation and burialQ+ecreasing density and other hydrodynamic factors, which would tend to promote later burialQ and8ncreasing elevation of habitat and therefore time re7uired for the lood waters to rise and advance to overtake them.

"his order is essentially consistent with the implications account of the lood, and therefore it provides further circumstantialevidence of the veracity of that account. 9f course, there would have been many exceptions to this expected general order,both in terms of omissions and inversions, as the water currents waxed and waned, and their directions changed due toobstacles and obstructions as the land became increasingly submerged and more and more amphibians, reptiles, andmammals were overtaken by the waters.9ther factors must have been significant in influencing the time when many groupsof organisms met their demise. As the catastrophic destruction progressed, there would have been changes in the chemistryof seas and lakes from the mixing of fresh and salt water, and from contamination by leaching of other chemicals. #achspecies of a7uatic organism would have had its own physiological tolerance to these changes. "hus, there would have beena se7uence of mass mortalities of different groups as the water 7uality changed. Changes in the turbidity of the waters,pollution of the air by volcanic ash, andS or changes in air temperatures, would likely have had similar effects. &o whereasecological Eonation of the prelood world is a useful concept in explaining how the catastrophic processes during the loodwould have produced the order of fossils now seen in the geologic record, the reality was undoubtedly much more complex,due to many other factors.

Conclusions

8n no sense is it necessary to capitulate to the vociferous claim that the order in the fossil record is evidence of theprogressive organic evolution to today?s plants and animals through various transitional intermediary stages over millions of years from common ancestors. *hile there are underlying thick strata se7uences which are devoid of fossils and weretherefore formed during creation and the preflood era, most of the fossil record is a record of death and burial of animalsand plants during the flood, as described in the creation account, rather than being the order of a living succession thatsuffered the occasional mass extinction.Asteroid impacts and volcanic eruptions accompanied other geological processesthat catastrophically destroyed plants, animals, and people, and reshaped the earth?s surface during the lood event. !ather than re7uiring long ages, the order of fossils in the rock record can be accounted for by the yearlong lood, as a result of the prelood biogeography and ecological Eonation, the early burial of marine creatures, the hydrodynamic selectivity of moving water, and the behavior and higher mobility of the vertebrates. "hus, the order of the fossils in the rock recorddoesn?t favor long ages, but is consistent with the global, catastrophic, yearlong flood cataclysm, followed by localiEedresidual catastrophism.

Cincinnati7%uilt on a &ossil *ra/eyardby +r. Andrew A. &nelling on :uly /, 6//Q last featured )ovember /J, 6/>

Many of us go about our daily lives* going to work and back home* without realiing we live atop massive graveyards* oftencovering hundreds of s:uare miles. Cincinnati9the region where the Creation Museum was built9is =ust one such locale.&hop )ow

A dark and stormy night, a series of violent deaths, a mass grave later discovered by construction workers who unearthedpiles of dismembered body partsDit sounds like the makings of a gruesome detective story.



















"hese circumstances are repeated in various locales all over our planet, but we are oblivious to the mysteries that lie under our feet, waiting to be explored and explained."he Creation Fuseum, for example, was built on top of one of the most wellstocked and uni7uely wellpreserved LfossilgraveyardsM on the planet. ossil hunters from around the world travel here specifically to hunt for trilobites and other strange sea creatures found in these rock layers.8t?s easy to find these fossils in the exposed rocks along the banks of the 9hio !iver and its tributaries. %ut they are bestfound in road cuts along the interstate highways and along many side roads.&everal puEEles immediately strike even the most casual observer, begging for explanation.iles of Farine %ody artsD@ Files from the 9cean9ne puEEle is that these layers contain untold trillions and trillions of fossiliEed body parts, all belonging to creatures thatonce lived at the bottom of a shallow sea. *hat catastrophe ripped apart all these animals, and how did they end up in thecenter of the continent, @ miles 1 km$ from the nearest ocean

%efore we consider the possible answer, let?s look at the facts. "hese fossils came from a biEarre menagerie of mostlyextinct creatures that once filled the shallow seas. "hese were invertebrates creatures without backbones$. &cientists givethem strangesounding names, but many of them look very much like modern creatures, such as lampshells brachiopods$igure !$, lace corals bryoEoans$, and sea lilies crinoids$, along with trilobites./*hen you pick up broken limestone slabs on the roadside, you usually don?t see whole creatures.6 9ften all that is visible of the corallike bryoEoans are stacks of broken LstemsM igure " $. &imilarly, often all that is preserved of the sea liliescrinoids$ are the columnals LstemsM$ and small discs from these brokenup columnals igure #$. "he trilobites, too, aremostly found only as fragments.How did this 4umble of sea creatures end up in Cincinnati, far from the sea%roken and %uried &ea ife&ome sort of catastrophe destroyed the shallow sea communities where trillions and trillions of trilobites and other strangesea creatures once lived. "heir fossiliEed body parts are now found 4umbled together in exposed rocks all along Cincinnati?shighways as shown in the author?s photos below$.

8hotos courtesy Fr. ,ndrew nelling %RAC-#O)ODS igure /$ LampshellsM are sea animals with hard shells that were hinged at the rear. "he lood ripped theshells apart, burying piles of them in slabs of limestone. %R+OPOANS igure 6$ Lace coralsM were colonies of sea animalsthat lived together in connected modules, called Eooids. "he lood tore apart these colonies, leaving only piles of brokenLstemsM and Lbranches.M CR#NO#DS igure 2$ L&ea liliesM were animals that attached to the seafloor on long columns. "he

lood tore apart their bodies, leaving only piles of broken pieces of the stems, called Lcolumnals.M A Testimony to the Global !lood Catastrophe( "he dumping of such a vast number of body parts in one place isconsistent with a massive, violent catastrophe that destroyed these creatures? habitat and then rapidly buried their remainsin layer after layer of clay and lime muds.

All the secular fossil hunters who have investigated the Cincinnati fossil layers have come to the same conclusionDtheywere deposited under stormdominated conditionsO 8ndeed, their studies suggest that the layers were deposited when theCincinnati area was being repeatedly battered by hurricanes and severe storms. "hey say that the ocean had advancedover the )orth American continent from the northeast, burying this region underwater, 4ust offshore of the resultant coastline.%ut creationists have a more logical explanationAs the fountains of the deep broke up, hot magma rose to erupt on theseafloor and pushed the ocean water up and out. "he surging water destroyed the nearby seafloors and then rolled forwarduntil it rose over the continents, in wave after wave, depositing the remains of the different habitats as it went. 2, >"he fossils in the Cincinnati region are found in a series of rock layers labeled conventionally as upper 9rdovician. "helayers are relatively low in the fossil record, 4ust above the Cambrian also full of trilobites and other sea creatures$. "hislocation means that these creatures must have been among the first destroyed and buried by the lood. "he dinosaurs and

other land animals weren?t buried until later, which explains why we find them higher in the fossil record .@$"here is a general pattern to the fossil content, consistent with the order that creatures were likely buried. irst are smaller creatures that were attached to the seafloor, followed by larger and more mobile creatures.JCycles of "hin !ock ayers

Another puEEling feature, as you drive down Cincinnati?s roads, is the alternating se7uence of thin limestone followed by thinshale beds, stacked right on top of one another igure $$. "he beds of limestone are made of lime muds that cementedtogether the remains of sea creatures, while the beds of shale are made of softer clay muds from the seafloor and haveweathered away.

https://answersingenesis.org/fossils/fossil-record/cincinnati-built-on-a-fossil-graveyard/#fn_1


















Catastrophic &torms at &eaHow did this 4umble of sea creatures ever end up in Cincinnati, far from the sea ossil experts agree that a series of oceanstorms ripped apart these creatures? homes. As the turbulent waves advanced over portions of the continent?s interior, theyrapidly buried these animals? remains in layer after layer of clay and lime muds.

8hoto courtesy Fr. ,ndrew nelling &#*URE D9n Cincinnati?s roadsides you will see alternating thin layersof limestone the hard rock protruding from the wall$ and shale softer,eroded layers$ from theairview ormation$.Conse7uently many slabs of limestone have broken off and fallen alongthe roadsides. "hese slabs are covered with fossils, making the roadsidesideal locations to collect fossils.

Iou find some interesting patterns as you investigate these layers. *ithinthe lowest layers, collectively known as the 3ope ormation, the shalebeds average B.@ inches /0 cm$ thick and account for almost three7uarters of the volume of rock. "he limestone layers average 6.@ inches Jcm$ in thickness and account for most of the remaining volume. &o itappears that most of these lower layers consist of clay muds, with someanimals.

8n the airview ormation, which is the next set of layers, the limestone beds comprise about half the thickness of theformation. "he beds at this level are slightly thicker than the 3ope beds, averaging 2 inches 1 cm$. "hey are also moreclosely spaced. "his is what you would expect to find, as creatures struggled to dig out of the initial deposits but eventuallysuccumbed to the continually rising mud deposits.#ven the casual observer can see this cyclic pattern of limestone and shale layers. &everal detailed studies have confirmedthe regularity of this pattern, although some disagree over the interpretation of details of the depositional cycles.Testimony to Colossal $torms during the !lood( +espite the differences about the details, all the secular investigators

have come to the same basic conclusionDthese alternating limestone and shale beds were deposited as colossal stormsbattered the coastline of )orth America, which was largely underwater."he conventional argument is that the rising and falling water levels sent water over the continent, depositing limestone andshale layers over millions of years, particularly as the storm surges waxed and waned. %ut contrary to this interpretation,there is evidence that strong water currents were flowing over these sediment deposits as would have occurred if the wholeearth were underwater, leaving telltale signs like megaripples, which are visible today."his stormwinnowing process could also explain the variations in fossil content. &torms sweeping across the ocean floor would LuprootM the brachiopods, bryoEoans, and crinoids and then bury them as debris in the accumulating sediment layers."hese conditions and processes would be expected during the global catastrophic lood described in the &criptures. "hethin alternating coarsegrained limestone and finegrained shale layers could be deposited 7uickly under such catastrophicconditions. 9n a smaller scale, a volcanic eruption at Ft. &t. Helens in /01 deposited a 6@foot bed of volcanic ashDwithlots and lots of alternating coarse and fine layersDin less than a day./6&urvey of Ficrobial Composition and Fechanisms of iving &tromatolites of the %ahamas and AustraliaK +eveloping

Criteria to Determine the %iogenicity o &ossil Stromatolites

by +r. Andrew A. &nelling and +r. Georgia urdom on +ecember /1, 6/2

Abstract A stromatolite is typically defined as alaminated and lithified structure that is theresult of microbial activity over the course of time. ossil stromatolites are relativelyabundantQ however, modern livingstromatolites are rare. "wo wellstudiedexamples of living stromatolites includethose found in the #xuma Cays of the

%ahamas and &hark %ay in Australia. +epending on dominant chemical reactions by bacteria and environmental conditions,accretion and lithification of the stromatolite occurs at intervals. #ach layer or lamina of a stromatolite represents a former surface mat of bacteria. As long as cyanobacteria or other phototrophs$ coloniEe the top surface of the stromatolite, growth

is likely to continue. (nderstanding microbial composition and mechanisms of living stromatolites is crucial to determiningthe biogenicity of fossil stromatolites. Although there is a paucity of fossiliEed bacteria in fossil stromatolites, their structuralfeatures closely resemble those of living stromatolites. A set of criteria from the study of living and fossil stromatolites hasbeen developed to aid determination of the biogenicity of fossil stromatolites. 8t was concluded that there is now sufficientevidence for the biogenicity of many stromatolites, even as early as 2.@ Ga, so these need to be understood within thecreationists framework of earth history. +iscernment of genuine stromatolites in the geologic record may help determineboundaries between Creation, preflood and flood strata. 8n addition, understanding how various living stromatolites form indifferent environments provides insight into the prelood environments in which fossil stromatolites grew.@eywords= iving stromatolites, fossil stromatolites, biogenicity, cyanobacteria, endolithic, heterotrophic, lithification,lamination, calcium carbonate, accretion, precipitation, mineraliEation, organomineraliEation, #xuma Cays, Hamelin ool,extrapolymeric substance #&$, sulfate reducing bacteria &!%$, recambrian strata, lood strata, microfossils, Creation,prelood era"his paper was originally published in the roceedings of the &eventh 8nternational Conference on Creationism 6/2$ andis reproduced here with the permission of the Creation &cience ellowship of ittsburgh.

8ntroduction&tromatolite definitions, although varied, typically refer to an organosedimentary laminated and lithified structure producedby sediment trapping, binding, andSor precipitation as a result of the growth and metabolic activity of microorganisms,principally cyanobacteria and heterotrophic bacteria over the course of time Chivas et al. /00Q !eid et al. /00@Q -isscher etal. /001Q apineau et al., 6@$. "he word stromatolite comes from the Greek stromat meaning to spread outand lithos meaning stone !iding, 6$. ossil stromatolites, though sparse in the geologic record, are nevertheless




https://answersingenesis.org/bios/georgia-purdom/





https://answersingenesis.org/bios/georgia-purdom/




relatively abundant in terms of the number of occurrences &emikhatov < !aaben /00JQ GrotEinger < 3noll /000Q &chopf,6>$Q however, modern living stromatolites are rare.

Although by definition stromatolites are biogenic, some scientists have 7uestioned whether these structures are exclusivelybiogenic and might instead be the result of abiogenic mechanisms owe /00>Q Hladil, 6@Q %rasier et al., 6J$.(nderstanding microbial composition and mechanisms of living stromatolites is crucial to determining the biogenicity of fossil stromatolites. ossil stromatolites have been found mainly in Archean 2@56@ Fa$ and roteroEoic 6@5@>/Fa$ strata, with comparatively minuscule numbers in haneroEoic @>/ Fa5resent$ strata Gradstein et al., 6/6$.Geologists and paleontologists have 7uestioned the biogenicity of the oldest Archean stromatolites due to the difficulties of identifying signatures of life, such as microfossils, in rock layers that are dated to 2.@ billion years old Awramik < Grey,6@$. or scientists believing in an earth that is >.@ billion years old, a biogenic origin for early Archean stromatolites isproblematic because it leaves only a scant one billion years for the evolution of cyanobacteria and their ma4or metabolicprocess of photosynthesis from nonlife Awramik < Grey, 6@$.

"he biogenicity of fossil stromatolites is also problematic for creationists. &tromatolites are believed to form over extendedperiods of time from hundreds to thousands of years. Archean strata likely represent rocks &nelling, 60$, so how canstromatolites that evidently take long periods of time to form be present in rocks that were created in less than a weekroteroEoic strata likely represent late Creation and prelood era rocks &nelling, 60$ and would have formed over aperiod of approximately /J@ years. "he biogenicity of roteroEoic stromatolites is typically not 7uestioned even within thesecular scientific community Hofmann et al. /000$. &tructurally there seems to be little difference between Archean androteroEoic stromatolites Awarmik < Grey, 6@$, leading to the potential conclusion that if roteroEoic stromatolites arebiogenic, then so are Archean stromatolites.ossil stromatolites in haneroEoic strata are also potentially problematic for creationists because those strata are believedto have formed very rapidly during the global flood &nelling, 60$. Again, how could structures that appear to take longperiods of time to grow form over the course of a year Could the nature and pattern of occurrence of fossil stromatolites beuseful in determining the preloodSloodSpostlood boundaries&tudying living stromatolites is absolutely essential to determining the biogenicity of fossil stromatolites and understandinghow such structures form and grow. "he microstructure of living stromatolites closely resembles that of fossil stromatolites

although there is a paucity of fossiliEed bacteria in fossil stromatolites$ !eid et al. /00@Q -isscher et al. /001$. "hus livingstromatolites are potentially a good model for developing criteria to determine the biogenicity of fossil stromatolites."he purpose of this study is to develop a set of criteria from the study of living and genuine fossil stromatolites to aiddetermination of the biogenicity of other fossil stromatolites. +iscernment of genuine stromatolites in the geologic recordmay help determine boundaries between creation , preflood and flood strata. 8n addition, understanding how various livingstromatolites form in different environments provides insights into the prelood environments in which fossil stromatolitesgrew.&urvey of iving &tromatolites&tromatolites consist of LguildsM of bacteria that perform different functions, such that the end metabolic products producedby one bacterial guild provide the starting metabolic products for a different guild -isscher < &tolE, 6@Q +upraE et al.,60$. "his distribution of functions benefits the microbial community and effectively builds the stromatolite. Ficrobialcomposition varies, but typically consists of three ma4or bacterial typesDcyanobacteria, heterotrophic bacteria, andendolithic cyanobacteria %aumgartner et al., 60Q apineau et al., 6@Q Goh et al., 60Q Allen et al., 60$.Cyanobacteria are active in photosynthesis and play a ma4or role in the overall growth of the stromatolite. Fetabolicactivities of heterotrophic bacteria create conditions in con4unction with environmental factors$ that result in the precipitation

and mineraliEation of calcium carbonate leading to lithification of the stromatolite. #ndolithic cyanobacteria bore throughsand grains of the stromatolite welding together grains and stabiliEing the structure of the stromatolite.

ithification the process of sediments becoming solid rock$ resultsdirectly from microbial activity performed mainly by heterotrophicbacteria in con4unction with environmental factors$ +upraE < -isscher,6@$. However, cyanobacteria are responsible for accretion addition$of sediment through the trapping and binding of sand grains +upraE <-isscher, 6@$. Ficrobial activity consists of a complex set of chemicalreactions that result in both the dissolution and precipitation of calciumcarbonate +upraE < -isscher, 6@$. *hen metabolic processes resultin net precipitationSmineraliEation of calcium carbonate, lithificationoccurs +upraE < -isscher, 6@$.

&igure 8. Fap of #xuma Cays, %ahamas. Arrows point to locations of

stromatolites. !eprinted from igure /, -isscher et al., /001.+epending on dominant chemical reactions by bacteria andenvironmental factors, accretion and lithification of the stromatoliteoccurs at intervals +upraE et al., 60$. #ach layer or lamina of astromatolite represents a former surface mat of bacteria !eid et al.,6$. As long as cyanobacteria or other phototrophs$ coloniEe the top

surface of the stromatolite, growth is likely to continue !eid et al., 6$. Although several studies have been done toestimate the growth rate of stromatolites, no consensus has been reached. However, most living stromatolites areconsidered to be no more than several thousand years old Facintyre et al. /00JQ :ahnert < Collins, 6/6$.or the purpose of developing criteria to determine the biogenicity of fossil stromatolites, we will examine two of the mostwidely studied living stromatolitesDthose in the #xuma Cays, %ahamas and Hamelin ool in &hark %ay, Australia.#xuma Cays, %ahamas"he #xuma Cays consist of more than 2J islands or cays. &tromatolites grow in an open marine, normal salineenvironment in subtidal and intertidal areas !eid et al. /00@$ of fringing reefs of the #xuma Cays -isscher et al. /001$igure /$."he dominant morphology of %ahamian stromatolites is columnar with heights ranging from a few centimeters to 6.@ metersAndres < !eid, 6J$ igure 6$.



&igure 9. Columnar %ahamian stromatolites. &iEe range of stromatolites in photo is .6@ to .@ m. !eprinted from late >D/d, !eid et al., /[email protected] are typically thought of as the main microbialcontributor to %ahamian stromatolite formation. However, a richdiversity of microbes is necessary for stromatolite growth andlithification.&tromatolites alternate between periods of active sedimentaccretion and sediment hiatus no accretion and lithification$!eid et al., 6$. "hree types of surface mats with varyingmicrobial compositions are associated with stromatolites. "ype /

is associated with periods of sediment accretion and "ypes 6 and2 are associated with sediment hiatus !eid et al., 6$. "hedominant bacterial species discovered in %ahamian stromatolitesbelong to the following groupsK Cyanobacteria, %acteroidetesheterotrophic bacteria$, roteobacteria heterotrophic bacteria$and lanctomycetes heterotrophic bacteria$ %aumgartner et al.,60$ "able /$.Ta0le 8. !epresentation of cyanobacteria, heterotrophic bacteria,archaea, and eukaryotes from the three ma4or types of %ahamian

stromatolites and surrounding seawater based on se7uence comparisons to known bacteria. !eprinted and adapted from"able 2, %aumgartner et al., 60.ercentage of &e7uences in ibrary

"ype / "ype 6 "ype 2 *ater

%acteria [email protected] 00.6 [email protected] /.

8roteobacteria >/.2 @B.> @6.1 JJ.6

,lphaproteobacteria 26./a >0. >/.1 @J.2

Feltaproteobacteria 2.6 J.> J.

Gammaproteobacteria J. 6. @./ 0.0

8lanctomycetes />.2 //.6 /2.> /.>b

Cyanobacteria /.2 />.2 0.0 />./

1acteroidetes /B.@ B.Jc J.d /J.0

Chlorofle4i 6.> 6.> @.B /.> pirochaetes 6.> .1 6.1

Lerrucomicrobia 6.> 6.> .0

,ctinobacteria 6.> .2

irmicutes .> /.6 .2

Chlorobi .0

Feferribacteres .1

9ther %acteria 6. /.6 6.1

,rchaea total .1 /.>

Eukarya total >.> 6.1

ootnotes are used to denote differences between libraries found to be significant by pairwise comparison with isher?sexact testKa. ,lphaproteobacteria are less abundant in "ype / mats than in either "ype 6 mats .6$ or water samples.2$.b. 8lanctomycetes are less abundant in water samples than in either "ype / ./6$, 6 .1J$, or "ype 2./B$ mats.c. 1acteroidetes are less abundant in "ype 6 than in "ype / mats .//$.d. 1acteroidetes are less abundant in "ype 2 mats than in either "ype / mats ./$ or water samples .@J$.



oster et al. 60$ analyEed cyanobacteria from a variety of stromatolite types and showed that several of the filamentouscyanobacteria identified exhibited gliding motility in response tolight phototaxis$. "his characteristic of cyanobacteria is vitalfollowing burial of stromatolites by sand or other sediment as thebacteria can move to the surface to capture sunlight necessaryfor photosynthesis and continued growth of the stromatolite."ype / mats are typically caramel colored or light green and are.@5/ mm thick &tolE et al., 60$. "hese mats exhibit the leastmicrobial diversity with filamentous cyanobacteria as the ma4or microbial component. chiothri4 gebeleinii was thought to be thedominant cyanobacteria in %ahamian stromatolites from

morphological studies$Q however, genetic analysis of +)Alibraries derived from %ahamian stromatolites showedno chiothri4 +)A was present %aumgartner et al., 60$."hese stromatolites appear to harbor many novel species of cyanobacteria based on se7uence analyses %aumgartner et al.,60$."ype 6 mats are white or graygreen, mucilaginous due toabundant amounts of extracellular polymeric substance #&$produced by bacteria$, somewhat brittle and flaky due to thinmicritic crusts consisting of calcium carbonate crystals _> m indiameter$, and are 65/ m thick &tolE et al., 60$. "heyharbor a wide variety of heterotrophic bacteria %aumgartner etal., 60$."ype 2 mats are white or graygreen, crusty and hard due to

micritic crust formation$ and are @5/ m thick &tolE et al.,60$. "he ma4or microbial component of these mats is anendolithic coccoid cyanobacteria recogniEed by morphological

studies to be olentia sp. and yella sp. &tolE et al., 60$. As mentioned previously, different mat types are associated with periods of sediment accretion "ype /$ and hiatal intervals

"ypes 6 and 2$. Fat types have also been shownto alternate with the seasons. "ype / is commonyear round, "ype 6 is nearly absent in spring andwinter but common in summer and fall and "ype 2is present year round but more common in springand winter &tolE et al., 60$."he influence of these environmental factors for mat types, and thus formation of stromatolites,has implications to rapidly changing andfluctuating conditions that were present during

creation and during and after the lood. "heeffects of perturbations, such as those mimickinglood conditions, are potentially testable sincestromatolites can be grown in a lab environmentHavemann < oster, 61$.Hamelin ool, &hark %ay, Australia

&igure :. Fap of Hamelin ool, &hark %ay, Australia. &tromatolites are found in subtidal andintertidal areas near the borders of the pool.!eprinted from igure /, :ahnert < Collins, 6/6.Hamelin ool is a shallow, hypersalineembayment that is separated by a grass bankfrom the rest of &hark %ay on the *estern

Australian coast !eid et al., 62$ igure 2$.High evaporation levels and reduced flow of seawater into Hamelin ool make the salinitytwice that of normal seawater Goh et al., 6J$.&tromatolites are found in both intertidal andsubtidal areas covering approximately / km of shoreline !eid et al., 62$."hey have a wide range of morphologiesincluding columnar, club, spheroidal, domal, andellipsoidal apineau et al., 6@Q :ahnert <Collins, 6/6$ igure >$. Faximum height isapproximately /.@ m :ahnert < Collins, 6/6$.



&igure . Hamelin ool stromatolites at low tide. &tromatolites in photo are approximately > cm high. !eprinted from late>@, igure /a, !eid et al., 62.

Ficrobial composition of Hamelin ool stromatolites shares manysimilarities to that of %ahamian stromatolites despite differences in their external environments. Genetic analyses of microbial diversity in Hamelinool stromatolites have been conducted comparing differentmorphological types macroscopic structure$ of stromatolites versusmicrobial diversity among individual mat types as with %ahamianstromatolites Allen et al., 60$. "he reason is that Hamelin oolstromatolites do not consist of specific mat types associated with dominantbacterial groups :ahnert < Collins, 6/6$ igure @$.However, macroscopically Hamelin ool stromatolites still have a laminar

appearance.

&igure B. roposed se7uence of Hamelin ool stromatolite formation Apioneer community to +climax community$.+espite the lack of localiEation of particular bacterial populations in Hamelin ool stromatolites, many similarities to%ahamian stromatolites can be found. A is similar in microbial composition to a "ype / mat in %ahamian stromatolites due tothe abundance of cyanobacteria on the top surface. % and C are similar to a "ype 6 mat in %ahamian stromatolites due tomicritic crust formation. + is similar to a "ype 2 mat in %ahamian stromatolites due to the formation of aragonite infilledboreholes. !eprinted from igure /J A5+, :ahnert < Collins, 6/6.

"he dominant bacterial species discovered in thesestromatolites belong to the following groupsKroteobacteria, lanctomycetes, Actinobacteriaheterotrophic bacteria$, and %acteroidetes apineau etal., 6@Q Goh et al., 60Q Allen et al., 60$. Fost of thegroups are the same as those found in %ahamian

stromatolites, although individual species may differ between them "able / and igure J$. or example, Microcoleus sp. is the dominant cyanobacteria incontrast to chiothri4 andSor novel cyanobacteria that aredominant in %ahamian stromatolites Allen et al., 60$.9ne of the main microbial contributors appears to beanoxygenic phototrophs like those belonging to theroteobacteria group apineau et al., 6@$. Anoxygenicphotosynthesis does not result in the production of oxygenand is likely beneficial for the metabolism of heterotrophicbacteria that also play a ma4or role in the formation of stromatolites. Halophilic archaea are also found inHamelin ool stromatolites and comprise about /W of the microbial community Goh et al., 60$. As with%ahamian stromatolites, Hamelin ool stromatolites

harbor many novel species of bacteria. or example, anovel halophilic archaea, alococcus hamelinensis, hasbeen identified Goh et al., 6J$.

&igure . Ficrobial diversity of Hamelin ool stromatolites. A pustular mat$ and % smooth mat$ represent differentmorphological types of stromatolites. !eprinted from igure 2, Allen et al., 60.

!ole of Ficrobial Fetabolic Activity in the ormation of &tromatolitesFetabolic activities will bediscussed in relation to %ahamianstromatolites as extensiveresearch has been published inthis area. Ficrobial composition

of both %ahamian and Hamelinool stromatolites is similar, thusmetabolic activities of themicroorganisms are also likelysimilar even if the organiEation of the microorganisms is different.

&igure . Cycling of bacterialcommunities in %ahamianstromatolites resulting in theformation of "ype / a5b$, 6 c5e$, and 2 f5g$ mats resulting inF and stabiliEation of thestromatolite over time. !eprintedfrom igure 6, !eid et al., 6.Fetabolic activities of microorganisms in the threedifferent mat types result ingrowth of the stromatolite throughthe processes of precipitation,mineraliEation, and subse7uentlithification abbreviated F for



the sake of brevity$. #nvironmental factors also play a role and these will be discussed below.$ A cycling process of mattypes occurs at the surface of the stromatolite in relation to seasons and sedimentation rates. "ype / mats represent pioneer communities that coloniEe the stromatolite surface during periods of sediment accretion !eid et al., 6$ igures B and 1$."ype 6 mats represent a biofilm community that coloniEes the stromatolite surface during sediment hiatus !eid et al., 6$igures B and 1$. F in "ype 6 mats results in the formation of micritic crusts.

&igure G. Cross section of "ype/ mat A, %$, "ype 6 mat C, +$,and "ype 2 mat #, $. A, C, and# are stereomicroscope imagesand %, +, and are lightmicroscope images. Arrow in C

is pointing to the micritiEed crustformed as a result of themetabolic activity of abundantheterotrophic bacteria in thismat type. Arrow in # is pointingto fused sediment grains due tothe boring activity of endolithicbacteria forming boreholes thatare subse7uently infilled.!eprinted from igure / a5f,%aumgartner et al., 60rolonged periods of sediment

hiatus result in "ype 2 mats representing a climax community that coloniEes the stromatolite surface !eid et al., 6$igures B and 1$. F in "ype 2 mats results from the welding or fusing together of sand grains that help stabiliEe the

stromatolite. *hen sedimentation increases again and a "ype / mat dominates the surface, "ype 6 and 2 mats now belowthe surface$ are still metabolically active and continue to lithify, and thus stabiliEe the stromatolite -isscher et al. /001$.

&igure H. Crosssection of %ahamian stromatolite showing laminations. C brackets a "ype / mat on the surface of thestromatolite. F with arrow points to micritic crust associated with a former surface "ype 6 mat. brackets a former surface

"ype 2 mat with endolithic bacteria. !eprinted from igure 6 A and %, -isscher < &tolE, 6@.

&igure 8>. Crosssection of Hamelin ool stromatolite showing laminations. !eprinted from late @6, igure /a, !eid et al.,62.9ver time this cycling of surface mats gives the stromatolite a laminated appearance, with each lamina representing aformer surface mat this is also true for Hamelin ool stromatolites$ igures 0 and /$. %oth %ahamian and Hamelin oolstromatolites are believed to grow less than a millimeter a year :ahnert < Collins, 6/6$. 8f the periodicity of the laminationcould be determined then age estimates could be made for living stromatolites. Although the oldest living stromatolites arenot considered to be more than a few thousand years old Facintyre et al. /00JQ Chivas et al. /00$, the periodicity of lamina formation is highly variable. "his also lessens the possibility of determining the time period necessary to formancientSfossil stromatolites. However, it seems possible that stromatolite formation could occur rapidly under certain

environmental conditions that may lend support to their rapid formation duringcreation and the flood.hotosynthesis and aerobic respiration are the dominant metabolic activities of "ype / mats -isscher < &tolE, 6@$. Cyanobacteria perform photosynthesis

and actively fix carbon dioxide using light energy with the end result being theformation of various sugars. "hese sugars polysaccharides$ are secreted incopious amounts from the bacteria and form the extrapolymeric substance #&$!iding, 6$. #& composes the mucilaginous sheaths surrounding individualcyanobacteria. #& is mucuslike or LstickyM and aids in bacterial attachment tosubstrates, protection, and nutrient absorption !iding, 6$. #& also trapscalcium ions and sediments. hotosynthesis and concomitant geochemical

reactions in the #& lead to net calcium carbonate precipitation -isscher < &tolE, 6@$ igure //$.



&igure 88. Chemical reactions resulting in calcium carbonate precipitation in "ype / mats. !eprinted from !eaction /,-isscher et al., /001.Heterotrophic bacteria perform aerobic respiration and metaboliEe some of the #& formed by the cyanobacteria -isscher < &tolE 6@$. Fetabolism of #& and concomitant geochemical reactions cause dissolution of the calcium carbonate-isscher < &tolE, 6@$ igure /6$. "here is little to no net calcium carbonate precipitation in "ype / mats due to thebalance of calcium carbonate precipitation and dissolution -isscher < &tolE, 6@$.

&igure 89. Chemical reactions resulting in calcium carbonatedissolution in "ype / mats. !eprinted from !eaction 6, -isscher et al.,/001.&ulfate reduction is the dominant metabolic activity of heterotrophic

bacteria in "ype 6 mats. &ulfate reducing bacteria &!%$ 7uicklydegrade the copious amounts of #& formed by cyanobacteria in both"ype / and 6 mats$ as their carbon and energy source.&ince "ype 6 mats usually form on top of "ype / mats during a sediment

hiatus this rich resource is readily available to them. #& degradation also releases calcium +upraE < -isscher, 6@$.Fetabolism of #& by &!% and concomitant geochemical reactions cause net precipitation of calcium carbonate +upraE etal., 60$ igure /2$. -isscher et al. 6$ showed that sulfate reduction is directly correlated with calcium carbonateprecipitation and the formation of micritic crusts in stromatolites.

&igure 8:. Chemical reactions resulting in calcium carbonateprecipitation in "ype 6 mats. !eprinted from !eaction 2, -isscher et al., /001.ithification could be viewed as disadvantageous tomicroorganisms as they essentially become entombed in rock.

However, there are advantages. 8n nutrient poor environmentssuch as the open marine environment of the %ahamianstromatolites, this entombment essentially seals in nutrients andprotects microorganisms from eukaryotic predators -isscher <&tolE 6@$. Another advantage comes from sulfate reduction

and other reactions that result in calcium carbonate precipitation. "hese reactions result in the release of protons H $ thatform a proton gradient across the bacterial cell membrane see previous e7uations$. "his generates a proton motive forcethat can be used by the bacteria for energy generation and other cellular processes FcConnaughey < *helan /00B$. "hecommunity of microorganisms working together in their respective LguildsM builds and lithifies the stromatolite for thepurposes of protection, nutrition, and energy formation allowing microorganisms to survive in very harsh environments.

&igure 8. ight micrograph of %ahamian stromatolite. Arrow / points to themicritic crust. Arrow 6 points to a truncated micritiEed sand grain due tomicroboring. Arrow 2 points to fused or welded micritiEed sand grains that arebelieved to stabiliEe the stromatolite. !eprinted from igure 2, Facintyre et al.,

6.&ulfate reduction is the dominant metabolic activity by heterotrophic bacteria in"ype 2 mats !eid et al. 6$ igure /2$. "his activity is closely associatedwith the boring activity of the endolithiccyanobacteria olentia sp. olentia bore through sand grains that have beendeposited during periods of sediment accretion previous surface "ype / mats$igures /> and /@$. "he endolithic cyanobacteria leave behind abundantamounts of #& that are then metaboliEed by heterotrophic bacteria, mainly&!%, in the boreholes !eid et al. 6$. "his results in calcium carbonateprecipitation and the formation of micritiEed sand grains Facintyre et al.

6$. "he calcium carbonate is typically in the form of aragonite needles that are clearly visible in the infilled boreholesFacintyre et al. 6 and !eid et al. 6$. "he metabolic activity of the heterotrophs and subse7uent precipitation isprogressive as the cyanobacteria bore through the sand grains Facintyre et al. 6$."he micritiEed sand grains become welded together as olentia crosses between grains Facintyre et al. 6$ igures />

and /@$. %oring, fusing and infilling are also observed in Hamelin ool stromatolites Goh et al. 60Q :ahnert < Collins6/6$. !ather than boring being a destructive process it is actually a constructive, stabiliEing, and preserving process due tothe infilling and welding that accompanies the boring Facintyre et al. 6$.

&igure 8B. &canning electron micrograph of Hamelin oolstromatolite showing welding of micritiEed sand grains. Arrow pointsto infilled borehole that crosses the fusion point between the grains.!eprinted from late >1, igure /c, !eid et al., 62.!ole of #nvironmental actors in the ormation of &tromatolitesFetabolic activities of microorganisms are important factors indetermining F but environmental factors also play a role. Acombination of both intrinsic and extrinsic factors leads toprecipitation and mineraliEation resulting in lithification of thestromatolite.

Although varied terminology is used to categoriEe factors leading tomineraliEation in stromatolites, we will use that of +upraE et al. 60$as it is the most comprehensive. +upraE et al. 60, p. />>$ uses theterm organomineraliEationsensu lato to refer Lto the process of mineral precipitation on an organic matrix, which is not genetically

organiEed.M 9rganomineraliEation s.l. can be divided into two subcategoriesDbiologically induced mineraliEation andbiologically influenced mineraliEation +upraE et al. 60$ igure /J$. *right and 9ren 6@$ using the terms active



precipitation biologically induced$ and passive precipitation biologically influenced$ suggest a similar division of mineraliEation processes.

&igure 8. Classification of different types of biologically relevant mineraliEation. 9rganomineraliEation sensu stricto isrepresented in the first column on the left not discussed in this paper$ and organomineraliEation sensu lato is represented inthe middle column and column on the right. !eprinted and adapted from igure 6, +upraE et al., 60.%iologically induced mineraliEation is the direct result of microbial metabolism changing the forms and balance of organiccarbon i.e. C96 and carbohydrates$ leading to conditions that result in calcium carbonate precipitation +upraE et al. 60$igure /J$, and was discussed in the previous section. %iologically influenced mineraliEation consists of environmentalfactors that are extrinsic to the microorganisms +upraE et al. 60$ igure /B$. "he socalled Lalkalinity engineM determinescarbonate alkalinity and is a ma4or factor determining calcium carbonate precipitation. 8t is influenced by both intrinsic andextrinsic factors +upraE et al. 60$ igure /B$. 8ntrinsic factors come from the microorganisms themselves see previoussection$. "wo ma4or extrinsic factors are evaporation of water leading to the formation of evaporites and C9 6 degassing



+upraE et al. 60$ igure /B$. #vaporites are salt deposits that can be composed of carbonate precipitates +upraE et al.60$.

&igure 8. #ffect of intrinsic and extrinsic factors on the alkalinity engine resulting in calcium carbonate precipitation andmineraliEation of the organic matrix mainly composed of the extracellular polymeric substance #&$. !eprinted from igure>, +upraE et al., 60.C96 degassing removal$ causes a shift that favors calcium carbonate precipitation +upraE et al. 60$.

%oth biologically induced and biologically influenced processes worktogether to create microenvironments that favor precipitation of calciumcarbonate. 8nterestingly, normal seawater is supersaturated in relation to

calcium carbonate CaC92$ and dolomite Ca,FgC92$6$ and therefore should spontaneously precipitate out of solution*right < 9ren 6@$. "his is commonly referred to as the Ldolomite problem.M *right and 9ren 6@$ point out that certainkinetic barriers i.e. the high enthalpy of hydration of the Fg 6 and Ca6ions$ are in place to prevent the spontaneousprecipitation of calcium carbonate. 8n the stromatolite it is believed that &!% remove these kinetic barriers and saturate thearea around the cells with respect to carbonate *right < 9ren 6@$. "his coupled with the release of calcium from thedegradation of #& again mainly by &!%$ and the Lalkalinity engineM increasing calcium carbonate alkalinity results in amicroenvironment that is favorable to calcium carbonate and dolomite precipitation.

Another aspect of the stromatolite microenvironment that mediates precipitation and mineraliEation is the organic matrixconsisting mainly of the #& secreted by cyanobacteria$. "he #& serves as a template or scaffold on which precipitationnucleates begins$ and grows +upraE et al. 60$ igure /1$. "he #& matrix is replaced with small carbonatenanospherulites that are the result of precipitation and serve as a nucleation point for further crystal growth +upraE et al.60$.



&igure 8G. #ffect of biologically induced and biologically influenced mineraliEation on the organomineraliEation of the #&.!eprinted from igure J, +upraE et al., 60."he organomineraliEation of the #& is affected by biologically induced and biologically influenced factors +upraE et al.60$ igure /1$. As discussed previously, the #& is degraded by &!% freeing calcium. 8n addition, the area in andaround the #& is supersaturated with respect to calcium thus favoring calcium carbonate precipitation +upraE et al. 60$igure /1$.+istinctive calcium carbonate mineralogies associated with organomineraliEation and typically not inorganic processes$ are

aragonite, calcite, monohydrocalcite, vaterite, and high Fgcalcite to Cadolomite +upraE et al. 60$. 3awaguchi and+echo 66$ found abundant aragonite needles embedded in the #& matrix. +istinctive crystal morphologies associatedwith organomineraliEation and not inorganic processes$ are smooth rhombs, needles, dumbbells, spherulites, andnanometer spheroids +upraE et al. 60$ igure /J$. "hese mineralogies and crystal morphologies are abundant instromatolites indicating again the necessity of microorganisms and biological activity for the formation and lithification of stromatolites.(nderstanding the processes of precipitation and mineraliEation resulting in lithification in living stromatolites is essential todevelop criteria to determine the biogenicity of fossil stromatolites. or example, precipitation and mineraliEation occur as a



result of degradation and modification of the amorphous #&. &ince precipitation and mineraliEation are not directlyassociated with bacterial structures such as cyanobacterial sheaths$ it may greatly diminish the number of microfossilsassociated with fossil stromatolites. "herefore, the absence of microfossils in fossil stromatolites is not necessarily anindicator that abiogenic processes formed them.+eveloping Criteria to +etermine the %iogenecity of ossil &tromatolitesGiven the general absence of microbial fossils within most fossil stromatolitic structures, it clearly is difficult, and perhapsimpossible, to prove beyond 7uestion that the vast ma4ority of reported fossil stromatolites, even those of the roteroEoic,are assuredly biogenic. Iet the roteroEoic stromatolites are so widespread and abundant 1 taxa in more than Jstromatolitic rock units are known worldwide RAltermann 6>T$, and their biological interpretation now seems to be firmlybacked by studies of microbial communities cellularly preserved in roteroEoic cherty stromatolites e.g., Fendelson <&chopf /006Q &chopf et al. 6@$, so that many stromatolite workers believe that most are products of biological activity.

&igure 8H. &tromatolitecontaining Archean geologic units, the check marks denoting occurrences of conical stromatolites

after &chopf 6J$.8n the Archean rock record, the problem of proving the biogenicity of such structures presents a greater challenge, duechiefly to the paucity of exposed Archean sedimentary strata found only in the ilbara Craton of *estern Australia and the%arberton Greenstone %elt of &outh Africa and &waEiland$ and the correspondingly small number of known occurrences of stromatolites >1 thus far$ and preserved microbial assemblages igure /0$ &chopf et al. 6B$. )evertheless, Archeanstromatolites are now established to have been more abundant and decidedly more diverse than was appreciated even afew years agoD> morphotypes in fourteen Archean rock units Hofmann 6Q &chopf 6J$. -irtually all such structuresthat have been reported have also been studied in detail in roteroEoic stromatolites. "hus the interpretation of thebiogenicity of Archean forms, and the differentiation of such structures from abiotic lookalikes, is based on the same criteriaas those applied to stromatolites of documented biogenicity in the younger recambrian including analyses of their laminar microstructure, morphogenesis, mineralogy, diagenetic alteration, and moreDe.g., %uick et al. /01/Q *alter /012Q Hofmann6$. All >1 occurrences of Archean stromatolites are regarded by those who reported them as meeting the biologycentered definition for stromatolites.9thers have also similarly studied living stromatolites in order to establish criteria for determining the biogenicity of fossil

stromatolites. "heir rationale, like ours, is that the characteristics observed in living stromatolites would be expected to befound in fossil stromatolites. 8n the geologic record there are of course nonstromatolitic rocks that contain the samebacterial body microfossils as found in some fossil stromatolites, so that begs the 7uestion as to whether the bacterial bodymicrofossils always indicate a genetic connection between the bacteria that left the microfossils and the sedimentary andstromatolite structures. &o there will always be a measure of sub4ectivity in using any list of criteria. )evertheless, the finaldecision as to whether a fossil stromatolite is of biogenic origin will likely be determined on whether most of the identificationcriteria have been satisfied. Certainly, the presence of bacterial body microfossils in a fossil stromatolite has been regardedas logically desirable for it to be classed as of biogenic origin.



3nown living stromatolites generally consist of carbonate sandsiEed particles that have micritic laminae and crusts,whereas recambrian fossil stromatolites generally consist of only very finegrained micrite calcium carbonate mud crystals_> microns in diameter$ !iding 6$. *hile this difference could be used to 7uestion the biogenicity of the recambrianstromatolites, it should be remembered that this difference is reflected in a comparable difference between the compositionand constituents of modern and recambrian sediments. 8ndeed, micritic textures are uncommon in most modernenvironments not 4ust stromatolite environments$, whereas micritic textures are common in most fossil sediments not 4ustin stromatolites$."here have thus been numerous recent attempts to establish a set of criteria by which the biogenicity of fossil stromatolitesmay be determined, and these are now supported by appropriate diagnostic techni7ues GrotEinger < 3noll /000Q Altermann6>, 61Q &chopf 6>, 6JQ Awramik < Grey 6@Q &chopf et al. 6BQ )offke 60$. 9ur study of living stromatolites,and the work done by others to establish the biogenicity of various fossil stromatolites, has been used to assess andcompile the following set of criteria. Among the crucial criteria for a fossil stromatolite to be of biogenic origin it mustK

&how a preferred orientation to the bedding of the sedimentary layer it is inQ&how evidence of having been formed penecontemporaneously and synchronously with the sediment in the bed in which itis found, such as the layering within the fossil stromatolite consists of mineral grains that also constitute a ma4or componentof the sediments in the host bedQ%e found in sedimentary rocks from the appropriate apparent depositional paleoenvironment, such as laminated limestonescomposed of lime silts, and cherts characteristic of peritidal and evaporitic carbonate environmentsQ%e morphologically similar to living stromatolites in terms of the shape and geometry of its laminae having continuity acrossother structuresQHave present within its laminae fossiliEed microbes with morphology appropriate siEe and shape$ consistent with microbesfound in modern counterpartsQHave associated microbial fossils that have the chemical composition of carbonaceous kerogen and not graphite$Q andHave associated microbial fossils that have a carbon isotopic signature which matches the modern organisms with thatmorphology.

A systematic examination of fossil stromatolites applying these criteria to determine which are biogenic and which are not

&nelling, in prep.$ is beyond the space and scope of this study. or our present purpose, having determined the suitablecriteria to establish the biogenicity of fossil stromatolites, it will suffice to show that a sufficient number of Archean fossilstromatolites, including some of the oldest recogniEed occurrences, have been reasonably established as of biogenic origin."hose Archean fossil stromatolites of biogenic origin then are critical in understanding all fossil stromatolites of biogenicorigin in the creationflood framework of earth history see below$.

&igure 9>. Carbon isotopic values of carbonateand organic carbon measured in bulk samples of the seven oldest microfossiliferous units knownafter &trauss < Foore /006Q &chopf 6>$."he fossil stromatolites of the 2>0J Fa +resser ormation in the ilbara Craton of *estern

Australia$ are the oldest known igure /0$, andyet they have been established to be of biogenicorigin due to their associated microfossils.

urthermore, these associated microbial fossilshave the chemical composition of carbonaceouskerogen and have a carbon isotopic signaturewhich matches similar modern microbes &trauss< Foore /006Q &chopf 6>$ igure 6$, thusfulfilling criteria @5B above. "hen in the case of the Archean 2>2 Fa &trelley ool chert also inthe ilbara Craton of *estern Australia$ igure/0$ a variety of fossil stromatolite morphotypesoccur together in a pattern consistent with aninterpreted stromatolitic reef ecosystem Allwoodet al. 6J, 6B$. &o coupled with the presenceof associated fossiliEed microbes wellestablishedby the chemical composition of the kerogen and

their carbon isotopic signature igure 6$, both of which are diagnostic &chopf 6>, 6JQ &chopf et al. 6B$, thebiogenicity of these Archean stromatolites would seem to be very firmly established.Conical structures have been recorded in seventeen of the >1 units listed in igure /0 Hofmann 6Q &chopf 6J$.resent in more than onethird of these deposits, notably including the 2>2 Fa &trelley ool chert Hofmann et al. /000Q

Allwood et al. 6J, 6B$ and the 3romberg ormation in the %arberton Greenstone %elt of &outh Africa and &waEiland$Hofmann 6$, such coniform stromatolites appear to constitute a special case, distinctive structures evidently re7uiringfor their formation both highly motile microbial mat builders and penecontemporaneous mineral precipitation GrotEinger <3noll /000Q Hofmann et al. /000Q &chopf 6J$. "hus, Archean conical stromatolites, especially the conical structures foundin the stromatolitic reef of the &trelley ool chert, that can only have been produced by matbuilding microbes because of there being no known sedimentological way of mimicking them, makes the biogenicity of these Archean fossiliEedstromatolites seem almost certain.or some time stromatolite researchers thought that the microstructure of stromatolites was definitive for determining their biogenicity until more and more abiotic processes were found to create more and more stromatolitelooking textures owe/00>Q GrotEinger and !othman /00JQ Hladil 6@Q %rasier et al. 6J$. As a result, microstructures as a single crucialcriterion for the biogenicity of stromatolites have become less and less persuasive, and so they should be considered nondefinitive. However, as noted earlier, since precipitation and mineraliEation are not directly associated with bacterialstructures such as cyanobacterial sheaths$ it may greatly diminish the number of microfossils associated with fossilstromatolites, and therefore the absence of microfossils in fossil stromatolites is not necessarily an indicator that abiogenicprocesses formed them. "hus the similarity in microstructures between modern stromatolites and recambrian fossilstromatolites can still be a useful guide to gauge whether a fossil stromatolite warrants further investigation to findassociated fossil microbes that might then help establish its biogenicity.



"here is still the problem though of establishing a causal link between the microfossils found in fossil stromatolites and thebuilding of the stromatolites themselves. 8nstead of the associated fossil microbes being the builders of the fossilstromatolites that enclose them, it could be argued that the original microbes were trapped in the stromatolite structureswhen they were being built by abiotic sedimentary processes. )evertheless, the overall morphology shape and siEe$ of thestromatolites themselves, rather than 4ust their internal microstructures e.g. laminations$, can still be a useful criterion for establishing the biogenicity of fossil stromatolites. or example, *ise and &nelling 6@$ described a fossiliEed stromatolitereef in the )eoproteroEoic 3wagunt ormation of the eastern Grand Canyon, consisting of in situ grown stromatolites sidebyside, and they concluded that these stromatolites were of biogenic origin. "hey did not see the need to demonstrate anycausal link between the microfossils also found in the enclosing sediments and the stromatolites in this fossiliEed reef,because the morphology of the stromatolites and their relationship to one another in the reef were sufficient to establish thebiogenicity of these stromatolites. *ellestablished microfossil and stromatolite associations are found throughoutroteroEoic rock se7uences, and again, while a causal relationship is difficult to establish, the biogenic origin of most

roteroEoic stromatolites by microbial mat activity is not 7uestioned, due to the morphology of the stromatolites in their sedimentary contexts being comparatively similar to modern living stromatolites, even though today?s microbial matbuildersare often not identical to the fossil microbes sometimes found associated with the fossil stromatolites."hus the listed criteria are not individually diagnostic of the biogenicity of fossil stromatolites. However, collectively they haveenabled the likelihood of the biogenicity of many recambrian stromatolites to be established. "his process has beenenhanced by the availability of newer technology to detect, identify and analyEe the microbial fossils being found associatedwith an increasing number of fossil stromatolites &chopf 6>Q &chopf et al. 6@Q &chopf 6J$. Iet even though there arestill many recambrian fossil stromatolites whose biogenicity is thus far not firmly established, the fact that several of theoldest Archean fossil stromatolites have had their biogenicity wellestablished means that our efforts to understand andplace recambrian fossil stromatolites within the creation framework of earth history is not dependent on establishing thebiogenicity of every recambrian fossil stromatolite.Understanding &ossil Stromatolites in the creation<lood &ramework&ince the biogenicity of many Archean stromatolites has now been well established in the relevant literature, it is importantto grapple with how and where they fit within the creation framework of earth history. Added to that is the compelling

evidence of stromatolitic reefs that grew in place due to microbial activity as far back as 2>2 Fa in the conventionalgeologic timescale. *ise and &nelling 6@$ discussed the options for when recambrian fossil stromatolites may haveformed and under what conditions. However, in the case of a given stromatolite all three could be true a created fossil core,an initially created living stromatolite structure, and subse7uent postcreation growth$. urthermore, the creation of a Lfullyfunctioning entityM would seem, almost by definition to have involved the creation of a fossil core and allowed for postcreation growth. "hese thus do not seem to be mutually exclusive possibilities.#ach of these options has its difficulties. 8s it reasonable to assume that Archean stromatolite reef would have been createdin fossil form 8f such a fossil stromatolites are already created in fossil form, logically it could be postulated that all thefossils are created as they are. *here then in the geologic record would the fossils have changed from those directlycreated , to those produced by living creatures being buried and fossiliEed Iet at some point this must seriously beconsidered as a possibility in the youngearth creationist model."he second logical possibility is that the stromatolites were created alive as fully functioning entities and then they wereburied subse7uently by ongoing sedimentary processes. However, given that above the earliest Archean 2.@ Ga$ fossilstromatolites in the *estern Australian +resser ormation there is a very thick and extensive recambrian rock se7uencethat also contains fossil stromatolites, including stromatolite reef structures spanning from other early Archean stromatolites

through to those in the )eoproteroEoic Allwood et al. 6J, 6BQ *ise < &nelling 6@$, at what point in this strata record,the first fully functional living stromatolites were created 8f only the earliest fossil stromatolites are created , those in thelower Archean rock units, then it might be argued that all those fossil stromatolites in the overlying rock units in these thickrecambrian rock se7uences would have to have formed by LnormalM secondary natural$ processes, which would seem tore7uire an enormous timespan. "hen again, there is the likelihood that some or even many$ of those overlying sedimentswere formed by reworking of previous sediments, and thus the stromatolites could similarly be reworked."he third logical possibility is that the matbuilding microbes were only created , and they then built the first stromatolites thatwere then buried and fossiliEed in the +resser ormation. "his possibility is only a small modification of the secondpossibility 4ust discussed, with a small step back in time to be created 4ust the matbuilding microbes rather than thecomplete stromatolites in a fully functioning reef. "his possibility then re7uires an enormous timespan for all the subse7uentstromatolites and stromatolite reefs fossiliEed in the thick overlying recambrian rock se7uences to grow and then be buriedand fossiliEed, andSor be reworked."he choice between these options therefore would seem somewhat arbitrary, since a case could be argued for each. %ut thedifficulty of deciphering at what point in the fossil record is the boundary between the created fossils and then the fossils

which formed from creatures that lived and were subse7uently buried would seem to rule out the first option. &ince thesecond and third options are closely similar, a fully developed completed entities are created that appear to have beenproduced according to human experience$ by secondary processes ,then it might be considered reasonable to start with theworking hypothesis that the first stromatolites are created as fully functioning living entities. "his also makes good sense, inthat when the soil were created on the land surface the microbes would have also be created in the soil that are part of thatfully functioning ecosystem i.e. as part of the entity they are created in$.8n the creation geologic model of earth history proposed by &nelling 60$ it is postulated that the earliest rocks of thegeologic record were created and put in place along with the earth?s fundamental internal structure. *e are not told whatwas under those globecovering waters of those first two days, so we can propose the possibility of the first rocks makingthe earth?s earliest crust, which may have even included marine sediments covering a crystalline basement. (nder a globalocean today one would expect marine sediments covering the ocean floor, and in shallower areas these sediments would becarbonates, even containing microbes. &o if fully functioning entities were created then it is reasonable to postulate that thefirst fully functioning stromatolites could have been created with matbuilding microbes, 7uite likely even includingstromatolite reefs, with the sediments blanketing the global ocean floor. "his is consistent with creating creating soilmicrobes in the soils .8f the gathering of the waters covering the earth into one place and formed the dry land, such actions re7uired catastrophicearth movements to create and uplift a supercontinent. As the supercontinent breached the global ocean, the waterscovering the emerging supercontinent were swept aside, and as they drained away they catastrophically eroded thatemerging land surface. "he sediments carried by those retreating waters in this LGreat !egressionM would have beendeposited at the margins of the supercontinent, with diminishing 7uantities being spread thinly over the ocean floors aroundthe rest of the globe. &ince the emerging land surface would have originally been ocean floor covered in sediments,including carbonates with stromatolites and stromatolite reefs, then these would also have been eroded and reworked. *e



may thus con4ecture the possibility of continued catastrophic deposition from the retreating sedimentladen waters of theGreat !egression beyond the continental margins through the the early part of the prelood era. &uch catastrophicdeposition would accomplish the rapid accumulation of the thick Archean to midroteroEoic sedimentary strata se7uences,including entombed stromatolites and microbes, before 7uieter conditions prevailed offshore, where renewed growth of stromatolites and stromatolite reefs began again as matbuilding microbes reestablished themselves on and in the shallowoffshore carbonate sediments."his implies that the immense thick se7uences of recambrian sediments enclosing many repeated levels in whichstromatolites are found fossiliEed over wide geographic areas can be fitted into the time period from the creation throughthe /J@ or so years of the prelood era. "his re7uires mechanisms for both the accumulation of those thick recambriansedimentary strata se7uences enclosing and fossiliEing many stromatolites, microbes and stromatolite reefs reworked fromthose created prior to the !egression growing in and on the carbonate sediments of the first global ocean floor, and then for subse7uent penecontemporaneous and synchronous growth of stromatolites, microbes and stromatolite reefs in the 7uieter

prelood era offshore conditions, some also being buried and fossiliEed as prelood sedimentation continued."his proposed scenario then raises the 7uestion as to where in the geologic record the prelood era boundary might beplaced. "he ArcheanroteroEoic geologic record preserves evidence of the activities of those springs and fountains&nelling 60$. 8f these springs and fountains were initiated by the catastrophic earth movements when the uplifted prelood supercontinent formed and these waters were therefore initially very hot from the magmatic activity associated withthose earth movements, then this would be reflected in the geologic record accumulated in this dynamic period through thelatter part of the creation. "hat the waters of these fountains and springs were hot and therefore mineralladen is evidencedby the uni7uely roteroEoic, massive banded iron formations %8s$, volcanic and volcaniclastic strata, and the thickcarbonate sedimentary units with their enclosed fossil stromatolites. &ince these %8s are uni7ue to this section of thegeologic record &nelling 60$, it could be argued that they represent a uni7ue period in earth?s history. And since their arguably rapid accumulation was accompanied by massive outpourings of volcanics and explosive volcaniclastics, it may befeasible to e7uate these and the %8s as having accumulated rapidly during the dynamic period of the Great !egression andits aftermath through the remainder of the creation. "his would then place the creationpreflood era boundary some place inthe geologic record above these %8s, perhaps even as high as the aleoproteroEoicFesoproteroEoic boundary /.J Ga$

Gradstein et al. 6/6$.*ise 62$ proposed that there were extensive fringing stromatolite reefs around the prelood supercontinent. "he reeftoland LlagoonM was probably at least hundreds of kilometers wide, based upon the distribution of the extensive carbonateplatforms on which carbonate sedimentary units accumulated during the recambrian. "hese stromatolite reefs constituteda stromatolitehydrothermal biome that only flourished in the prelood era. "he hot waters of the fountains and springs notonly provided the nutrients for the rapid growth of the microbes responsible for building these fringing stromatolite reefs andthe associated stromatolites that grew within the enclosed shallow lagoon waters, but also the voluminous dissolvedminerals that were precipitated to accumulate the thick carbonate sedimentary units that entombed and fossiliEed thestromatolites. "he )eoproteroEoic 3wagunt ormation stromatolite reef described by *ise and &nelling 6@$ would be thefossiliEed remains of an example of this prelood stromatolitehydrothermal biome."he breakup of the prelood supercontinent during the terminal )eoproteroEoic at the initiation of the lood would thenhave marked the almost complete demise of living stromatolites. "he lood cataclysm began with the breaking up of thosefountains of the great deep, the collapse of the margins of the prelood supercontinent, and the rifting of the supercontinentand the ocean basins. "he lood cataclysm then reshaped the earth?s surface as it deposited the haneroEoic geologicrecord and entombed macrofossils in it. +uring the catastrophic conditions of the yearlong lood there were not sufficiently

long timespans available for microbial activity on transient surfaces to develop into living and growing stromatolites of anysignificant thickness or geographic extent. "his would explain the almost complete lack of fossil stromatolites of anysignificant thickness or geographic extent in the aleoEoicFesoEoic strata record of the lood catastrophe. "he microbeswhich survived through the lood then reestablished their matbuilding activities to again grow stromatolites during thewaning stages of the lood through to the present, as seen in the uppermost part of the haneroEoic strata and fossilrecords. 8n the present world living stromatolite remnants are rare and geographically isolated.Conclusion"oday?s rare stromatolites are being built by the metabolism of bacterial microbes in mat communities at the sedimentsurfacewater interface in a few geographically isolated locations. Growth is by sediment grain trapping and bindingprincipally by precipitation of calcium carbonate, resulting in a distinctive cyclical laminar microstructure as the microbialmats repeatedly reestablish themselves at the sedimentwater interface. "his laminar microstructure and the matbuildingmicrobes are the distinctive features of living stromatolites that are essential criteria in determining whether the relativelyabundant ArcheanroteroEoic conventionally 2@5@>/ Fa$ fossil stromatolites are likewise of biogenic origin. A robust setof biogenicity criteria have been established, which include the identification of microbial fossils associated with fossil

stromatolites that should be composed of kerogen and have an appropriate carbon isotope signature. owerful diagnostictechni7ues that can establish the identity of genuine microfossils have thus confirmed the biogenicity of many genuine fossilstromatolites, and even stromatolitic reefs, as far back in the strata record as the lower Archean conventionally dated asearly as 2>0J Fa$.*ithin the creation framework of earth history microbes, fully functioning stromatolites and even stromatolite reefs may havebeen created, as an integral component of the carbonate sediments on the floor of the global ocean. +uring the Great!egression those carbonate sediments, stromatolites and stromatolite reefs could have then been eroded and reworked tobe deposited in subse7uent sedimentary rock layers, thus accounting for their occurrence in the thick recambrianse7uences. 9nce reestablished in the prelood era, matbuilding microbes and stromatolites then flourished in reefsfringing the prelood supercontinent and in the wide lagoons they enclosed, first as sediments were rapidly deposited off the prelood supercontinent?s margins after the land emerged, and then continuing on through the prelood era. "heir rapid proliferation was facilitated by the mineralladen hot waters from fountains and springs, which also precipitated thestromatolitefossiliEing extensive thick carbonate strata. "he onset of the lood cataclysm marked the demise of livingstromatolites. (nable to establish themselves and grow during the devastation of the lood, today?s rare stromatolites arestill being built by those matbuilding microbes that survived in a few isolated places with conditions suitable for their growth.



Order in the &ossil Recordby +r. Andrew A. &nelling on :anuary /, 6/Q last featured )ovember 2, 6/

ome creationists believe that thegeological column is a figment ofevolutionists2 imagination. et by visiting places like the Grand Canyon9Grandtaircase region* you can literally climbthrough the rock layers and see these:uence and patterns of the layersfirsthand. 3he rock layers are real andcan be e4plained within the creation

framework of earth history.&hop )ow&ome creationists believe that the fossil record, as depicted in geologic column diagrams, does not represent reality."his assessment is usually based on the unfortunate claim that the geologic column is only theoretical, having beenconstructed by matching up rock layers from different areas of the world that contain similar fossils./ "hey also believe thatthe layers were arranged based on an assumed evolutionary order of fossils, so they conclude that the whole concept of thegeologic column and the order of rock layers must be totally re4ected. 6"o the contrary, we can walk across various regions of the earth and observe that the rock layers and the fossils containedtherein generally match what is depicted in the widely accepted geologic column diagrams. urthermore, creationists can be

greatly encouraged by the fact thatthe order and patterns of the fossiloccurrences are predicted by, and canbe explained according to, thecreation framework of earth history.

"he Grand CanyonDGrand &taircase!ock ayers &e7uence"he best way to begin evaluatingthese claims is to examine ageographic region where the rocklayers and fossils are well exposedand well studied. A spectacular example is the Colorado lateau of the southwestern (&A, and morespecifically, the Grand CanyonDGrand &taircase rock layersse7uence."he se7uence of rock layers in thisregion is depicted in igure !.2, > "hediagram shows how the topography

moves up from the Grand Canyonthrough a series of cliffs called theGrand &taircase to the %ryce Canyonarea at the highest elevation. &ome/@, feet >.J km$ of sedimentarylayers are stacked on top of oneanotherK @, feet /.@ km$ in the

walls of the Grand Canyon and /, feet 2 km$ in the Grand &taircase. "he standard geologic column diagram labelsthe Grand Canyon rock layers as recambrian and aleoEoic, and the Grand &taircase rock layers as FesoEoic andCenoEoic, as shown on igure !.$9rder of the !ock ayers is !eal, igures / through 2. Click the picture to view a larger, pdf version."he diagrams in igure ! provide more details about individual sedimentary rock layers, including the names assigned tothem for easy reference. "hese names usually have two components. "he first is a local feature, such as an 8ndian tribee.g., &upai$, and the second component is the type of sedimentary rock in the layer, such as limestone, sandstone, or

shale. &o, for example, the L!edwall imestoneM is named for the distinctive red cliff or wall$ made of limestone. 8f a layer includes a variety of different sediments at different levels, it is termed a formation, such as L"oroweap ormation.M*alking in the area, we can see other obvious patterns. *hen similar rock layers are always found together in outcrops andhills, they are called a group. "he &upai Group, for example, consists of four other named layersK the #splanade &andstone,the *escogame ormation, the Fanakacha ormation, and the *atahomigi ormation. )o matter which direction you go inthe Colorado lateau, wherever you find one of these layers, the other three appear in the same se7uence as well.8t seems trite to say it, but the names for these rock layers represent real places and patternsO Any keen observer couldliterally hike and climb$ from the bottom of Grand Canyon up its walls and on up the Grand &taircase, inspecting each layer and noting how they are progressively stacked on top of one another all the way to the top of %ryce Canyon. Iou don?t haveto rely on the fossils contained in these sedimentary rock layers, or any evolutionary assumptions, to conclude that this localgeologic strata column, as depicted in igure !, is tangible and real. "hese rock layers are observable data, so the diagramis not some figment of evolutionary bias based on Lthe fossil content of their rocks.M @The Order in This &ossil Record)ow that the physical reality of this local rock column has been established, we must conclude that the fossils contained inthese rock layers are also a valid record of the order that creatures were progressively buried within each successivesedimentary layer.

At the bottom of the Grand Canyon, the first sedimentary layers are those of the (nkar Group and the Chuar Group igure!* Grand Canyon$. "hese sedimentary layers were deposited on top of the Lcrystalline basementM rocks, which were createdby volcanic activity granites$ and the transformation of other sedimentary and volcanic layers by heat and pressuremetamorphics$. 9bviously these sedimentary layers of the (nkar and Chuar Groups were horiEontal when originallydeposited, but subse7uent earth movements tilted them. Fost creationist geologists believe that upheaval coincides with theonset of the lood.




https://answersingenesis.org/fossils/fossil-record/order-in-the-fossil-record/#fn_1
















At the top of all these rocks, running the length of the whole canyon, is a prominent erosion surface, where the lood watersviolently eroded all preexisting prelood$ rocks, as the water rose up from the oceans to advance over thecontinents.J Above this erosion surface is the "apeats &andstone, which represents one of the earliest layers of sedimentdeposited by the lood. "he boulders found at its base igure " $ are testimony to the catastrophic violence of the onset of the lood.)atterns in This &ossil Record8f we truly find a clear order of sedimentary layers, then we would expect to be able to look at the fossils contained in each of these layers and find patterns that give us clues about why the creatures were deposited in this particular se7uence."he best way to do that is to see a list of the fossils found in each of the main layers, as in igure #.B A careful examinationof this list reveals the order in which creatures were buried by the lood.

ossil atterns &how the 9rder

of lood +eposits, igures >through J. Click the picture toview a larger, pdf version.)re<&lood Single<Cell&ossils. 8t is hardly surprisingthat the fossils found in the prelood Chuar Group don?tre7uire catastrophic burial toform. "he onecelledorganisms in these layers,such as algae that formmounds called stromatolites$,re7uired calm environmentalconditions for burial and

fossiliEation. #ven today, algaebuild these structures, calledstromatolites, only in calmconditions.Shallow ,arine #n/erte0rateso the Sealoor. "rilobites,brachiopods, and other shallowmarine invertebrates are thefirst creatures to be buried inthe first sedimentary layers of the loodDthe "apeats, %right

Angel, and Fuav.&ish. 8t is not until the "emple

%utte imestone that fish remains are found. )ote, however, that the marine invertebrates are found buried at almost everylevel in this fossil record. "his is consistent with the ocean waters rising and washing across the continents during the lood,

carrying these marine creatures with the sediments in which they were buried .1'and )lants and Re"tile &oot"rints. )ext note that the first land plants are found buried in the &upai Group, where thefossiliEed footprints of amphibians and reptiles are also found.&ossils o 'and (erte0rates. 8nterestingly, the first fossiliEed bodies of land vertebrates reptiles in the Foenkopiormation$ are not found buried until much higher than the footprints. +inosaurs are found even higher, in the Foenaveormation. Fammals aren?t found buried until right at the top of this se7uence of rock layers.!emember, this is a burial during the lood. As the lood waters inundated the continents, the shallow marine invertebrateswere first swept from the prelood ocean floors and buried on the continents in rapid succession. After the waters rose over the continents, they progressively encountered different ecological Eones at different elevations, which were inundated inrapid succession.0, /E/olutionary Order or &lood Se4uence5"he conventional explanation of the fossil order is progressive evolutionary changes over long periods of time. %ut thisexplanation runs into a huge challenge. #volution predicts that new groups of creatures would have arisen in a specificorder. %ut if you compare the order that these creatures first appear in the actual fossil record, as opposed to their

theoretical first appearance in the predictions, then over 0@W of the fossil record?s LorderM can best be described asrandom.//9n the other hand, if these organisms were buried by the lood waters, the order of first appearance should be either random, due to the sorting effects of the lood, or reflect the order of ecological burial. 8n other words, as the lood watersrose, they would tend to bury organisms in the order that they were encountered, so the ma4or groups should appear in thefossil record according to where they lived, and not when they lived. "his is exactly what we find, including this fossil recordwithin the Grand CanyonDGrand &taircase.Iou can also see another interesting pattern that confirms what we would expect from a global lood. Iou would expectmany larger animals to survive the lood waters initially, leaving their tracks in the accumulating sediment layers as theytried to escape the rising waters. %ut eventually they would become exhausted, die, and get buried.*hat do we find 8n the "apeats &andstone are fossiliEed tracks of trilobites scurrying across the sand, but fossiliEedremains of their bodies do not appear until higher up, at the transition into the %right Angel &hale igure $$.&imilarly, we find fossiliEed footprints of amphibians and reptiles in places that are much lower in the &upai Group, Hermit&hale, and Coconino &andstone, igure % $ than the fossils of their bodies in the Foenkopi ormation$.Conclusion

At the Grand CanyonDGrand &taircase strata se7uence, both the column of sedimentary rock layers and the fossils areobservable and real. "he stacked layers throughout this region appear in a definite order. "hey contain fossils in arecogniEable order, too, reflecting the order in which the organisms were buried during the lood.8ndeed, the pattern of first appearances doesn?t fit the expected evolutionary order but instead is consistent with the risinglood waters, as they inundated the continents. urthermore, even the pattern of finding tracks before bodies is consistentwith creatures surviving in the initial lood waters before eventually perishing.&o the geologic column and the fossils? order and patterns agree with the creation framework of earth history.





















&ossilized &oot"rints7A Dinosaur Dilemmaby +r. Andrew A. &nelling on 9ctober /, 6/

CoolN dinosaur tracksN ow cantoday2s slow0and0gradual geologic processes over millions of yearse4plain the preservation of delicateimpressions in mud before they arewashed away? Foes the lood provide a better e4planation?&hop )ow"housands of dinosaur footprints

have been found in the geologicrecord, often in long trackways of

successive left and right footprints. *ith the help of these clues, paleontologistshave deciphered many details about the behavior of these fascinatingcreatures./ 6 2 >2ho -as a Dilemma5+inosaur footprints create an apparent dilemma for creationists. How could theyever be made and fossiliEed during the lood@

After all, with the lood waters covering the entire earth, the dinosaurs would havenowhere to walk. #ven if they did, the churning waters would erode away anyfootprints left behind. &ecular geologists and skeptics often raise this 7uestion andare sometimes scathing in their mockery.creation geologists, on the other hand, say it is the conventional geologists who, infact, face a dilemma. 8f geologic change takes place slowly, surely footprints made

in mud would be obliterated by wind and rain long before the prints were coveredby new sediments and hardened into rock.&o who has a dilemma "o find out, let?s explore a specific case of fossiliEeddinosaur footprints discovered in 8srael.

A ertinent #xample

8hoto courtesy Fr. nelling igure / eft foot5right foot se7uence of fossiliEed footprints.:ust west of :erusalem is the village of %eit ;eit. "here on an exposed rockpavement, a left foot5right foot se7uence of fossiliEed footprints is clearly evidentigure /$. 8n a closer view the imprints of three long toes are plainly visible igure6$.erhaps the most interesting clue about the formation of these footprints is thetype of rock in which they are found. 8t is a uni7ue type of carbonate rock similar tolimestone, called dolomite. *e see various types of limestone forming today, but

dolomite re7uires uni7ue conditions to form, as determined in the laboratory.+olomite forms today only in small 7uantities and only in extreme environments

where dinosaurs could not possibly have lived, such as hot springs and desert salt flats.J All other theoretical environmentswhere dolomite might form are likewise not places where dinosaurs could live such as hypersalty lakes and oceans withunusual chemistry$.&o conventional geologists, who believe that the present is the key to the past, would not expect to find dinosaur prints indolomite. "he best explanation they can suggest is that, for some reason, a dinosaur walked across an intertidal mudflat inan arid region where there was nothing for him to eatO$.

8hoto courtesy Fr. nelling igure 6 "hree long toes clearly visible."he problem is complicated by the vast scale of the rock deposits. "he dinosaur prints are found in the lower section of a thick se7uence of alternating layers of dolomite and limestone, half a mile thick 6,J feet or 1 m$, collectively called the

:udea Group.B :erusalem sits on the :udea Group, which includes Fount ;ion andthe "emple Fount Fount Foriah$.

A LgroupM in geology is not based on rocks in a relatively small area but a pile of rocks identifiable over a very large region. &ince it is a group, we must conclude thatthese thick limestones and dolomites in 8srael were formed over a vast region .1"he only known way to produce large 7uantities of limestone, such as we find in the:udea Group, is an ocean environment. "he LeasiestM way to form widespreaddolomites, too, is an ocean, but the water must be of unusual chemistry. &o the:udea Group probably formed in a vast ocean sitting over the entire region. "hiswasn?t an optimum place for dinosaurs to liveOThe Con/entional 2isdom&o, how did the dinosaurs make these footprints under the ocean #veryone agreesthat the dinosaurs were landdwellers. &o conventional geologists cannot explain

why they were walking across an ocean floor.urthermore, even if the dinosaurs somehow left footprints in soft dolomite mud on a shallow ocean floor, how would thewatersaturated sediment harden to fossiliEe the footprints "his can be done in only two waysK by exposing the sediment tothe air so that the water evaporates from the mud, or by burying the mud so that the overlying sediments s7ueeEe the water out of the mud.#xplaining the +olomite ayers-ow do &lood geologists o/ercome all these challenges5irst, let?s explain the unusual chemical conditions. "he prelood ocean floor would have been littered with the remains of mollusk shells, in the form of lime. Follusk shells are made out of calcium carbonate, the main ingredient in lime.$ *hen the




https://answersingenesis.org/store/product/aquarium-guide-mini/?sku=10-2-389

https://answersingenesis.org/dinosaurs/footprints/fossilized-footprints-a-dinosaur-dilemma/#fn_1













https://answersingenesis.org/store/product/aquarium-guide-mini/?sku=10-2-389











fountains of the great deep broke up at the start of the lood, massive earth7uakes0 would have caused the ocean watersto rise and sweep in across the prelood supercontinent, like tsunamis, carrying the lime sediments landwards with them."he water temperature would have progressively increased as hot volcanic waters were added to the ocean. Also, manyvolcanic eruptions would have added magnesium to the limerich lood waters. "his combination of hot water, lime, andmagnesium would produce the layers of dolomite./ "hus, catastrophic plate tectonics can explain the increase in loodwater temperatures, the inundation of the continents, and the formation of enormous amounts of LmarineM carbonatesediments on the continents.E!"laining the Dinosaur &oot"rints

As the lood waters swept inland, dinosaurs would have been forced to swim to survive the rising lood waters.//#lephantstoday react similarly when faced with rising floodwaters./6"he water level at each location would not have risen at a constant rate. As global sea level rose, water would rise and falllocally with the surge and ebb of tsunamis and the shifting tidal pull of the moon and sun ./2

At the same time, earth7uakes and continental collisions would raise and lower land at different places and times.Conse7uently, warm surging waters of the catastrophic lood might cover a particular lowland area with dolomite layers,only to expose that same area again for a few hours. "his cycle could occur several times before the lood finally coveredthe area completely.&ome dinosaur prints may have been made by fully submerged dinosaurs, others in shallow water, and others ontemporarily exposed surfaces.

Any brief exposure would probably not provide enough time, however, for the soft dolomite layer, composed of a naturalL7uick setM cement, to harden sufficiently to preserve the footprints. 8nstead, the next surge of dolomite sediment would burythe footprints even if still underwater$, and the weight of the overlying layers would s7ueeEe the water out of the dolomiteand harden it to rock."he dinosaurs that made the footprints would again be swept away in the lood waters. *ithin weeks or months, they wouldsuccumb to exhaustion and die, to be buried in lood sediments higher up in the se7uence."his explanation fits what is found in the geologic record. +inosaur body fossils are invariably found in sediment layershigher in local strata se7uences than their fossiliEed footprints./>

Dating Dilemma= &ossil 2ood in LAncientM Sandstoneby +r. Andrew A. &nelling on :une /, /000

'riginally published in Creation "!* no #+(une !---/ #-0$!.ydney has its beautiful harbour and famous bridge* its 'pera ouse and golden beaches* but it also has someuni:ue and characteristic rock formations.&hop )ow#very ma4or, worldrecogniEed city has itsuni7ue landmarks and features. &ydney,

Australia?s oldest city settled in /B11$ andlargest more than 2.@ million people$, and soon to host the 6 &ummer 9lympics, is no exception. 8t has its beautiful

harbour and famous bridge, its 9pera House and golden beaches, but it also has some uni7ue and characteristic rockformations.The -awkes0ury Sandstone"he Hawkesbury &andstone, named after the Hawkesbury !iver 4ust north of &ydney, dominates the landscape within a /km J mile$ radius of downtown &ydney. 8t is a flatlying layer of sandstone, some 6, s7. km B,B s7. miles$ in areaand up to 6@ metres 16 feet$ thick./ +ominated by grains of the mineral 7uartE6 which is chemically very similar towindow glass, and harder than a steel file$, the sandstone is a hard, durable rock which forms prominent cliffs, such as atthe entrance to &ydney Harbour and along the nearby coastline.+espite the widespread, spectacular exposures of the Hawkesbury &andstone, there is a long history of speculation aboutits origins, going back to Charles +arwin.2 !ather than consisting of 4ust one sandstone bed encompassing its totalthickness, the Hawkesbury &andstone is made up of three principal rock typesDsheet sandstone, massive sandstone andrelatively thin mudstone.> #ach has internal features that indicate deposition in fastflowing currents, such as in a violentflood.@ or example, thin repetitive bands sloping at around 6V within the flatlying sandstone beds technically known ascrossbeds$, sometimes up to J metres 6 feet$ high, would have been produced by huge sandwaves like sand dunes$

swept along by raging water.ossils in the sandstone itself are rare. However, spectacular fossil graveyards have been found in several lenses lenticular bodies of only limited extent$ of mudstone.J Fany varieties of fish and even sharks have been discovered in patternsconsistent with sudden burial in a catastrophe. &ome such graveyards contain many plant fossils."he Hawkesbury &andstone has been assigned a Fiddle "riassic LageM of around 66@562 million years by mostgeologists.B,1,0 "his is based on its fossil content, and on its relative position in the se7uence of rock layers in the region

the &ydney %asin$. All of these are placed in the context of the long ages timescalecommonly assumed by geologists.ossil wood sample%ecause of its hardness and durability, the Hawkesbury &andstone not onlyprovides a solid foundation for downtown &ydney?s skyscrapers, but is an excellentbuilding material. A number of &ydney?s old buildings have walls of sandstoneblocks. "oday, the Hawkesbury &andstone is mainly used for ornamental purposes."o obtain fresh sandstone, slabs and blocks have to be carefully 7uarried. &everal7uarries still operate in the Gosford area 4ust north of &ydney, and one near %undanoon to the southwest.8n :une /00B a large fingersiEed piece of fossil wood was discovered in aHawkesbury &andstone slab 4ust cut from the 7uarry face at %undanoon see photo,right$./ "hough reddishbrown and hardened by petrifaction, the original character of the wood was still evident. 8dentification of the genus is not certain, but more thanlikely it was the forkedfrond seedfern Ficroidium, well known from the Hawkesbury&andstone.//,/6 "he fossil was probably the wood from the stem of a frond.












https://answersingenesis.org/fossils/dating-dilemma-fossil-wood-in-ancient-sandstone/#fn_1













































Radiocar0on 8CF analysis%ecause this fossil wood now appears impregnated with silica and hematite, it was uncertain whether any original organiccarbon remained, especially since it is supposed to be 66@562 million years old. )evertheless, a piece of the fossil woodwas sent for radiocarbon />C$ analysis to Geochron aboratories in Cambridge, %oston (&A$, a reputable internationallyrecogniEed commercial laboratory. "his laboratory uses the more sensitive accelerator mass spectrometry AF&$ techni7ue,recogniEed as producing the most reliable radiocarbon results, even on minute 7uantities of carbon in samples."he laboratory staff were not told exactly where the fossil wood came from, or its supposed evolutionary age, to ensurethere would be no resultant bias. ollowing routine lab procedure, the sample their lab code G562J>>$ was treated firstwith hot dilute hydrochloric acid to remove any carbonates, and then with hot dilute caustic soda to remove any humic acidsor other organic contaminants. After washing and drying, it was combusted to recover any carbon dioxide for theradiocarbon analysis."he analytical report from the laboratory indicated detectable radiocarbon had been found in the fossil wood, yielding a

supposed />

C LageM of 22,B6 \ >2 years % before present$. "his result had been L/2

C correctedM by the lab staff, after they had obtained a d/2C+% value of 56>. ./2 "his value is consistent with the analyEed carbon in the fossil woodrepresenting organic carbon from the original wood, and not from any contamination. 9f course, if this fossil wood reallywere 66@562 million years old as is supposed, it should be impossible to obtain a finite radiocarbon age, because alldetectable />C should have decayed away in a fraction of that alleged timeDa few tens of thousands of years.

Anticipating ob4ections that the minute 7uantity of detected radiocarbon in this fossil wood might still be due tocontamination, the 7uestion of contamination by recent microbial and fungal activity, long after the wood was buried, wasraised with the staff at this, and another, radiocarbon laboratory. %oth labs unhesitatingly replied that there would be no suchcontamination problem. Fodern fungi or bacteria derive their carbon from the organic material they live on and don?t get itfrom the atmosphere, so they have the same LageM as their host. urthermore, the lab procedure followed as alreadyoutlined$ would remove the cellular tissues and any waste products from either fungi or bacteria.Conclusions"his is, therefore, a legitimate radiocarbon Lage.M However, a 22,B6 \ >2 years % radiocarbon LageM emphaticallyconflicts with, and casts doubt upon, the supposed evolutionary LageM of 66@562 million years for this fossil wood from the

Hawkesbury &andstone. Although demonstrating that the fossil wood cannot be millions of years old, the radiocarbon dating has not provided its trueage. However, a finite radiocarbon LageM for this fossil wood is neither inconsistent nor unexpected within a creationSfloodframework of #arth history. %uried catastrophically in sand by the raging flood waters only about >,@ years ago, this fossilwood contains less than the expected amount of radiocarbon, because of a stronger magnetic field back then shielding the#arth from incoming cosmic rays. "he flood also buried a lot of carbon, so that the laboratory?s calculated />C LageM basedon the assumption of an atmospheric proportion in the past roughly the same as that in /0@$ is much greater than the trueage./>

Thundering %urialby +r. Andrew A. &nelling on :une /, /001

'riginally published in Creation "6* no # +(une !--)/ #)0$!.3his fossil graveyard on the ake uron coastline of Michigan is thus =ust another e4ample of the devastation resulting fromthat catastrophic global lood.&hop )ow

8n a sunny summer?s day in eastern ower Fichigan (&A$, the placid waters of ake Hurongently lap against the pictures7ue coastline igure /$. %y contrast, when storms rage acrossthat vast expanse of open waters, the locals can testify to large waves crashing violently on tothose same shores. Iet such storms and waves are minor compared to the scale of thestorms, waves, and resultant devastation that must have occurred during the global flood, asseen today in a fossil graveyard exposed on this same coastline.&igure 8= "he ake Huron coastline looking southeast at artridge oint, near Alpena,eastern ower Fichigan. "he limestone shingles on the beach foreground$ contain fossils.+riving north of %ay City along &tate !oute 62, skirting the shores of ake Huron, one couldeasily miss the turnoff to artridge oint 4ust south of Alpena igure 6$ if one didn?t know thatit was there and that artridge oint had some geological significance./ However, atartridge oint are outcrops of a fossil graveyard, one of many fossil deposits found aroundthe world that are significant as examples of the catastrophism during the lood.artridge oint is a small peninsula of land which 4uts southeastward into ake Huron,

dividing the coastline between "hunder %ay to the north and &7uaw %ay to the south igure6$.6 "he shape and orientation of this peninsula is determined by the rock layers of which it iscomposed, being roughly parallel to the strike of the strata their elongation direction$D

igures 6 and 2."he outcrops of interest belong to the "hunder %ayimestone and are exposed along the shoreline.2 "heyrepresent what geologists call the type section of this rockformationDthat is, the originally described outcrops of thisrock unit that show its features and contents across itsthickness, and that then serve as the representative or ob4ective standard against which separated parts of thissame rock unit elsewhere may be compared. "he outcropsare accessible along the beaches at the water?s edge, andcan be reached by crossing vacant land among the privatehomes and from the unmaintained boatramp launch roadigure 2$.

&igure 9= ocation map for the Alpena area on the akeHuron coastline of eastern ower Fichigan (&A$, showingartridge oint and the local extent of the "hunder %ay

imestone.










https://answersingenesis.org/geology/catastrophism/thundering-burial/#fn_1
















&igure := Geologic sketch map for artridge oint, the type locality of the"hunder %ay imestone. 9utcrops and fossil occurrences along the shingledbeaches are shown.

&igure B= ooking southeast along the main beach at artridge oint, thetype section for the "hunder %ay imestone see igure 2$. "he limestoneshingles contain fossils and the outcrops are to the left, beneath the houseand trees."he se7uence of rock types in the outcrops making up the "hunder %ayimestone is shown diagrammatically in igure >. 9f particular interest arethe lightcoloured shaly beds and limestone full of fossiliEed corals and

shellfish.>,

@ "he remains include the skeletons of animals that once livedattached to the rocky bottom of a shallow sea, such as colonial coralsbunches of corals connected to one another like apartments$, solitarycorals, bryoEoans Nlace corals?$, crinoids Nsealilies?$, stromatoporoids

extinct sea creatures of uncertain identification, possibly related to the sponges andcorals due to similarity of their limey skeletons$, brachiopods Nlamp shells,? similar toclams, but with a Nfoot? for attaching themselves permanently to the sea bottom$, andblastoids relatives of the crinoids and the sea urchins$. "here are also the fossiliEedremains of more mobile sea creatures, such as conodonts extinct animals whoseonly remains are tiny 4awlike bones with serrations like teeth$. A detailed descriptionof these rocks, with a complete list of their fossils, has been compiled. J&igure = 8dealiEed composite diagram depicting the type or reference section of therock types and layers making up the "hunder %ay imestone along the ake Huronshoreline at artridge oint. Fost fossils found in the shingles of limestone along

the beaches have eroded from the fossiliferous limestone unit, and some of thesefossils are listed there.Fany of these fossils can be found in pieces of the hard limestone shingles alongthe beaches igure @$. &ome of the fossils are shown in igures J51. 9f particular interest are the crinoid remains seen in igure J, the disks or columnals of thecrinoids? stems or stalks which were once connected and stacked on top of one

another.B After death, crinoids fall apart very7uickly, so it is common to find abundantfossiliEed columnals from broken stalks scatteredand 4umbled indiscriminately through limestonessuch as this "hunder %ay imestone.However, here we also see, thrown together withthese crinoid columnals, pieces of Nlace coral?bryoEoansDigure J$, brachiopod shells igureB$, and solitary corals igure 1$. "he limestone

that now entombs these remains cannot bewhere these creatures once lived, because theyare not found here in their living positions. "hesolitary coral, for example, is not seen hereattached to the sea bottom, with a distinct hardsurface visible in the rock mass, but wascompletely enclosed in what originally was a softlime mud which only became rockhard after burying the coral.

&igure = Crinoid columnals or disks from thestalks endon and sideon views$ scattered

haphaEardly through the "hunder %ay imestone. Also shown issome Nlace coral? a bryoEoan$.

&igure = An entombed brachiopod shell."here is, therefore, only one conclusion which makes sense of the evidenceDthese sea creatures were buried together suddenly when overwhelmed, carried, and then dumped bymoving water filled with lime muds. "hat?s why geologists call thisa fossil graveyard. However, unlike a human graveyard today,where the individual graves are neatly arranged, these fossils inthese graveyards are all 4umbledDtossed together and buriedhaphaEardly in sediments laid down by moving water.&igure G= A solitary coral (.&. penny for scale$ surrounded

uniformly by what wasoriginally lime mud butnow limestone.%ut the scale is alsoimpressive. 9nly a tinyportion of the "hunder %ayimestone is exposed atartridge oint, whereasthese rock layers extendsideways for severalhundred miles in each of













two directions across what is known as the Fichigan %asin. 1 At artridge oint one can see countless thousands of fossiliEed sea creatures? remains. %ut one?s mind is 7uickly overwhelmed trying to comprehend the countless billions of fossils that must therefore have been buried in these rock layers underneath many hundreds of s7uare miles of FichiganO

And this is only one of the fossil graveyards found in Fichigan. 8n fact, similar fossil graveyards are found in many places onevery continent all around the globeDNbillions of dead things fossils$ buried in rock layers laid down by water all over the#arth.? "his is exactly the evidence we would expect to find based on what the creation model about the flood. "his fossilgraveyard on the ake Huron coastline of Fichigan is thus 4ust another example of the devastation resulting from thatcatastrophic global lood.

A L8B ,illion +earM Sur"riseby +r. Andrew A. &nelling on Farch /, /00B

'riginally published in Creation !-* no " +March !--7/ !$0!%.&hop )ow

A Nmysterious network? of mud springson the edge of the Nmarket town? of *ootton %assett, near &windon,*iltshire, #ngland, has yielded aremarkable surprise./ A scientificinvestigation has concluded that Kthe phenomenon is uni:ue to 1ritain and

possibly the world2."he mud springsHot, bubbling mud springs or volcanoes are found in )ew ;ealand, :ava and elsewhere, but these *ootton %assett mudsprings usually ooEe slowly and are cold. However, in /0B> !iver Authority workmen were clearing the channel of a small

stream in the area, known as "emplar?s irs, because it was obstructed by a mass of grey clay. 6 *hen they began to digaway the clay, grey li7uid mud gushed into the channel from beneath tree roots and for a short while spouted a third of ametre one foot$ into the air at a rate of about eight litres per second.)o one knows how long these mud springs have been there. According to the locals they have always been there, andcattle have fallen in and been lostO Consisting of three mounds each about / metres almost 22 feet$ long by five metres/J feet$ wide by one metre about three feet$ high, they normally look like huge Nmud blisters?, with more or less li7uid mudcores contained within living Nskins? created by the roots of rushes, sedges and other swampy vegetation, including shrubsand small trees.2 "he workmen in /0B> had obviously cut into the end of one of these mounds, partly deflating it. &ince thenthe two most active Nblisters? have largely been deflated and flattened by visitors probing them with sticks. >8n /00 an Nunofficial? attempt was made to render the site Nsafe?.@ A contractor tipped many truckloads of 7uarry stone andrubble totalling at least / tonnes into the mud springs, only to see the heap sink out of sight within half an hourO i7uidmud spurted out of the ground and flowed for some J metres about 6, feet$ down the stream channel clogging it.*orried, the contractor brought in a tracked digger and found he could push the bucket down J.B metres 66 feet$ into thespring without finding a bottom.3)ristine ossils3 and e/olutionary 0ias

&o why all the Nexcitement? over some mud springs )ot only is there no explanation of the way the springs ooEe pale, cold,grey mud onto and over the ground surface, but the springs are also Npumping up? fossils that are supposed to be /J@ millionyears old, including newly discovered species.J 8n the words of +r )eville Hollingworth, paleontologist with the )atural#nvironment !esearch Council in &windon, who has investigated the springs, N3hey are like a fossil conveyor belt bringing up finds from clay layers below and then washing them out in a nearby stream.?B9ver the years numerous fossils have been found in the ad4acent stream, including the :urassic ammonite @hactorhynchiainconstans, characteristic of the socalled inconstans bed near the base of the 3immeridge Clay, estimated as being onlyabout /2 metres almost >2 feet$ below the surface at "emplar?s irs.1 ossils retrieved from the mud springs and beingcataloged at the %ritish Geological &urvey office in 3eyworth, )ottinghamshire, include the remains of sea urchins, the teethand bones of marine reptiles, and oysters N that once lived in the subtropical (urassic seas that covered southern England .?0&ome of these supposedly /J@ million year old ammonites are previously unrecorded species, says +r Hollingworth, and thereal surprise is that Nmany still had shimmering mother0of0pearl shells?./ According to +r Hollingworth these Npristine fossils?are 2the best preserved he has seen O . ou =ust stand there Rbeside the mud springsT and up pops an ammonite. What makes the fossils so special is that they retain their original shells of aragonite Ra mineral form of calcium carbonateT = 3he

outsides also retain their iridescence =?// And what is e7ually amaEing is that, in the words of +r Hollingworth, K3here arethe shells of bivalves which still have their original organic ligaments and yet they are millions of years old2 O/6erhaps what is more amaEing is the evolutionary, millions5of5years mindset that blinds hard5nosed, rational scientists fromseeing what should otherwise be obviousDsuch pristine ammonite fossils still with shimmering mother5of5pearl iridescenceon their shells, and bivalves still with their original organic ligaments, can?t possibly be /J@ million years old. (pon burial,organic materials are relentlessly attacked by bacteria, and even in seemingly sterile environments will automatically, of themselves, decompose to simpler substances in a very short time./2,/> *ithout the millions5of5years bias, these fossilswould readily be recogniEed as victims of a comparatively recent event, for example, the global devastation of the globalflood only about >,@ years ago.No e!"lanation#ven with +r Hollingworth?s identification of fossils from the 9xford Clay,/@ which underlies the 3immeridge Clay andCorallian %eds, scientists such as !oger %ristow of the %ritish Geological &urvey office in #xeter still don?t know whatcaused the mud springs./J #nglish )ature, the Government?s wildlife advisory body which also has responsibility for geological sites, has re7uested research be done."he difficulties the scientists involved face include coming up with a driving mechanism, and unravelling why the mudparticles do not settle out but remain in suspension./B "hey suspect some kind of naturally5occurring chemical is beingdischarged from deep within the 3immeridge and 9xford Clays, where some think the springs arise from a depth of between2 and > metres / and /2 feet$. &o 8an Gale, a hydrogeologist at the 8nstitute of Hydrology in *allingford, 9xfordshire,is investigating the water chemistry./1 Clearly an artesian water source is involved./0 Alternately, perhaps a feeder conduitcuts through the 9xford Clay, Corallian %eds and 3immeridge Clay strata, rising from a depth of at least / metres 22feet$.6 "he mud?s temperature shows no sign of a thermal origin, but there are signs of bacteria in the mud, and also




https://answersingenesis.org/store/product/lie-25th-anniversary-edition/?sku=10-2-418

https://answersingenesis.org/evidence-against-evolution/a-165-million-year-surprise/#fn_1



































https://answersingenesis.org/store/product/lie-25th-anniversary-edition/?sku=10-2-418























chlorine gas.6/ %ut why mud instead of water +oes something agitate the underground waterSclay interface so as to causesuch fine mixing66Conclusion!esearch may yet unravel these mysteries. %ut it will not remove the evolutionary bias that prevents scientists from seeingthe obvious. "he pristine fossils disgorged by these mud springs, still with either their original external iridescence or their original organic ligaments, can?t be /J@ million years oldO %oth the fossils and the strata that entombed them must only berecent. "hey are best explained as testimony to the global watery cataclysm about >,@ years ago.

6#nstant3 )etriied 2oodby +r. Andrew A. &nelling on &eptember /, /00@

'riginally published

in Creation !7* no $ +eptember !--%/ #)0$6.K5nstant petrified wood29so ranthe heading to theannouncement in 8opular cience* 'ctober !--".&hop )owN8nstant petrified wood?Dso ranthe heading to the announcementin8opular cience, 9ctober

/006./ 8t?s also the reality of research conducted at the Advanced Ceramic abs at the (niversity of *ashington in &eattle(&A$.!esearchers have also made woodceramic composites that are 65/6W harder than regular wood, but still look like wood.&urprisingly simple, the process involves soaking wood in a solution containing silicon and aluminium compounds. "he

solution fills the pores in the wood, which is then ovencured at >>VC //6V$. According to the lab?s research director, +aniel+obbs, such experiments have impregnated the wood to depths of about @ millimetres .6 inches$. urthermore, deeper penetration under pressure and curing at higher temperature have yielded a rockhard woodceramic composite that hasapproached petrified wood.)atent Qreci"eQ or "etriicationHowever, priority for the discovery of a 'recipe' for petrification of wood must go to Hamilton Hicks of Greenwich, Connecticut(&A$, who on &eptember /J, /01J was issued with (& atent )umber >,J/6,@. 6 According to Hicks, his chemical'cocktail' of sodium silicate commonly known as 'water glass'$, natural spring or volcanic mineral water having a highcontent of calcium, magnesium, manganese, and other metal salts, and citric or malic acid is capable of rapidly petrifyingwood. %ut in case you want to try this 'recipe,' you need to know that for artificial petrification to occur there is some specialtechni7ue for mixing these components in the correct proportions to get an 'incipient' gel condition.Hicks wroteK'*hen applied to wood, the solution penetrates the wood. "he mineral water and sodium silicate are relatively proportionedso the solution is a li7uid of stable viscosity and is acidified to the incipient 4elling RgellingT condition to a degree causing

4elling RgellingT after penetrating the wood, but not prior thereto. "hat is to say, the solution can be stored and shipped, but

after application to the wood, 4ells RgelsT in the wood. *hen its content is high enough, the penetrated wood ac7uires thecharacteristics of petrified wood. "he wood can no longer be made to burn even when exposed to moisture or high humidity,for a prolonged period of time. "he apparent petrification is obtained 7uickly by drying the wood. '2

"he patent indicates that the amount of acid in the solution appears to have a critical effect on the production of the gelphase within the cell structure of the wood, although evaporation also plays its part. *ood thoroughly impregnated, even if necessary by repeated applications or submersions of the wood in the solution, after drying evidently has all thecharacteristics of petrified wood, including its appearance.%oth Hicks and the researchers at the (niversity of *ashington lab have suggested potential uses for such 'instant' petrifiedwoodsKireproofing wooden structures such as houses and horse stables the horses wouldn't be tempted to chew on the woodeitherO$.ongerwearing floors and furniture.Greater strength wood for structural uses.8nsect, decay and salt water 'proofing' wood in buildings, etc.

!apid natural petrification"he chemical components used to artificially petrify wood can be found in natural settings around volcanoes and withinsedimentary strata. 8s it possible then that natural petrification can occur rapidly by these processes 8ndeedO&igleo>reported silica deposition rates into blocks of wood in alkaline springs at Iellowstone )ational ark (&A$ of between./ and >. mmSyr.rom Australia come some startling reports. *riting in "he Australian apidary FagaEine, igott@ recounts his experiences insouthwestern PueenslandK'. . . from Frs FcFurray Rof %lackallT, 8 heard a story that rocked me and seemed to explode many ideas about the age of petrified wood. Frs FcFurray has a piece of wood turned to stone which has clear axe marks on it. &he says the tree thispiece came from grew on a farm her father had at #uthella, out of !oma, and was chopped down by him about B yearsago. 8t was partly buried until it was dug up again, petrified. Fac FcFurray capped this story by saying a townsman had apiece of petrified fence post with the drilled holes for wire with a piece of the wire attached.'etrified wood thousands of years old 8 wonder is it so'&everal months later earceJ added further to these amaEing stories of woods rapidly petrified in the ground of 'outback'PueenslandK'. . . iggott writes of petrified wood showing axe marks and also of a petrified fence post.'"his sort of thing is, of course, 7uite common. "he Hughenden district, ). P. R)orth PueenslandT, has . . . arkensonia treeswashed over near a station RranchT homestead and covered with silt by a flood in /0/1 RwhichT had the silt washed off by aflood in /0@. ortions of the trunk had turned to stone of an attractive colour. However, much of the trunks and all the limbshad totally disappeared.'9n ;ara &tation R!anchT, 2 miles Rabout >1 kilometresT from Hughenden, 8 was renewing a fence. *here it was dipped intoa hollow the bottom of the old posts had gone through black soil into shale. "he Gidgee wood was still perfect in the black















soil. 8t then cut off as straight as if sawn, and the few inches of post in the shale was pure stone. #very axe mark was perfectand the colour still the same as the day the post was cut . . . .'8 understand that down in the sandhill country below %oulia Rsouthwestern PueenslandT, where fences are often completelycovered by shifting sand, it's a common thing for the sand to shift off after a number of years, leaving stone posts standingerect.'rom the other side of the world comes a report of the chapel of &anta Faria of Health &anta Faria de &alute$, built in /J2in -enice, 8taly, to celebrate the end of "he lague. %ecause -enice is built on watersaturated clay and sand, the chapelwas constructed on /1, wooden pilings to reinforce the foundations. #ven though the chapel is a massive stone blockstructure, it has remained firm since its construction. How have the wooden pilings lasted over 2J years "hey havepetrifiedO "he chapel now rests on 'stone' pilingsOB

#xperimental verification9f course, none of these reports should come as a surprise, since the processes of petrification of wood have been known

for years, plus the fact that the process can occur, and has occurred, rapidly. or example &curfield and &egnit1

had reportedthat the petrification of wood can be considered to take place in five stagesK/. #ntry of silica in solution or as a colloid into the wood. 6. enetration of silica into the cell walls of the wood's structure. 2. rogressive dissolving of the cell walls which are at the same time replaced by silica so that the wood's dimensionalstability is maintained. >. &ilica deposition within the voids within the cellular wall framework structure. @. inal hardening lithification$ by +rying out.urthermore 9ehler 0 had previously shown that the silica minerals 7uartE and chalcedony critically important in thepetrification of wood, can be made, rapidly in the laboratory from silica gel. At 2VC @B6V$ and 2 kilobars about 2,atmospheres$ pressure only 6@ hours was re7uired to crystalliEe 7uartE, whereas at only /J@VC 260V$ and 2 kilobarspressure the same degree of crystalliEation occurred in /B hours about seven days$.&imilarly, +rum/ had partially silicified small branches by placing them in concentrated solutions of sodium metasilicate for up to 6> hours, while eo and %arghoorn// had immersed fresh wood alternately in water and saturated ethyl silicate

solutions until the open spaces in the wood were filled with mineral material, all within several months to a year. ikewise, asearly as /0@ Ferrill and &pencer /6 had shown that the sorption of silica by wood fibres from solutions of sodiummetasilicate, sodium silicate and activated silica sols a homogeneous suspension in water$ at only 6@VC BBV$ was asmuch as /6.@ moles of silica per gram within 6> hoursthe e7uivalent of partial silicificationSpetrification. As &igleoconcluded,'"hese observations indicate that silica nucleation and deposition can occur directly and rapidly on exposed cellulose RwoodTsurfaces.'/2

Conclusions"he evidence, both from scientists' laboratories and the natural laboratory, shows that under the right chemical conditionswood can be rapidly petrified by silicification, even at normal temperatures and pressures. "he process of petrification of wood is now so well known and understood that scientists can rapidly make petrified wood in their laboratories at will.(nfortunately, most people still think, and are led to believe, that fossiliEed wood buried in rock strata must have takenthousands, if not millions, of years to petrify. Clearly, such thinking is erroneous, since it has been repeatedly demonstratedthat petrification of wood can, and does, occur rapidly. "hus the timeframe for the formation of the petrified wood within thegeological record is totally compatible with the creation timescale of a recent creation and a subse7uent devastating global

lood.

+et Another Q,issing 'inkQ &ails to ualiyby +r. Andrew A. &nelling on :une /, /002

'riginally published in Creation !%*no # +(une !--#/ $60$$. , fossil truly Kin0between2 the crucial fish and amphibian characters is not only hard to conceive* but has never been found.&hop )ow

After speaking at a recent publicmeeting on the campus of an

Australian university, 8 was confrontedby a palaeontologist from the local, large, publicly funded museum. He was irate at my assertion that the fossil recordcontained no evidence of ma4or transitional forms or Nmissing links? re7uired by the evolutionary scenario, such as betweenfish and amphibians. He insisted that 8 was blatantly wrong and claimed that a Nbeautiful? fossil record had been found inGreenland a few years ago which illustrated the fishtoamphibians transition. "his confrontation between us, and the

palaeontologist?s claim, were subse7uentlyfeatured in a writeup in a ma4or Australiannewspaper./

"his claim, of course, warranted fullinvestigation. 8f verified, a series of fossilsillustrating the transition between ma4or types of organisms could prove to be aserious embarrassment to those who takeGod at His *ord when He says Hecreated separately the different types of creatures to reproduce only Nafter their kind? 8 didn?t expect to find any proof for this claim. %esides, if this claim were true,then surely the evolutionist scientificcommunity would be trumpeting the




https://answersingenesis.org/store/product/evolution-vs-god/?sku=30-9-460


https://answersingenesis.org/store/product/evolution-vs-god/?sku=30-9-460



display of these fossils in every ma4or museum and university, accompanied by bold headlines in ma4or newspapers andpopular scientific 4ournals.9f course, neither 8 nor others have seen such.At the museum8 checked in the ma4or Australian museum that employs this palaeontologist. &urely, if his claims were true, he would havefeatured this fossil series supposedly illustrating this ma4or transition from fish to amphibians in his own museum.)ow in this museum there is a gallery on fossils and the geological record. Foreover, there is also a special exhibit entitledN"racks "hrough "imeD"he &tory of Human #volution?, which features a section on fossils, including the transition from fishto amphibians. "his special exhibition was launched in /011 after being prepared under the direction of this palaeontologist.ive years later it is still on display in the museum, unchanged. &idebyside are the rhipidistian fish Eusthenopteron and theamphibian 5chthyostega, the latter fossil having been found in the N(pper +evonian? strata of #ast Greenland. "hese fossilsigure /$ supposedly illustrate how fish evolved into amphibians. However, they fail to show how fins changed into legs.

Fissing is the claimed Nbeautiful? fossil record found in Greenland which supposedly better illustrates this transition from fishto amphibians.*hat the textbooks sayigure /.

R"op to bottomTa$ the rhipidistian fish Eusthenopteron. b$ "he skeleton of the labyrinthodont amphibian 5chthyostega. %oth originals wereabout one meter long. After Carroll.2$ )otice how completely are the fins and legs."o confirm that this fish Eusthenopteron and amphibian 5chthyostega were not the transitional fossils or Nmissing links?$claimed to have been found recently, 8 went to the textbooks on vertebrate palaeontology. Colbert,6for example, in /0J0 alsoused these fossils to illustrate the supposed transition from water to land. However, his accompanying diagram onlyillustrated similarities between the 4aws and skulls of these fossils, and ignored the allimportant claimed transition from finsto legs.9n the other hand, both Carroll2 in /011 and &tanley> in /010 show drawings of the skeletal structures of the fins and legs

respectively of these two fossils, making comparisons in order to illustrate how these fossils might represent the transitionfrom the fish?s fin to the amphibian?s leg. urthermore, in his text, &tanley saysKN"hese fossils, many of which are assigned to the genus 5chthyostega, represent creatures that are strikingly intermediate inform between lobefinned fishes and amphibiansK "he lobe fin itself is formed of an array of bones resembling that found inamphibians = "hese features alone strongly suggest that amphibians were derived from lobefinned fishes, but additionalfeatures make the derivation a certainty = %ecause of this intriguing combination of features, 5chthyostega, which was notdiscovered until the present century, represents what is commonly termed a Lmissing linkM?.@

A pictorial diorama is then used by &tanley to reinforce this statement.A "alaeontologist3s admission&tanley, who is on the staff of "he :ohns Hopkins (niversity in %altimore, (&A, cannot be aware of the statement madeearlier on this issue of Nmissing links? by his colleague +r Colin atterson, &enior alaeontologist at the %ritish Fuseum)atural History$ in ondon. 8n /0B1 that museum published a book on evolution by atterson.J +esigned to be a popular book on the sub4ect, it is still being sold in museums, even here in Australia. &o it is still regarded as an authoritativepresentation on evolution, including the fossil record. Iet, even though fossils are mentioned in a number of places in thebook, nowhere does atterson illustrate any Nmissing links? between ma4or types of organisms, such as between fish and

amphibians.8n /0B0 American uther &underland read atterson?s book and noticed this rather obvious lack of even a single photographor drawing of a transitional fossil. &o he wrote to atterson asking why this omission, and in a letter dated / April /0B0atterson replied in these wordsKN= 8 fully agree with your comments on the lack of direct illustration of evolutionary transitions in my book. 8f 8 knew of any,fossil or living, 8 would certainly have included them. = Gould and the American Fuseum people are hard to contradictwhen they say there are no transitional fossils = Iou say that 8 should at least Lshow a photo of the fossil from which eachtype of organism was derived.M 8 will lay it on the lineDthere is not one such fossil for which one could make a watertightargument.?B

*reenland ossil inds*ith this background 8 scanned the recent literature to see if any relevant new fossils had been found recently which mightbe the claimed Nbeautiful? fossil record illustrating this fish to amphibians transition. &ure enough, in /01B an expedition to&tensi[ %erg in #ast Greenland by %ritish scientists from Cambridge (niversity and +anish scientists supported by theGreenland Geological &urvey found very closely associated skulls of a new fossil, ,canthostega, at sites where fossil

remains of 5chthyostega were also found.1

Ear 0ones and 0reathing"he first account of this new fossil material0 presented details of the skull and attempted to show that the middleear bone,while related to that in other tetrapods, had a functional part to play not only in hearing but also in breathing, which wouldmake this bone similar to a bone in some fish that helps to pump in water, which is then expelled through the gill slits./ 8twas also claimed that N"he earliest tetrapods may have retained a fishlike breathing mechanism.?//"his naturally evoked

scientific correspondence from other researchers,/6,

/2 with a response from the Cambridge (niversitypalaeontologist./>

&ins and lim0s)ext came a report from palaeontologist Clack andher colleague Coates at Cambridge (niversity on thefossiliEed limb bones./@ "hey reported that theforelimb of ,canthostega had eight digits and thehindlimb of 5chthyostega had seven, 7uite unlike thecommon pattern of five digits on the feet or hands$ of many amphibians, reptiles, birds and mammals. "heyalso described some resemblances of the forelimbskeleton of ,canthostega to the pectoral fin skeleton



of Eusthenopteron, the similarities being viewed by the researchers in the context of the evolution of the tetrapod limb bonesfrom the finbones of lobefinned fishes see igure 6$."o account for this variation in digit numbers from the general norm of five$, Cooke /J suggested that conceivably theevolutionary process in the genetics of limb development in these Nprimitive? amphibians was Nnot even well enoughcontrolled to assure constancy between different individuals within single species?. He thus concluded that the common fivedigit structure of tetrapod limb skeletons the pentadactyl limb$ must have become stabiliEed in a subse7uent lineage, or lineages, to produce the common ancestors of today?s classes of tetrapods. &uch a statement is clearly based on theassumption of macroevolution, and not on observational evidence of the bones in fins of fish changing into the limb bones of these amphibians and then other tetrapods.A 6missing link358n yet another paper Coates and Clack/B reported the discovery of what they regard as a fishlike gill branchial$ skeletonin ,canthostega, with grooves that they claimed are identical to those found in modern fishes. "hus they concluded that

N ,canthostega seems to have retained fishlike internal gills = for use in a7uatic respiration?./1

"his they claimed Nblurs thetraditional distinction between tetrapods and fishes? because it supposedly implies that the Nearliest? tetrapods were not fullylanddwelling terrestrial$. "hey further claimed that ,canthostega resembled a gillbreathing lungfish and that its legs withdigits must have first evolved for use in water rather than for walking on land. /0 "hey didn?t say it outright, but the implicationis that they believe, as does the palaeontologist who confronted me with this example, that ,canthostega thus 7ualifies as aNmissing link? transitional form$.No A mosaic tetra"odigure 6.Rleft to rightTaF ectoral fin skeleton of Eusthenopteron. 0F !estoration of the forelimb skeleton of ,canthostega. cF!estoration of thehindlimb skeleton of 5chthyostega.All are dorsal view, anterior edges to the left, and drawn at a comparative scale only.$ After Coates and Clack. />$ )oticethat some of the ,canthostegalimb bones are remotely similar to theEusthenopteron fin bones, but the total limb is after theoverall bone patter of fellow amphibian 5chthyostega. )otice also the varying digit numbers.

At about the same time, Clack and Coates made the following comment at an international conferenceKN ,canthostega gunnari is an (pper +evonian tetrapod which, like its better known contemporary 5chthyostega, displays amosaic of fish and tetrapodlike characters.?6

"hey also asked, rhetoricallyKN*as this animal secondarily a7uatic, or do the fishlike characters indicate retention of the primitive condition *ere itstetrapodlike characters = evolved among more terrestrial tetrapods, or were they originally developed for life in shallow,swampy waters?6/

Clearly, in their minds, and the minds of their fellow evolutionary palaeontologists, this mosaic of fish and tetrapodlikecharacters, and the presumed mode of life, make ,canthostega a Nmissing link?, even though they describe it as a tetrapod,that is, a fourlegged animal. However, ,canthostega was a fully formed and fully functional fourlegged amphibian, with four legs and not four fins, in some respects not unlike amphibians such as salamanders and newts.Fosaics don?t count"heir description of ,canthostega as a Nmosaic? is significant. ,canthostegais not the first fossil to be called a mosaic, acreature that has characteristics common to two or more other types of creatures. or example, Australia?s platypus has milkglands and fur that classify it as a mammal, but it has a leathery egg, echolocation ability, a duckbill, webbed feet, poison

spurs and other features that it shares in common with other animals, not only mammals.ike ,canthostega, ,rchaeoptery4 has been regarded as an evolutionary intermediate Nmissing link?$, but leadingevolutionists Gould and #ldredge state thatN&mooth intermediates = are almost impossible to construct, even in thought experimentsQ there is certainly no evidence for them in the fossil record curious mosaics like ,rchaeoptery4 do not count$.?66

An am"hi0ian nonethelessGodfrey62 lists >/ characteristics that are uni7ue to tetrapods. According to !itchie,6> who has inspected the actualfossils, ,canthostega Nfails the tetrapod test? in eight out of these >/ characteristics, with two other characters not foundin ,canthostega and another five not known from the fossil material. "hus ,canthostega still has 6J out of these >/ tetrapodcharacteristics. !itchie also suggests that there are three other tetrapod characteristics present in ,canthostega not listed byGodfrey, so if these are included, ,canthostega has 60 out of >> tetrapod characteristics. A >@th character which could beregarded as an unconventional tetrapod feature is the multidigit, paddlelike limbs. 9n the other hand, !itchielists ,canthostega as having only eight potential Nfishlike? or Nprimitive? characters.However, the fact remains that ,canthostega has been classified as an amphibian tetrapod$ with a mosaic of tetrapod and

fishlike features. )evertheless, leading evolutionists such as Gould and #ldredge regard mosaics as not 7ualifying asNmissing links?. 8nterestingly, in his /00 textbook Cowen6@ doesn?t mention ,canthostega, even though reports on itsclaimed intermediate characteristics had appeared in the scientific literature from /011 onwards.Fade up Nstories?&o why do evolutionary palaeontologists and other scientists still persist in claiming that Nmissing links? suchas ,canthostega have been found, when some of their eminent colleagues have pronounced these fossils as failing to7ualify Again, +r Colin atterson?s comments are tellingKNAs a palaeontologist myself, 8 am much occupied with the philosophical problems of identifying ancestral forms in the fossilrecord. = 8t is easy enough to make up stories of how one form gave rise to another, and to find reasons why the stagesshould be favoured by natural selection. %ut such stories are not part of science, for there is no way of putting them to thetest.?6J

&everal months later in an interview, after having been given two creation science books to read, 6B, 61 atterson was asked toelaborate, and in part of his response he said,N8f you ask, L*hat is the evidence for continuityM you would have to say, L"here isn?t any in the fossils of animals and man."he connection between them is in the mind.M?60

8n other words, fossils such as ,canthostega are regarded by some evolutionary palaeontologists as Nmissing links? notbecause they are, but because they are believed to be. As atterson says, it is Nin the mind?, because Nmissing links? are aphilosophical necessityDto somehow provide Nproof? for their evolutionary faith.,oreo/er ,N"he systematic status and biological affinity of a fossil organism is far more difficult to establish than in the case of a livingform, and can never be established with any degree of certainty. "o begin with, ninetynine per cent of the biology of anyorganism resides in its soft anatomy, which is inaccessible in a fossil.? 2



8n any case,N= anatomy and the fossil record cannot be relied upon for evolutionary lineages. Iet palaeontologists persist in doing 4ustthis.?2/

urthermore,N#verybody knows fossils are fickleQ bones will sing any song you want to hear.? 26

Conclusion"he fossil record has so far revealed many types of fish, some of which have bones in their fin lobes, serving a usefulpurpose as in the coelacanth long believed to be an extinct ancestor of land animals, until it was found alive and well$. "hefossil record has also revealed many types of amphibians, including 5chthyostega and ,canthostega, in which the limbbones are firmly attached to the backbone and clearly designed for bearing the weight of the body in walking. Anything trulyNinbetween? these crucial fish and amphibian characters is not only hard to conceive, but has never been found.

2here Are All the -uman &ossils5by +r. Andrew A. &nelling on +ecember /, /00/

'riginally published in Creation !$* no ! +Fecember !--!/ ")0##.&hop )ow"here are some claims and reports of human artefacts and remains in rock layers that are clearly part of the floodsediments. However, many of these claims are not ade7uately documented in any scientific sense, while those few reportsthat have appeared in the scientific and related literature remain open to 7uestion or other interpretations. or example, thebook ,ncient Man/ , andbook of 8uling ,rtifacts/ looks like an impressive and voluminous collection of such evidence,but on closer examination many of the artefacts, though puEEling archaeologically, still belong to the postflood era, whileother reports and claims are either anti7uated or sketchy and amateurish.9ften lay scientists claiming to have found human artefacts or fossils have not recorded specific location details, so thatprofessional scientists investigating the claims have had difficulty finding the location from which the sample in 7uestioncame. A&9, lay scientists have in the past not kept some of the rock which encloses the fossil or artefact as proof of its insitu occurrence. "hese two oversights have often made it well nigh impossible to reconstruct andSor prove where fossils or

artefacts came from, thus rendering such finds virtually useless.ossiliEed hammers and supposed human footprints in ancient geological strata, regarded by evolutionists as depositedmillions of years before man evolved, but regarded by creationists as flood deposits, are extremely difficult to documentscientifically above reproach andSor with any conclusive finality. Ferely finding rock around an implement does not prove itis preflood.$or example, it has been claimed that a gold chain was found in black coal. 6 However, the artefact evidently was exhibitedas a clean gold chain with no coal clinging to it, so we see no evidence that the chain was actually found in the coal, 4ust theclaim that it was. *hile one would never assume any dishonesty on the part of the people concerned, because proper scientific procedures have not been followed the exhibit has proven to be almost useless in convincing a generally skepticalscientific community and apathetic lay public."hus, should genuine human fossils or artefacts from the time of the global flood be found, then it is mandatory that proper scientific procedures be followed to document the geological context, in order to guarantee that the scientific significance of such a find is une7uivocally demonstrated. !egretfully, of course, the hardened skeptic would still remain unconvinced, butat least such a find may still awaken some in the apathetic public and a few of the more openminded scientists.*hat is needed, of course, are actual human bones fossiliEed in situ as an integral part of rock strata that are demonstrably

ancient in evolutionary terms, and therefore are usually flood sediments of the creationist framework for earth history. Iethere is where the real hard une7uivocal evidence is lacking and why people ask the 7uestion L*here are all the humanfossilsM*e simply cannot point to the report of a human skull found in socalled "ertiary brown coal in Germany, for there is nodefinitive scientific report available on this ob4ect, even though its existence has been verified by the staff of the Fining

Academy in reiberg.2 8f it is a coalified human skull, how is it possible to distinguish it from a clever carving in such a waythat it becomes conclusive proof #ven if it were demonstrated as genuine, are we sure that the "ertiary brown coal in7uestion was a flood stratum 8n some parts of the world some of the isolated socalled "ertiary sedimentary basins couldeasily be classified, according to some creationist geological schemes, as postflood strata. After all, the early floodgeologists, prior to the advent of yellian uniformitarianism and the evolutionary geological timescale, applied the termL"ertiaryM to those rock strata that they believed to be postflood."he controversial Guadeloupe skeletons are another case in point.> *ithout wishing to take sides in the debate, and in anycase the hard data are still inconclusive either way, the fact remains that even if perchance these skeletons were socalledFiocene, that in and of itself would still not prove that the skeletons were in flood sediments and therefore represented the

remains of preflood people. %eing a subdivision of the socalled "ertiary, these Fiocene rocks may still be postfloodsediments and so these Guadeloupe skeletons may still not be human fossils from the global flood.erhaps the fossiliEed human skeletons that come closest to having been preflood humans buried in flood strata are thoseskeletons found at Foab, (tah (&A$.@ 8n a copper mine there, two definitely human skeletons were found in CretaceousLageMQ sandstone supposedly more than J@ million years old$, the bones still 4oined together naturally and stained greenwith copper carbonate. *hile many regard these bones as recently buried, there still remains the remote possibility that theyare preflood human Lfossils.M*e can only concur that there is no definite une7uivocal evidence of human remains in those rock strata that can definitelybe identified as flood sediments. "his realiEation is at first rather perplexing. %ut some clues to unravelling this puEEleemerge on investigation.The Nature o the &ossil Recordet?s begin by considering the nature of the fossil record. Fost people don?t realiEe that in terms of numbers of fossils 0@Wof the fossil record consists of shallow marine organisms such as corals and shellfish.J *ithin the remaining @W, 0@W areall the algae and plantStree fossils, including the vegetation that now makes up the trillions of tonnes of coal, and all the other invertebrate fossils including the insects. "hus the vertebrates fish, amphibians, reptiles, birds and mammals$ together make up very little of the fossil recordDin fact, @W of @W, which is a mere .6@W of the entire fossil record. &ocomparatively speaking there are very, very few amphibian, reptile, bird and mammal fossils, yet so much is often made of them. or example, the number of dinosaur skeletons in all the world?s museums both public and university$ totals onlyabout 6,/.B urthermore, of this .6@W of the fossil record which is vertebrates, only /W of that .6@W or .6@W$ arevertebrate fossils that consist of more than a single boneO or example, there?s only one &tegosaurus skull that has beenfound, and many of the horse species are each represented by only one specimen of one tooth O1





https://answersingenesis.org/fossils/fossil-record/where-are-all-the-human-fossils/#fn_1































8n any regional area where vertebrate fossils are found, there is a general tendency for these land animals to be higher up inthe rock strata se7uence on top of the strata containing marine organisms. "his has been interpreted by evolutionists asrepresenting the evolutionary se7uence of life from marine invertebrates through fish and amphibians to the landbasedvertebrates.However, this same observation can be more reasonably explained by flood geologists as due to the order of burial of thedifferent ecological Eones of organisms by the flood waters. or example, shallow marine organismsS ecological Eoneswould be the first destroyed by the fountains of the great deep breaking open, with the erosional runoff from the land due tothe torrential rainfall concurrently burying them. 9n this basis then we would probably not expect to find human remains inthe early flood strata, which would contain only shallow marine organisms. "he fossil record as we understand it at themoment certainly fits with this.

Additionally, the ma4ority of the few mammal fossils in the fossil record are in the socalled "ertiary strata, which mostcreationist geologists nowadays regard as postflood strata. 8f this is the case, then there really aren?t very many mammal

fossils in the late lood sediments there are a few mammal fossils in the socalled FesoEoic rocks$. Conse7uently, it?s notonly human fossils that are not found in the lood sediments, but there is a relative lack of other mammal fossils also.9f course, in the postlood era humans would have been able to make the necessary decisions to get away from the localresidual catastrophes responsible for the postlood "ertiary$ strata, so we wouldn?t expect to find humans fossiliEed inpostlood sediments like we find other mammals.

Another problem in the fossil record is, as we have already seen, the fragmentary nature of what is often found, whichmakes identification difficult. or example,?a five million yearold piece of bone that was thought to be the collarbone of ahuman like creature is actually part of a dolphin rib . . .? 0 &uch genuine mistakes are inevitable when only fragments of boneare recovered from the rocks. *e can?t even be sure that some bone fragments already found in lood sediments aren?t infact human remains, having been labelled something else by evolutionists. After all, because of their evolutionarymoleculestoman belief bias$ they don?t expect to find human remains in lower older$ strata.Dierential ,o0ility

Another factor to be considered is the differential mobility of humans and many landdwelling animals compared to much of the abundant marine life, such as corals, barnacles and shellfish. *hen the lood began, the rising lood waters would

probably have encouraged humans and mobile land animals to preferentially move away from low lying areas to higher ground. "hus their being swept away by the lood waters would probably have been postponed perhaps for weeks$ until allthe high ground also was covered.Conse7uently, we would predict that it would be highly unlikely for us to find human fossils now in sediments that weredeposited early in the lood year. 8ndeed, when we look at the fossil record, as we have already seen, we find that in the socalled aleoEoic strata there is a preponderance of marine creatures, beginning with trilobites, corals, sea anemones,shellfish of all types, etc. "his is what we would predict, given that the lood waters carried sediments from the land out tothe sea where they would then be deposited, burying many of the relatively immobile seafloordwelling creatures, followedlater by destruction and burial of fish. "hus it is not surprising that we see the landdwelling animals being preserved later inthe fossil record, where they would have been buried later in the lood year as the rising lood waters finally covered theland surface completely.Destruction o Skeletons"he next 7uestion to ask isK *ould all the people still be alive when the lood waters finally covered all the land and sweptthem away to be buried and preserved as fossils in the later lood sediments Can we assume that there was nodestruction of the people?s bodies in the lood waters and by other processes operating during the lood and subse7uently

robably notO"he turbulence of the water, even in a local flood, can be horrific, particularly when the fastmoving current picks up not onlysand and mud, but large boulders. (nder such conditions, human bodies would probably be thrown around like flotsam andwould tend to be destroyed by the agitation and abrasion.%ut even if human bodies were buried in the later lood sediments, destruction could still occur subse7uently that is, postdeposition$. or example, if ground waters permeating through the sediments such as sandstone$ contain sufficient oxygen,then the oxygen would probably oxidiEe the organic molecules in the buried bodies and so destroy them. "his could beregarded as a type of weathering.$ ikewise, chemically active ground waters could also be capable of dissolving humanbones, removing all trace of buried people.Fany lood sediments have also undergone chemical and mineralogical changes due to the temperatures and pressures of burial, plus the presence of the water trapped in between the sediment grains. "his process of change, known technically asmetamorphism, eventually obliterates many fossils in the original sediments, whether they be fossils of shellfish, corals or mammals, particularly with increasing depth of burial, and higher temperatures and pressures.Iet another process that could destroy buried human bodies would be the intrusion of molten igneous$ rock into the lood

sediments, and through them to the surface to form volcanoes and lava flows. &uch processes involve heat intense enoughto melt rocks and recrystalliEe them. As the hot molten rock rises through the sediments, the sediments are often baked bythe heat, and again chemical and mineralogical changes occur that obliterate many contained fossils. All of these factorsgreatly lengthen the odds of finding a human fossil today.Dierential Sus"ension)ot only would the turbulence of the sedimentladen lood waters probably destroy some of the human bodies swept away,but differential suspension in the waters could have made it hard to bury those bodies that survived the turbulence. "his isbecause human bodies when immersed in water tend to bloat, and therefore become lighter and float to the surface. "his iswhat is meant by differential suspension. "he human bodies floating on the water surface could therefore for some time becarrion for whatever birds were still flying around seeking places to land and food to eat. ikewise, marine carnivores stillalive in their watery habitat would also devour corpses.urthermore, if the bodies floated long enough and were not eaten as carrion, then they would still have tended to either decompose or be battered to destruction on and in the waters before any burial could take place. "his could explain why westill don?t find human fossils higher up in the fossil recordSgeological column, that is, the later lood sediments.*hen we take all these factors into account, it would seem unlikely that many of the people present at the time the loodwaters came could have ended up being fossiliEed. #ven if a handful, perhaps a few thousand, were preserved, when sucha small number is distributed through the vast volume of lood sediments, the chances of one being found at the surfaceare mathematically very, very low, let alone of being found by a professional scientist who could recogniEe its significanceand document it properly.utting all these factors together and assuming that they are all realistic possibilities, then the probability of finding a humanfossil in the lood sediments today would be very, very small. "o date, our investigations of the fossil record indicate thatthere are no human fossils in lood strata, so perhaps the above explanations could be some of the reasons why this is so.






Conclusions As far as we are aware at the present time, there are no indisputable human fossils in the fossil record that we could saybelong to the prelood human cultures$. *hen we endeavour to understand some of the processes that may haveoccurred during the lood, and also the real nature of the fossil record, we are not embarrassed by the seeming lack of human fossils.*e don?t have all the explanations as to how the evidence came to be that way, and it may be that in the future we willdiscover some human fossils. However, there is also much about the fossil record that the evolutionists have a hard timeexplaining. 9n the other hand, we should also realiEe that we don?t have all the answers either, and we never will.%ecause we weren?t there at the time of the lood we cannot scientifically prove exactly what happened, so there will alwaysbe aspects that will involve our faith. However, it is not blind faith. As we have investigated the evidence, we have seennothing to contradict about a world lood. *e can be satisfied that there are reasonable explanations, for the seeming lackof human fossils in lood rocks.

COA'

-ow Did 2e *et All This Coal5by +r. Andrew A. &nelling on April /, 6/2Q last featured April /, 6/>

3hankfully* the earth is filled with huge reserves of coal. 1ut that raises an interesting :uestion if most of this coal wasformed during the recent* global lood. Were enough plants alive at the same time to produce so much coal so :uickly?&hop )ow"he (&A has more than seven trillion tons of coal reserves. / &imilar huge coal deposits lie underground in Canada,

Australia, China, &outh Africa, and other countries. 8n many cases, the coalfields are not 4ust one bed but multiple coal bedsstacked between other fossilbearing sedimentary rock layers. *here did all this coal come from#ach coal bed may beinches to feet thick, formed by the accumulation and compacting of thick piles of dead plant material. 8t has been estimatedthat, if all the vegetation living on the earth?s surface today were converted to coal, it would amount to only a small fractionD

perhaps 2 percentDof the earth?s coal reserves.6&o where did all this vegetation buried in the coal beds come from And if all these coal beds were formed during the yearlong lood only about >,2 years ago, how did we get all this coal so7uicklyThe uantity o (egetation Re4uired"he estimated 7uantity depends on how thick a pile of vegetation, called peat, needs to be compressed and converted intocoal. 8t is usually claimed that it takes a peat layer 15/ feet thick to produce each foot of coal. 2However, if you compare theenergy content of the coal to that of the peat the calorific value, or energy from burning$, or if you compare the weight of e7ual volumes of coal and peat, in both cases the peattocoal compaction ratio would be only about 6 to /O >urthermore,studies of coal beds that are in contact with sandstone layers, along with studies of dinosaur tracks where dinosaurs musthave walked on top of the peat layers before their burial to eventually form coal beds, demonstrate that peattocoalcompaction ratios of between 6 to / and / to / are more realistic.@ &uch ratios are also consistent with the measuredcompaction around many coal balls limestone nodules containing fossils of plants andSor marine snails, clams, or lampshells$ and compaction of wood that is sometimes found in coal beds."he estimate that all the vegetation alive on earthtoday would produce only about 2 percent of the earth?s coal reserves is based on a compaction ratio of somewherebetween / to / and 1 to /. 8f that compaction ratio is only between 6 to / and / to /, then today?s volume of vegetation

would produce /@52 percent of the known coal reserves. *here did the rest come fromToday3s S"arse (egetationFore than half of today?s land surface is covered by deserts, ice sheets, or only sparse vegetation. (nder the central

Australian deserts and Africa?s &ahara +esert is evidence of lush vegetation that grew there during the postlood 8ce AgeDa time of both rapid ice sheet accumulation and plentiful rain at and near the earth?s e7uator. urthermore, thick coal bedsunder some of the Antarctic ice sheet suggest that continent was also once covered in lush vegetation."hus, if all today?sland surface were covered with lush vegetation, as the prelood land surface likely was, then the volume of vegetationwould at least double. *ith minimal compaction, that amount would account for @ percent or more of the known coalreserves.8n today?s world the earth?s surface is roughly 2 percent land and B percent ocean. However, the land of Creation, along with evidence that some of this land was later piled into high mountain ranges during the lood, might implythere was @ percent land and @ percent seas in the prelood world. "hat would almost double the land surface coveredin lush vegetation. 8f true, even more of today?s coal beds would be accounted for.Iet there are other sources of vegetation not seen on earth today.Uni4ue )re<&lood (egetation &ound in Coal

Fuch of the vegetation found fossiliEed in the coal beds is very different from today?s vegetation. "he LCarboniferousM coalbeds of the )orthern Hemisphere, which stretch from the Appalachian Fountains in the (&A through #ngland and #urope,all the way to the (rals of !ussia, consist of fossil lycopod trees giant relatives of today?s tiny forestfloor plants known asclub mosses$, giant ferns, conifers, giant rushes, and extinct seed ferns. Clearly, different vegetation grew back then.Fost of these plants had hollow stems and roots. "heir hollow, lightlybuilt structures were not designed for growing in soils but for floating on water .J &o these fossil plants appear to represent the remains of a floatingforest biome or ecosystem$, whichalso included odd reptiles and fish. A smallscale e7uivalent is found today in 7uaking bogs mats of spongy bog vegetationthat float over lakes$."hus in the prelood world the oceans once had vast mats of floating forests that apparently grew outfrom the coastlines, fringing the original supercontinent, particularly where the seas were shallow.B "he volume of thisuni7ue vegetation is now preserved in the )orthern Hemisphere?s LCarboniferousM coal beds. "he extent of these bedswould suggest that perhaps as much as half the prelood sea surface was covered with these floating forest mats.8f half theplanet was once a supercontinent above the ocean and floating forest mats covered half of the ocean itself, then as muchas B@ percent of the earth?s prelood surface could have been covered by lush vegetationDmore than six times the areacovered by vegetation on the present earth?s surface. "hese calculations would thus indicate there was more than enoughlush vegetation growing on the prelood earth surface to provide the volume of vegetation to form today?s coal beds.Con/erting (egetation to Coal9nce buried, how 7uickly could this vegetation be compacted and converted to coal aboratory experiments havesuccessfully produced coallike materials rapidly, under conditions intended to simulate the conditions when actual coalbeds accumulated.A research team at the Argonne )ational aboratory in 8llinois made material resembling coal by heatingplant materials with clay minerals at 26V /@VC$ for two to eight months in the absence of oxygen. After a series of suchexperiments, the team concluded that coal can be produced directly from plant materials via thermal reactions speeded upby the clay minerals in only one to four months. 1 9ther experiments have also confirmed that clay particles act as chemical



https://answersingenesis.org/biology/plants/how-did-we-get-all-this-coal/#fn_1


























catalysts in a rapid coalforming process.0 8t is thus significant that clay minerals often account for up to 1 percent of thenonplant matter in actual coal.&ubse7uent experiments have more closely simulated natural geologic conditions, withtemperatures of only 6@BV /6@VC$ and lower pressures e7uivalent to burial under @,0@ feet R/,1 metersT of wetsediments$./ After only B@ days, the original plant and wood materials still transformed into coal material, comparablechemically to coal from the same area of 8ndonesia.%ecause these experiments simulated natural conditions, we can beconfident that the coalforming process is rapid and re7uires only months. &o there is no reason to insist that coal formationre7uires millions of years.How +id prelood *orld roduce &o Fuch Coal

Click to enlarge&ome people have wondered how the vegetation during the prelood day could produce so much coal, since today?s

vegetation would produce only 2W of known coal reserves. "o find the answer, we must reexamine the assumptions behindthat estimate.irst, it is often assumed that around / feet of peat is necessary to produce / foot of coal. %ut if you consider the weight of peat and coal, or if you consider the energy content, then / feet of vegetation probably produced @5/ feet of coal.&econd, it is mistakenly assumed that the prelood day was much like today. "hat is not the case. 8t turns out that theprelood was very lush, producing nearly six times more vegetation than we see today.Conclusion8t appears that lush vegetation might have covered up to B@ percent of the prelood world, including the floating forestsfringing the land. "he lood waters rose from the oceans and swept over the land, catastrophically destroying and buryingall the vegetation in beds between other fossilbearing sediments. "he temperatures and pressures at these depths, aidedby the presence of water and clay, converted these beds into coal within months."hus the huge coal deposits of today?s world can easily be explained. // "he coal formed 7uickly in the yearlong lood onlyabout >,2 years ago.

&orked Seams Sa0otage Swam" Theoryby +r. Andrew A. &nelling on :une /, /00>

'riginally published in Creation !&* no # +(une !--$/ "$0"%.Most geologists believe the process of coal formation was slow and gradual* but this is denied by the field evidence.&hop )owictured are some thin coal seams or layers near Chignecto %ay otherwise known as the %ay of undy$, )ova &cotia,Canada. "he geological hammer gives an indication of the scale. "he coal seam it is resting against is about / centimetres> inches$ thick, while along the top of the photograph can be seen another coal seam which is about /@cm J inches$ thickand roughly parallel to the bottom coal seam. %etween these two can be seen two thinner coal seams. *hat is critically sig

nificant is that the uppermost of these two thinner coal seamsactually forks or branches, one fork angling acutely upwardsthrough the intervening stratum to merge with the coal seamabove. How could this coal have formed+iagram of Eshaped coal seam.

According to the standard theory, remains of plant debrisaccumulate as a rotting mass called peat in swamps andmarshes. "oday we know of a number of swamps where peatappears to be accumulating. "his peat accumulates slowly andgradually today estimated at between / and > millimetres per year$, so geologists who believe that Nthe present is the key tothe past? conclude that the plant debris found in coal seamsmust have formed slowly and gradually from plant debrisaccumulating as peat in the bottom of swamps.9nce the peat is













https://cdn-assets.answersingenesis.org/doc/articles/am/v8/n2/coal-chart-large.pdf








buried under subse7uently deposited layers of sand and mud, in the process of coal formation it is compressed down toabout a tenth of its original thickness. "his means that for a /@ centimetre J inch$ thick coal seam there could haveoriginally been up to /.@ metres @ feet$ of peat to be compressed. Accumulating at />mm per year, 4ust this one layer would have supposedly taken up to /,@ years to accumulate.However, most of these geologists are realistic enough to accept that 4ust as flooding can occur locally today, then localflood events in the past would have deposited layers of sediment in swamps burying the peats. &ubse7uent regeneration of plant growth would result in more peat then accumulating on that sediment layer, so forming a se7uence of successive peatand sediment accumulations within the swamp. Fany geologists believe this is the process which produced the layeringoften observed within individual coal seams. "o produce the thicker layers of sediment between coal seams as seen in thepicture here$ would have taken much longer and more widespread periods of flooding, which would effectively destroy theswamps for protracted periods of time.)ow can this slow and gradual theory explain the situation shown in this photographof a field exposure +efinitely notO )owhere do we observe peat forking like this in swamps today. 8f the intervening

sediment layer through which the coal seam forks represents a protracted period of flooding and destruction of the originalpeataccumulating swamp, then how could this swamp have continued in this localiEed area, and on a slo"ing surace,while at the same time flooding was depositing sediments horiEontally to bury the swamp Clearly, socalled E4unctions likethis one are totally inexplicable in terms of the Nslow and gradual accumulation in a swamp? theory for coal formation.urthermore, such E4unctions are found in many coalfields around the world, the forks often passing through many feet or metres of intervening strata over distances of several miles or kilometres. "his only compounds the impossibility of theswamp theory explanation.9n the other hand, the catastrophic flooding model can explain these occurrences with ease.-egetation ripped up by flood waters and accumulated as floating mats of debris on the water?s surface progressivelybecame waterlogged and sank to accumulate as a layer below as in &pirit ake at Fount &t Helens/$. "hat then becameburied by other sediments, or was caught up and buried within accumulating sediments. As more debris becamewaterlogged and sank, further layers of debris would accumulate in a progressive alternating se7uence of sediments andvegetation debris layers, that were subse7uently altered to the coal. 8n this model the vegetative debris can accumulate andbe buried at any angle or relationship to the enclosing sediments. Hence the E4unction seen in the photograph."hus thefield evidence is consistent with catastrophic destruction and burial of vegetation during the lood, and totally inconsistent

with the slow and gradual swamp theory which prevails among geologists committed to the idea that Nthe present is the keyto the past?, or geological evolution."he catastrophic flood model can explain the E4unctions where the normal Nswamptheory? fails. icture shows floating log mat in &pirit ake at Fount &t Helens, *ashington.

+rained swamp deposit along the coast of )ova &cotia.

Coal %eds and *lo0al &loodby +r. Andrew A. &nelling on :une /, /01J

'riginally published in Creation )* no # +(une !-)&/ "60"!.Coal beds formed from plant debris catastrophically buried by Global lood about $*%66 years ago?&hop )ow#volutionists believe that the material in coal beds accumulated over millions of years in 7uiet swamp environments like the#verglades of lorida. #volutionary geologists often ob4ect to the creationists? explanation of coal bed formation, so what aretheir arguments and what answers do we give to them&ome geologists have claimed that even if all the vegetation onearth was suddenly converted to coal this would make a coal deposit only /2W of the known coal reserves on earth. Hence

at least 22 loods are needed, staggered in time, to generate our known coal beds. "herefore a single lood cannot be thecause of coal formation."his argument is based on valid estimates of the volume of vegetation currently on today?s landsurfaces. %ut it assumes that at least /6 metres of vegetation are needed to produce one metre of coal eg. Holmes, /0J@$.Fodern research shows that less than two metres of vegetation are needed to make one metre of coal. &ome observationsmade by coal geologists working in mines e.g. the compaction of coal around clay Nballs? included in some coal beds$suggest that the compaction ratio is probably much less than 6K/ and more likely very close to /K/. "hese observationsdestroy this ob4ection to coal bed formation during lood, since instead of today?s vegetation volume only compacting downto /2W of known coal reserves, today?s vegetation volume would compact down to at least 2W of the known coalreserves. %ut where did the other JW come from"wo other factors are very relevant here. "he evolutionists? argumentbased on the volume of vegetation on today?s land surface ignores the fact that JW of today?s land surface is covered bydeserts or only sparse vegetation. 8n addition, there are the vast icy wastes of Antarctica beneath which are rock layerscontaining thick coal beds. &o if all of today?s land surface was covered with the lush vegetation suggested by Antarctica?scoal beds, under the influence of a global subtropical greenhouse effect before the lood the socalled water vapour canopy$ and the mist that watered the ground daily instead of today?s unreliable intermittent rain$ then the volume of suchvegetation on today?s land surface would be sufficient to produce at least another @W of the known coal reserves. &o whatabout the remaining /W%ut this all assumes that the area of land surface available for vegetation growth has always beenthe same. "his assumption simply is not correct. 8nstead of land masses surrounded by seas today?s world$, in the prelood world there was one sea surrounded by one large land mass."here was probably more land area then on the face of the globe than Nseas? see "aylor, /016$. "his being the case therefore, it is likely that there was at least twice as much landarea available for vegetation growth in the prelood world compared with today?s world i.e. at least JW land versus >Wsea in the prelood world compared with today?s roughly 2W land verses BW oceans$. 8f then this vast land area wasunder lush vegetation, then we can account for /W of the known coal reserves.









A %etter 2ay%ut there is another way of comparing vegetation growth and volume with the known coal beds, a way that is probably far more reliable, and that is by comparing the stored energy in vegetation with that in coal. 8nternational authority on solar energy, Fary Archer, has stated that the amount of solar energy falling on the earth?s surface in /> days is e7ual to theknown energy of the world?s supply of fossil fuels. &he also said that only . 2 W of the solar energy arriving at the earth?ssurface is stored as chemical energy in vegetation through photosynthetic processes. (ournal of ,pplied Electrochemistry ,-ol. @, /0B@, p. /B$ rom this information we can estimate how many years of today?s plant growth would be re7uired toproduce the stored energy e7uivalent in today?s known coal reservesK+ivide /> days by .2Wi.e. /> x /$S.2 days e7uals >J,JJB days or /61 years of solar input via photosynthesis.&o we can conclude that only /61 years of plant growth at today?s rate and volume is all that is re7uired to provide theenergy e7uivalent stored in today?s known coal bedsO "here was, of course, ample time between Creation and the lood for

such plant growth to occurD/J years, in fact.Conclusion#ither way, whether by comparison of energy stored in vegetation growth and in coal i.e. the time factor$, or by vegetationgrowth, climate, geography, land area and compaction ratio i.e. the volume factor$, we can show conclusively that theevolutionist?s ob4ection is totally invalid. "here was ample time, space and vegetation growth for one lood to produce all of today?s known coal beds.

Coal1 (olcanism and &loodby +r. Andrew A. &nelling and :ohn Fackay on April /, /01>

'riginally published in (ournal of Creation !* no ! +,pril !-)$/ !!0"-. Abstract ,pplying the e4plosive pyroclastic volcanism model to the formation of coal deposits* it is entirely feasible that all the coal seams were formed by the conditions during the lood.&hop )ow

"he debate over the origin of coal seams was settled years ago in favour of in situ or autochthonous$ formation from peatsformed slowly in swamps of various descriptions. 9ne of the key factors in this ascendancy of the peat swamp model over the various allochthonous or transported$ models was the recognition of socalled Nfossil forests?Dtree stumps with rootsand logs in apparent growth positions on top of coal seams. "he peat swamp model has not only become the basis of virtually all studies on coal seam formation, but is now also the basis of studies on the coalification of the plant constituentsto produce the various coal macerals e.g. +iessel,/ &tach et al.6$. or this reason considerable effort has been directedtowards the study of modern peatforming environments e.g. Fartini and Glooschenko 2$ as a key to understanding the peatprecursors of coal and the coalification process itself. #ven so, rof. Fartini of Guelph (niversity Canada$, a noted experton modern peatforming environments, while giving his keynote address on the sub4ect to a recent conference the /01>/1th )ewcastle &ymposium organiEed by the Coal Geology &pecialist Group of the Geological &ociety of Australia$ came tothe 7uestion of the relationship between peat and coal, and honestly admitted that he didn?t know what it wasO(nfortunately,the ascendancy of the gradualistic peat swamp model has led to neglect of the evidence for the allochthonous, andcatastrophic, deposition of coal seams. #ven with abundant evidence for contemporaneous volcanism resulting involcanically derived interseam sediments, such coals are still viewed as having formed in peat swamps that wereperiodically buried by volcanic debris. %ut the Fay /1, /01 catastrophic eruption of Fount &t. Helens, (.&.A., provided an

opportunity to witness the wholesale destruction of forests by volcanism, and to study the deposition of this forest debris inlayers and as stumps with roots and logs in growth positions within pyroclastic sediments, all reminiscent of depositionalse7uences in some coal basins. urthermore, recent artificial coalification experiments have been able to rapidly producehigh rank coals using clays as catalysts under conditions analogous to those existing in and around volcanic centres.The 8HG> ,ount St. -elens eru"tion9n &unday morning, Fay /1, /01, an estimated / megaton explosion blasted over four cubic kilometres of rock materialout of Fount &t. Helens, (.&.A. "he top > metres of the mountain were blown away. According to ipman andFullineaux> a Ndirected blast was generated by massive explosions that occurred when an enormous landslide released theconfining pressure on a shallow dacite cryptodome and its associated hydrothermal system. ropelled by expanding gasesand gravity, the mixture of gas, rock, and ice moved off the volcano as a catastrophic, hot, ground hugging, turbulentpyroclastic cloud at velocities of as much as 2 mSs *ithin minutes the directed blast had extended about 6@ km andcarried off or knocked down all trees in its path.? 9ver a radius of more than // km the surrounding coniferous forests wereflattened and a wall of ash, mud and broken trees roared across nearby &pirit ake and down "outle !iver Canyon ig. /$."his volcanic debris included enormous 7uantities of trees which had been devastated and stripped of their branches and

leaves.!eporting the event, ritE@ stated that many of the trees from Fount &t. Helens were transported many kilometresdown "outle Canyon by ash and mud flows and deposited upright and at various other angles. ritE commented andrecorded by photography$ that although all the blasted stumps were devoid of branches, many still had large root systems.

&ome even retained fine rootlets. "his was true particularly for theshorter stumps which were deposited upright in an apparentgrowth position. "he longer logs wore often deposited horiEontallywhile some were in diagonal position.

As a result of his investigations, ritE@ concludedKa$ 8t is wrong to automatically assume that trees discovered inmud or volcanic ash sediments grew in situ 4ust because they arein apparent growth position and show root structuresQ andb$ "he mud and ashflow deposited trees in "outle Canyon havemuch in common with the petrified Nforests? of the #ocene amar !iver ormation in Iellowstone )ational ark.igure !. ocation map of the Fount &t. Helens area, *ashington,(&A, showing the devastating effects of the Fay /1, /01eruption.Click here for larger image."hus ritE postulated that such petrified Nforests? could have beenformed rapidly by the repetition of similar mechanisms to thatobserved at Fount &t. Helens, that is, they were not formed insitu despite their apparent growth position. ritE?s observations of


https://answersingenesis.org/bios/john-mackay/

https://answersingenesis.org/store/product/how-do-we-know-bible-true-volumes-1-2/?sku=40-1-410

https://answersingenesis.org/the-flood/coal-volcanism-and-noahs-flood/#fn_1











https://cdn-assets.answersingenesis.org/img/articles/tj/v1/i1/Fig1.jpg



https://answersingenesis.org/bios/john-mackay/

https://answersingenesis.org/store/product/how-do-we-know-bible-true-volumes-1-2/?sku=40-1-410










the events at Fount &t. Helens and his conclusions indicate that the "outle !iver event produced large deposits of uprightconiferous logs in situations where they could still bleed from their freshly broken surfaces, but be unable to drop leaves or branches, since these had already been blasted off.!eturning again to the Fount &t. Helens eruption, after the violence hadsubsided, a gigantic raft of broken logs and stumps floated on nearby &pirit ake see ig. /$. J %etween the logs were thesmaller charred remains of bark, broken branches, woody splinters and anything else that had not totally burned in the gascloud that had poured down Fount &t. Helens. "he mountain itself was a sterile grey, bare of life and covered only withloose ash and pumice.Comparison of aerial photographs of &pirit ake taken soon after the eruption with those taken in late/012 indicated that the siEe of the log raft had diminished over those three years. Fuch of the material had becomewaterlogged and sunk to the bottom. Fany of the larger logs and stumps were still floating, and a significant portion of themwere floating vertically. "his was particularly true of those with large root areas still attached or with larger trunk bases. J"hesame was true of many of the sunken logs, as investigated by skin divers FcFillen and *hite in late /012. J "he bottom of &pirit ake resembled an underwater forest. "hose tree stumps resting on the bottom, roots down and trunks vertical, gave

the appearance of having grown there. "hey were very easy to push around, but rapidly returned to their vertical floatingposition. "he skin divers reported that where the lake was less than six metres deep, the bottom was devoid of debris,because the sunken logs and fragments either had accumulated in the deeper parts of the lake, or had been rapidly coveredby more volcanic ash being washed into the lake. 8n fact every new rainfall still brings an abundance of volcanic ash, mudand organic debris into &pirit ake, because the surrounding mountainsides are still devoid of new wellestablished

vegetation.igure ". 8dealiEed sketches of deposition in &pirit ake, Fount &t.Helens area, *ashington, (&A. a$ +eposition of debris from, and by,the initial eruptive blast. b$ +eposition of ash and organic debris bysubse7uent rainfall runoff.Click here for larger image.igure 6a is an idealiEed sketch of what the bottom of &pirit ake isvisualiEed as looking like at present, particularly the deepest parts of the lake. "here would first be layers of ash, and rubble from the initial

explosion, followed by an accumulation of pine tree fragments such asthe more resistant leaf debris, bark and wood splinters which sank after floating for only a short time in the lake, all buried by ash and mud.Fuch of this pine tree debris would be charred or burnt. 9n top of this

layer of ash would be further ash and mud from later rainfall$ with the larger sheets of bark that have only recently pealedoff the floating logs through bacterial action. ogs and stumps, many in the rootdown position and with bark peeled or blasted off, would then be resting on the top of these layers with still further ash and mud accumulating around them. 8t isnot hard to visualiEe how increased runoff, sedimentation, andSor further ash falls would deposit and more organic debrisand logs, and so add to this tern of sediment accumulation several times in succession as depicted in igure 6b.Already onescientific field expedition has commenced investigation of the &pirit ake area as modern site of coal seam formation. Anearly reportB has confirmed the essential elements of the model depicted in igure 6. Fany more pine logs are now floatingvertically in the waters of &pirit ake, while the charred remains of other pine tree debris bark and wood splinters$ lie buriedin the volcanic ash and mud both on the lake?s bottom and on the lake?s shores. "he report indicates that some of this debrisappears to have already coalified.Analogue o ancient ra"id coal measure ormation

)ewcastle, ) &.*, Australiaigure #. GeneraliEed geological map of the )ewcastle Coalfield, )&*, Australiashowing the location of &wansea Heads and Puarries Head.Click here for larger image.8n the coal measures at )ewcastle, )&*, several sediment se7uences similar tothat in the idealiEed diagrams of igure 6 have been identified in outcrops at&wansea Heads and Puarries Head see ig. 2$."he relevant coal seams in thisarea are the (pper and ower ilot &eams, seen in igure > with tree stumpsprotruding from them up into tuff beds. "hese seams are stratigraphically locatedin the %oolaroo &ubGroup of the )ewcastle Coal Feasures ig. @$. Fc3enEieand %ritten1 describe the (pper and ower ilot &eams as a Nseries of thin coaland carbonaceous plies with only generaliEed groupings into seams, so that therelationship of their thicknesses and those of the interbedded sediments tooverlying and underlying seams cannot always be well defined %oth seams are

characteriEed by their association with thick tuff beds which normally have a widerange of red, green and black colours. = "hese tuffs contains abundant flakes of mica. *here the two groupings are identifiable, the intervening !eid?s Fistakeormation mostly consists of the &outhampton &andstone Fember withassociated shales and minor tuff beds.? "he beds dip between >V and 1V to thewest.0 "he ilot &eams are not of economic significance or 7uality. "he (pper

ilot &eam, for instance, contains up to 61W ash./+iessel// has described in detail the section at &wansea Heads andPuarries Head. igure J is his generaliEed sketch of the relevant section, which may be closely compared to the PuarriesHead cliff outcrop shown in igure >. +iessel//has divided the !eid?s Fistake ormation between the ower and (pper ilot&eams into four tuff subunits and interpreted them as ash fall, pyroclastic surge, ash flow, and pyroclastic surge depositsrespectively, using the pyroclastic ash$ deposits of the Fay /1, /01 lens eruption> as his model."he site at &wanseaHeads is a well known tourist spot and is referred to by +iessel, 0 who made the comment that None of the most interestingthe area is the occurrence of remnants of tree trunks, many of them in growth positions , on top of the ower ilot Coal.?"hat statement reflects the longstanding view held by many as far +avid/6 that the tree stumps are in growth position.However, is not a universal opinion as %ranagan and ackham/2 indicateK N&ome of the stumps appear to be in the positionof growth but this may be accidental.?










https://answersingenesis.org/the-flood/coal-volcanism-and-noahs-flood/#fig4





































igure $. "ree stumps andlogs in apparent growthpositions at &wanseaHeads a$ b$, and PuarriesHead c$. At &wanseaHeads the stump a$ andlog b$ are in the ryholitictuff above the ower ilot&eam. "hey are completelysilicified, apart fromcoalification of the former bark on the log. At Puarries

Head the logs sit on top of the ower ilot &eam see also ig. J$.

igure %. "he stratigraphic se7uence in the )ewcastle Coal Feasures after Crappand )olan/$.Click here for larger image."he vast number of tree stumps and logs include many in an upright position as wellas those in horiEontal positions see ig. >$. "he horiEontal logs are usually coalifiedand crushed, whilst the vertical logs often have at their bases coalified bark with ironcarbonate replacement of the interior woody tissue. "he upper trunks of the verticallogs which protrude high into the tuffs are often silicified, the woody tissue beingreplaced by chalcedony. "he tuff around these logs contains coalified specks thathave the characteristics of resinite or coalified resin.Historically, the logs and stumps have been regarded as overwhelming evidence of insitu formation of the coal seams, but the following observational evidence argues

strongly against the trees being in actual growth positionKa$ *hilst many of the stumps and logs are in vertical positions, they rarely exhibitevidence of branching or leaf structures and are commonly fractured at their ends."hey are therefore identical to the logs and stumps produced by the Fount &t. Helensexplosion and deposited with ash in both &pirit ake and "outle Canyon.b$ #ven as far back as /0B, +avid/6 argued that these trees hadbeen rapidlyburied by an ash fall, and in support of his argument pointed to the presence of

resinites in the associated tuff. &ince some of the vertical trees he referred to were up to 2feet or / metres tall, their excellent state of preservation indicates that the entire / metres of ash and sediment were deposited 7uickly, that is, the interseam sediments between the (pper and ower ilot &eams were rapidly and catastrophically deposited, a conclusionacknowledged by +resser/// by his discussion of the origin of these interseam tuffs.c$ "he stumps and logs are found on the top of the coal seams and are not in the coal. "heroot structures of the tree stumps rarely penetrate any depth into the coal seams. +avid /6 K

602 claimed this was because the precursor trees, which have been identified as +adaxylon, a

relative of the )orfolk, 8sland ine, could not grow healthily Nif immersed in peat?. "his is afactual statement which does not assist the argument that the tree stumps are in situ.

igure &. GeneraliEed sketch of !eid?s Fistake ormation at Puarries Head south of )ewcastle showing its ma4or subdivision after +iessel//$.Click here for larger image.d$ "he classification of the stumps and logs as +adaxylon supports the thesis that theprecursor trees were catastrophically destroyed. +adaxylon is, in fact, the name given to

Araucaria pine trees when it is uncertain what specific name should be given to pine trees thatare recogniEed as Araucaria. 8n this case the reason the name +adaxylon has been given isthat the stumps and logs rarely show any evidence of leaf scars or branches, factors that arenecessary for identification of Araucaria./> "he absence of these identifying factors againindicates catastrophe, that is, the precursor trees were stripped of these recogniEable featuresin much the same way as the conifers on the slopes of Fount &t. Helens were stripped of their

leaves, branches and some bark by the force of the /01 eruption?s blast.e$ "he coal upon which the logs and stumps are lying and the enclosing sediments containabundant evidence of Glossopteris flora, but a virtual absence of Araucaria forest litter. "his isan observation that even +avid/6 commented was strange if the Araucaria actually grewthere.f$ "he coal and surrounding sediments show no conclusive evidence of bioturbation. #ven thecommonly referred to vertebraria could be viewed as having been depositedcontemporaneously with the sediments.g$ Analyses of the coalified bark of the logs, even those reported by +avid /6 back in /0B,and analyses of the coal in the seams below the tree stumps and logs, indicate that much of

the coal in the seams is derived from, or has similar composition to that of, the Araucaria bark. "his suggests that the coal,while not containing much evidence of Araucaria forest litter on its surface, doescontain much Araucaria bark throughout. &uch a situation is inexplicable if theprecursor trees are viewed as the terminal growth, or the forest stage, of a peatswamp. (nder terminal swamp conditions, the Araucaria bark and litter shouldonly be found on the surface of the peat, since they would be deposited thereonly after the area had ceased to be a swamp. "hus this evidence is far moreconsistent with a volcanism model, where the bark debris is depositedthroughout the sediments like those in &pirit ake, than with terminal growth on aforested swamp refer to +avid,/6 Crapp and )olan/$.igure 7. ocation of the 9akleigh mine in the !osewood*alloon Coalfield,Pueensland, Australia.































Click here for larger image.h$ 8f )ashar /@ is correct when she states that some of the vertical logs of the ower ilot &eam originally penetrated up intothe next seam of coal, then it is obvious that not only were the interseam volcanic sediments deposited rapidly, but so alsowas the vegetable material in the (pper ilot &eam. "his would have been necessary to ensure that the full lengths of thevertical logs would be preserved, since such logs would not have been preserved if they had been exposed for any length of time while the area slowly subsided and new swamp conditions developed.i$ "he occurrence of many crushed and coalified logs in a horiEontal position, and sometimes of enormous length, isremarkably similar to the Fount &t. Helens situation.4$ inally, the association of the logs with the coal, and in particular their interpretation as representing the remains of the insitu terminal forest stage of a coalforming peat swamp, is seriously challenged by the occurrence of the widespread AwabaNfossil forest? marker bed/6 below the Great )orthern &eam, and approximately J m stratigraphically above the (pper ilot&eam see ig. @$. 8n this bed, silicified stumps and logs are often discovered in apparent growth positions, but without any

necessary association with coal, in a chert formation that has great similarities petrologically to the felsic volcanic ash flow in"outle Canyon. 8t is clear that the Awaba trees could not have grown in situ. "he massive chert formation the logs are indoes not represent a Nfossil? soil. urthermore, the absence of any other vegetation or forest litter is another factor which isexceedingly strange if the area is supposed to be a buried forest in which only logs and stumps and no other vegetationwhatsoever are preserved."he conclusion is obvious. 9ne cannot assume that simply because coalified plant matter and coalified +adaxylon logs arefound together, they either grew in situ or necessarily had any active on site ecological relationship. 8n other words, theevents at Fount &t. Helens, both in &pirit ake and along "outle Canyon, imply, as ritE @ pointed out, that arguments for insitu tree growth cannot in future be based only on the position of logs sediments. "hus it is our contention that the logs andcoal seams at &wansea Heads and Puarries Head in the )ewcastle area, and the Awaba marker bed above them are morereadily and consistently explained by invoking a rapid and catastrophic allochthonous origin using the Fount &t. Helensevent as a model, rather than the buried peat swamp hypothesis.

9akleigh, Pueensland, Australiaigure ). GeneraliEed stratigraphic column of the *alloon Coal Feasures in the !osewood

*alloon Coalfield after Cameron/J$.Click here for larger image. At 9akleigh near !osewood, Pueensland ig. B$ coal is mined from the *alloon CoalFeasures. igure 1 is a generaliEed stratigraphic column of the *alloon Coal Feasures,while igure 0 shows the stratigraphy at 9akleigh./JCranfield et al ./B describe the *alloon Coal Feasures as comprising mudstone, siltstone, finegrained labile calcareous sandstone, thin coal seamsand minor limestone. "hey comment that Ngenerally thesandstone is finegrained, thick bedded, and friable,and consists of feldspar and black lithic grains of andesitic material in a montmorillonite matrix.Fudstone occurs with sandstone and siltstone asthin interbeds or in thicker massive beds. 3aolinite is thedominant clay mineral.?8n their general description of the depositional

environment of the *alloon Coal Feasures in the!osewood*alloon area, Cranfield et al ./B notedthat Ncontemporaneous volcanism is indicated by thepresence of fresh andesitic fragments in sandstones,and by montmorillonitic claystones which may bealtered tuffs.?/1"he *alloon coal seams themselves are generally

regarded to have formed in situ./1 Gould/0 commented thatK/$ "he finegrained sediments immediately overlying the ma4ority of seamscontain a greater percentage of conifers.6$ "he bulk of the coal appears to be from conifer material.2$ "he coalforming flora was dominated by araucarian conifers.>$ ine cuticles are very common in the coal.@$ !esinite is an abundant maceral in some *alloon coals.

J$ Araucarian ovuliferous cone scales and various pollen cones are preserved.B$ Fassive coniferlike trunks of fossil wood exhibiting growth rings occur in the*alloon Coal Feasures.

igure -. "he stratigraphic se7uence in the 9akleigh coal mine near !osewoodafter Cameron/J$.Click here for larger image."hus the *alloon coal has much in common with the coal in the (pper andower ilot &eams, including the presence of volcanic ash in the interseamsediments.Cranfield et al./B also indicate that fossil wood fragments are features of the*alloon Coal Feasures. 8ndeed, even small vertical logs have been observed ontop of some of the seams in the 9akleigh mine. igure / illustrates one particular log that was discovered in the tuffaceoussandstone above the topmost seam see ig. 0$. %oth the fragmented nature of the broken log, and the character of thesediments in which it was found, confirm that it is a drift log, that is, it didn?t grow in situ but was deposited with thesediments enclosing it. *hat is also significant about this log is that it has hard black coal on the outside, and low 7uality,very woody brown coal and iron oxides on the inside. Fany places still show the presence of tree rings and splinters$. "hepresence of both black coal and brown coal in the one log, and also the very fine lining of black coal on either side of a clayfilled fracture that penetrates across the inside of the log see ig. /$, 7uite clearly indicates that the coalification of thewood in this log did not necessarily result from exposure to temperature and pressure over a long period of time. %oth thesefactors temperature and pressure$ would have reached e7uilibrium throughout such a thin log over any extended period of time. "he presence of high rank black coal only around the outside and lining the fracture$ indicates either,




















































a$ that the process of coalification was so rapid that there was insufficient time for coalification conditions to reache7uilibrium throughout the log, or b$ that there was a difference in conditions between the outside and the inside of the log which resulted in coalificationadvancing further around the circumference of the log,or both of these conditions$.

A very significant implication of these observations is that if coalification resulted from the log being exposed to a rapidheating event, then this would also imply that the sediments surrounding the log were not only rapidly heated, but they alsocooled rapidlyK that is, they rapidly lost sufficient heat so as to drop below the temperature at which the inside of the logwould have also reached the same advanced stage of coalification as the log?s outer circumference. 8n other words, therewas rapid heat loss on a regional scale.

-olcanism and rapid coalification

igure !6. A broken log found in tuffaceous sandstone above the topmostcoal seam at 9akleigh near !osewood see ig. 0$. a$ A general view of two pieces of the log which consist mainly of woody brown coal.&ee igure /b$."he observations of a volcanic eruption at Fount &t. Helens, the "outle!iver ash and mud flows which deposited conifer logs and roots in apparentgrowth positions, and the &pirit ake phenomenon which produced verticalgrowth position conifer logs with or without roots in tuffaceous sedimentsand conifer bark rich debris have been shown to be 7uite clearly related asdepositional models to the vertical pine tree logs with a pine bark and clayrich coal and 4utting into overlying tuff layers at &wansea and Puarriesheads, the Awaba Nfossil forest? marker bed of similar pine logs but in chertlargely devoid of other vegetable matter, and the 9akleigh drift log

consisting of both black and brown coal that was discovered in tuffaceous sandstone above seams which are full of coalified

pine cuticles. "his relationship highlights a point made by +ryden, 6 and remade by Hayatsu et al .6/ that Nthere had beenno incontrovertible evidence to support any theory of coalification.? "his has been stated here because the listedobservations strongly imply that not only can large 7uantities of carbonrich sediments be accumulated rapidly incatastrophic conditions, but that the same sediments can be coalified rapidly."he Fount &t. Helens volcanic eruption as a depositional model for coals appears particularly obvious from the widespreadoccurrence of volcanic tuffs and associated clay minerals resulting from devitrification of tuffs in the coals and interseamsediments of the )ewcastle and !osewood*alloon coalfields. *here tuffs are not apparent, their previous existence isoften suspected because of the widespread distribution of clay minerals which potentially have been derived from ashfalls.//,/B &ince depositional relationship between these coals and volcanism can thus be established by the fact that thema4ority of the clays associated with these coals are common derivatives of volcanic ash, then similarly a relationshipbetween volcanism and rapid coalification of these seams can be established on the basis of laboratory experiments inwhich it has been shown that such clays seem to act as catalysts for the rapid coalification of carbonrich materials.urthermore, the nonrelationship of peat to coal can thereby be demonstrated, since the present of large amounts of claythroughout these coal seams disassociates them from being descendants of peat swamps, particularly cold environmentpeat swamps, which are virtually devoid of clays.

,echanisms or ra"id coaliication

igure !6. +b A closer view of one piece showing, from left to right,tuffaceous sandstone still clinging to the log, bituminous black$ coal, andthe woody brown coal of the bulk of the log.&ee igure /c$.3arweil66 reported that he had produced artificial coal by rapidly applyingvibrating pressures to wood. &ubse7uently Hill62 reported that he had alsomanufactured artificial coal through rapid application of intense heat. *hileboth these studies used simulated conditions that are applicable tocoalification in areas of tectonism and volcanism, such as the coal seams at)ewcastle and 9akleigh, recent work by Hayatsu et al.,6/ is even moreapplicable. 8n their study, Hayatsu and his colleagues at the Argonne

)ational aboratory, 8llinois, (&A made simple coals by heating lignin to about /@VC in the presence of montmorillonite or

illite clays. !unning that procedure for periods ranging from two weeks to nearly a year, they discovered that longer heatingtimes produced higher rank coals, and found that the clays appear to serve as catalysts that speed the coalification reaction,since the lignin is fairly unreactive in their absence.8n summary, the relevant aspects of the work of Hayatsu et al.6/ areK/$ &oftwood lignin heated with clay minerals particularly montmorillonite at /@VC for two to eight months in the absence of

oxygen was readily transformed into insoluble materials resembling coals of various ranks.6$ onger reaction times produced materials resembling vitrinites of higher rank.2$ &imple pyrolysis of lignin without clay at 2@ to >VC yielded only char fusinite$.>$ (sing kaolinite or illite, independently or mixed with montmorillonite,produced similar results.igure !6. +c A closer view of the other piece showing, in cross section, thebituminous black$ coal on the log?s circumference and along a clay filledfracture."hey concluded, therefore that natural clay minerals are important for

coalification because they act as catalysts.They also noticed that=a$ in the presence of clay activated by acid, the reaction of lignin to form coaly materials was highly accelerated, even atonly /@VC four weeks instead of two to four monthsO$Q andb$ loss of catalytic action of clays occurred when the reaction was carried out in the presence of air.



https://answersingenesis.org/the-flood/coal-volcanism-and-noahs-flood/#fig10b











https://answersingenesis.org/the-flood/coal-volcanism-and-noahs-flood/#fig10c









https://answersingenesis.org/the-flood/coal-volcanism-and-noahs-flood/#fig10b












"hus their overall conclusion was that coal macerals can be produced rapidly from biological source material by a claycatalyEed thermal reaction in periods of only two to four months sometimes one month$."ables / and 6 summariEe the experiments conducted by Hayatsu et al .6/ 8t should be noted from "able / that samples A-/and A-> produced coal materials ranging from low rank over two months to high rank over eight months. %y comparison,sample A-9 was heated in the presence of air and produced no noticeable coal products after two months, while sample2, which was a >VC experiment over an hour, produced only char material. )ote also the results of experiments 6 and 2in "able 6. *hen no acid was used the coalification time was two months, while acidactivated coalification took only 61days. urthermore, temperatures lower than /@VC have so far not been tried in these experiments.

Table +( Summary o Artiicial Coaliication Reactions6/

)roduct Designation Sam"le Clay Tem". C Time

A-/ ignin Ies /@ 6 Fo.

A-6 ignin Ies /@ > Fo.

A-2 ignin Ies /@ J Fo.

A-> ignin Ies /@ 1 Fo.

A-9 igninSAir Ies /@ 6 Fo.

A ignin Ies 2@ 2 Fin.

/ ignin )o 2@ 2 Fin.

6 ignin )o 2@ J Fin.

2 ignin )o > J Fin.C/ Cellulose )o 2@ 2 Fin.

C6 Cellulose )o 2@ J Fin.

C2 igninSCellulose )o 2@ J Fin.

AA/ atty Acids /$ Ies 6 > Fo.

AA6 atty Acids /$ Ies 6 J Fo.

AA2 atty Acids 6$ Ies 6 > Fo.

Table ( Eect o Clay ,ineral as Catalyst or Artiicial Coaliication o Sotwood 'ignin6/

+ield 2t #nsolu0le )roduct

RunCatalyst ConditionSol/entE!tracta0le #nsolu0le )roduct -IC OIC

)one &tarting Faterial$ /.1 .22

/ )one /@VC 6 Fo. 6.B 0/.@ /.> .26

6 Fontmorillonite /@VC 6 Fo. /2.@ J1.> .0> .61

2 Acid Activated Fontmorillonite /@VC 61 +. 0./ BJ.2 .BB ./J

> FontmorilloniteSA/%r 2/K.@$ /@VC 6> Hr. /@.2 J6. .06 .6@

@ A/%r 2 /6VC 6> Hr. 66.2 @0.> .1J .6J

Clays, coals and volcanism"he significance of the work of Hayatsu et al .6/ is in the role of clays as catalysts since the clay minerals illite,montmorillonite, and kaolinite are the most common inorganic mineral constituents of coals. 8n fact, clays often account for up to JW or 1W of the total mineral matter associated with the plant debris in coal. Clays in coal are found asK 6/$ ine inclusions6$ ayers2$ artial or complete fillings of plant cell cavities, particularly in vitrinite. 8n this case the clay is usually homogeneouskaolinite.

Table -( (ariation o Ash +ield "er centF in (arious Coal ty"es Data rom Stach et al(6F

(itrians Clarains Duro<Clarains Durains &usains

Australia ermian$ _6D/> 6D66 6D66 6D66 6D66

8ndian ermian$ _6D/6 6D66 6D66 >D>6 _6D2

)orth America Carboniferous$ _6D/6 _6D/J n.a. 6D6 >D6

%ritish Carboniferous$ 6DJ 6D/6 n.a. _6D/J 6D2




https://answersingenesis.org/the-flood/coal-volcanism-and-noahs-flood/#table1




















Another interesting observation on clays in coal is the differing percentages of clay in the different types of coal &ee "able2$. *hile fusains and durains normally contain a far greater percentage of mineral matter than vitrains and clarains, themineral content of vitrains is almost totally clay. urthermore, in most &outhern Hemisphere coals, clays predominate over other types of inorganic matter e.g. see *ard6>$. 8n Australian coals even after washing over half the original clay content

is still present, indicating that the clay is therefore homogeneouslydistributed throughout the coal.

igure !!. "he effect of rising temperatures during metamorphism of the clay minerals usually found in coal seams +ata from &tach et al .6$.)ow these clays are also commonly derived from volcanic ash. "hesame clay minerals, principally kaolinite,6> can be found in the form of tonsteins which because of their widespread nature, have become

increasingly important as marker beds in coal measure sediments.&uch tonsteins are not only important as marker horiEons for particular bands in a single coal seam, but for seam correlation in a coal basin or district, and even in ad4acent coal basins over distances of severalhundred kilometres as has been experienced in )orthern #uropeancoal belts.6 8t has been suggested that these tonsteins originated asvolcanic ash falls./,//,6@"he presence of the clays, particularly kaolinite, also indicates that the

temperatures involved in coalification must have been less than 6VC. At and above this temperature the common clayminerals are metamorphosed, e.g. kaolinite to pyrophyllite see ig. //$. "his underlines the reasoning behind Hayatsu et al.?s investigation of claycatalyEed coalification at low temperatures.6/"he weight of evidence observation and data$suggests that the clays found in coals and interseam sediments are involved in the coalification reactions and are importantindicators of the conditions during both seam deposition and seam coalification. "he clays strongly suggest related nearbyvolcanism and disallow cold climate swamp and peatforming environments as precursors to the coals.

Clays and "eat swam"s"he widespread presence of clays in coals has led advocates of the peat swamp hypothesis to suggest that the clays arederived from clays and feldspar debris washed into swamps during flood periods. However this suggestion ignores theobservation that in most acid swamp environments, clays will flocculate and not settle to the bottom. &uch a suspendedstate will not produce the homogenous distribution of clays throughout the organic swamp debris and it most definitelycannot explain the clay bands consistently traceable as marker horiEons between ad4acent coal basins.%ut it is still necessary to account for the current coal structures with their homogeneously distributed clays, particularlythrough the higher rank coals, so can this have been achieved by chemical means, that is, by precipitation from incomingsurface waters, percolating ground waters, or the swamp waters themselves *ard,6> for example, proposes severalmechanisms whereby the clay minerals could have been transported in solution as colloids, or as silica and alumina gels, tothen precipitate and crystalliEe within the structures of the coalforming peat, but he then admits that this mechanism doesnot explain some of the field and mineralogical evidence. "he inability of clay minerals to form within coals by suchmechanisms and under such conditions is dramatically illustrated by the presence of very pure, high grade clays associatedwith brown coal deposits and yet 7uite distinct from them. or example, the atrobe -alley brown coal seams at Iallourn andForewell, -ictoria, Australia, sit on pure white clay which has not Ndiffused? into the coal seams above or below them by such

groundwater action.6J "his is further confirmed by the virtual absence of aluminium silicates throughout the brown coal .6Binally, Fartini and Glooschenko2 and Fartini61 have shown and stated emphatically that cold climate peat swamps do nothave clay minerals in them. "his conclusively indicates that such environments are not suitable choices for precursors of coal seams.Discussion"he application of these data on the relationship between clays and coal indicates that the variables associated withcoalification should probably be expanded to include at leastK/$ "he presence of the appropriate clay minerals to act as catalystsQ6$ "he presence of the appropriate trace elements,2$ "he absence of catalytic poisonsQ>$ "he relevant pHQ@$ A rapid heat source of less than 6VCQ andJ$ A variable pressure source similar to that associated with volcanism or tectonism."his combination of variables successfully explains why nonanthracite coals are sometimes found in high grade

metamorphic rocks, showing that neither continuously applied pressure nor heat have been the key factors. &imilarly, it alsoexplains why some massive coal deposits are found as thick seams of low rank brown coal and not as more mature higher rank black coals. 9ne missing Ningredient? in these brown coals is aluminium silicates clays$. A classic case is the atrobe-alley coals at Iallourn in -ictoria, where thick brown coal seams are virtually devoid of clays. 6J,6B %y comparison, the thinower and (pper ilot &eams at )ewcastle consist of higher rank black coals containing abundant clays."his importantrelationship between clays and coalification also suggests why the various coal types are associated with different claycombinations even within the one seam, where temperature, pressure and pH had a high probability of being the same. or example, vitrain has low mineral matter but a large percentage of this mineral matter is clay, whereas fusain has highmineral matter but a much lesser percentage of its mineral matter is clay. "his higher mineral matter in fusain may well actas a coalification inhibitor or catalytic poison$."his same clayScoalification relationship can be taken a step further andapplied even to individual coalification events, such as that responsible for partial coalification of the tree stumps in the ilot&eams at )ewcastle. )ear the bases of these tree stumps where the pH was lower due to the abundant ad4acent vegetationdebris, coalification has occurred. Higher up the stumps where there was much less ad4acent vegetable material and higher amounts of siliceous volcanic ash, silicification has occurred. urthermore, at the bases of the tree stumps the ashsurrounds the outside of the stumps, so coalification of the ligninrich bark has occurred, whereas solution replacementoccurred internally with the woody tissues being replaced by iron carbonate. "he coalification of only the bark near thebases of these tree stumps can now be best explained as due to the thinner bark on the upper parts of the stumps havingbeen removed either by bacterial action similar to that seen in &pirit ake, or during the directed volcanic blast.ikewise, thecondition of the log found at 9akleigh can be explained on the assumption that it has been sub4ect to brief and thereforerapid$ claycatalyEed thermal activity around its circumference to produce high rank black coal, while the protected inner portion of the log remained virtually unaltered. "his thesis would also explain why the Awaba tree stumps and logs, whichare virtually devoid of accompanying vegetation debris, have been silicified rather than coalified, whereas the tree stumps
















































sitting on the ilot &eams have been coalified near their bases because of the accompanying acidgenerating vegetablematerial. 8f this thesis is correct, it is therefore feasible to predict that tree stumps and logs deposited in tuffaceoussediments devoid of accumulated acidgenerating vegetation debris will most probably petrify. "hus it is predicted thatshould appropriate conditions ensue the logs in the "outle Canyon ash flows will be more likely to petrify, while the logsbeing buried beneath the waters of &pirit ake will probably coalify around their external margins.8t should be obvious nowthat the explosive pyroclastic volcanism model can not only be applied to the deposition of coal seams, but can be invokedto produce rapid coalification of the same coal seams. "he implication is that the whole process from pine forests to coalseams was both catastrophic and extremely rapid. A series of explosive pyroclastic eruptions from the one volcanic centrecould flatten the pine forests, bury the debris in ash, and then provide the rapidly applied pressures volcanic seismicity$ anda rapid heat source at temperatures below 6VC hot ash, steam, etc.$ to coalify the buried forest debris catalyEed by theclays buried with the forest debris and to a lesser extent, by the clays in the overlying and underlying tuffaceous muds andvolcanic ash units. "he evidence at both )ewcastle and 9akleigh is consistent with an explosive pyroclastic volcanism

model for coal seam formation.*lo0al &lood"he relevance to the lood of this explosive pyroclastic volcanism model for the rapid destruction of whole forests,deposition of forest debris in seams, and coalification of these seams should by now be obvious. "he catastrophic effects of volcanism and the associated flooding at Fount &t. Helens were isolated to 4ust a small region that is hardly comparable tothe extent measuring thousands of s7uare kilometres of many Australian coal basins, including the &ydney and ClarenceForeton %asins )ewcastle and *alloon Coal Feasures respectively$. Any catastrophe that produced these coal seamsmust have been on a greater scale than the impressive explosive /01 eruption of Fount &t. Helens. "he only largevolcanic and water catastrophe the world has experienced was the Global lood, some >,2 or so years ago.+uring thelood much of the water came from inside the earth. #ven today up to 0W of what comes out of volcanoes is water.urthermore, in the last two decades many springs have been discovered issuing forth prodigious amounts of hot 2@VC$salty water from deepseated cracks and vents in volcanic rift Eones on the ocean floor.60 &uch a global upheaval as thelood would have been catastrophic, for all the mountains on the earth?s surface were covered with water and the earth?scrust was broken up by earth7uakes and volcanoes. "he erosion and debris produced would have been phenomenal."his

uni7ue catastrophe would have devastated the entire forest and vegetation cover of the earth?s surface. &ome debris wouldbeen buried immediately by explosive volcanic blasts, whereas other debris would have been carried off by the rising watersas huge floating log rafts, only to be buried later as the logs became waterlogged and sank, or further surges of volcanic ashandSor sedimentladen water buried them. "hus whole coal measure se7uences with multiple seams would have beendeposited rapidly. "he heat flow produced by the catastrophic volcanism, crustal upheavals tectonism$, rapid deep burial,circulating hot waters hydrothermal activity$ and rising granitic magmas carrying radioactive elements would have beenmore than sufficient to rapidly coalify the seams of forest debris, assisted particularly by the catalytic action of the admixedclays present as shown by the laboratory research$.6/ Given the catastrophic nature of the lood, and the amount of vegetation buried in today?s coal seams,2 it is thus entirely feasible that all of today?s coal seams were formed by the globalyear long lood catastrophe and its aftermath.#ndustrial a""licationsinally, the concept of rapid coal seam formation in association with ancient explosive volcanism, and the experimental workon claycatalyEed rapid coalification has several industry applicationsK8F Coal explorationD#xplorers, seeking massive coal deposits should consider exploring in areas of ancient explosivevolcanism and tectonism. "arget areas would be those that consist of thick piles of tuffaceous sediments surrounding a

dormant caldera.9F Coal beneficiationD"he possibility of using the concept of clay catalysis for the potentially low cost upgrading of currently uneconomic brown coal deposits, such as those in &outh Australia, should be seriously investigated. #ven theatrobe -alley brown coals could potentially be upgraded to high rank black coals by mixing the mined coal with the interseam clays and Ncooking? the mixture.:F Artificial coal preparationDCarbonrich industrial waste products such as those in the sawmilling, woodchip and sugar industries could potentially at low cost be artificially coalified by utiliEing clay as a catalyst. &uch artificial coals could even bemade to customer specifications once the techni7ues have been refined.&ummary and conclusions"he catastrophically deposited ash and mud flows along "outle Canyon and in &pirit ake carried with them broken, conifer logs that were deposited or sank in apparent growth positions, many with fine root structures. urther volcanic ash is still thedominant sediment being washed over these buried logs. "hus the /01 Fount &t. Helens eruption provides a model that isable to explain similar apparent growth position tree stumps and logs in ancient coal deposits which are associated withtuffaceous andSor clayrich sediments. (pon this basis it has been concluded that the tree stumps and logs on top of the

(pper and ower ilot &eams and in the Awaba Nfossil forest? horiEon at )ewcastle did not grow in situ even though they arefound in apparent growth positions. "he presence of both clays and coalified pine bark, cuticles and debris throughout theassociated ilot &eams, and in the coal seams at 9akleigh, indicate that the coal in these areas are not the product of terminal pine forests on ancient swamps, since it would be impossible then to explain the pine bark, cuticles and debristhroughout the coal. "hus the vegetable debris in the coal seams does not appear to have grown in situ. !ather, it musthave been washed into the depositional basins from the same forests that the catastrophically deposited pine trees werestripped from by the explosive volcanism. "he coal therefore is allochthonous, and not autochthonous.&uch rapidaccumulation of carbonrich sediments in areas of volcanism also implies the possibility of rapid seam formation. At9akleigh the discovery in tuffaceous sandstones above the coal seams of a broken log that has black coal around itscircumference and lining a clayfilled internal fracture, but only woody brown coal inside, provides compelling evidence thattemperature and pressure are not the key factors in coalification and that coalification must have been rapid in such avolcanic setting. "his widespread association of volcanic ash and ashrich sediments particularly the tuffs and kaoliniterichtonstein marker beds$ with coal seams full of allochthonous forest debris is an indication that widespread volcanism wasassociated with past coal seam formation, and provides evidence consistent with experimentally demonstrated rapid lowtemperature less than 6VC$ claycatalyEed coalification of such seams in contrast with the slow formation, slowcoalification autochthonous peat swamp hypothesis. "he absence of clay in many present day peat deposits is sufficient tothrow further doubt on the peat swamp hypothesis and should relegate such clayfree peats to be viewed merely as analternative state of preserved carbonrich material. &uch peat deposits are thus not related to coalOApplying this explosivepyroclastic volcanism model to the formation of coal deposits worldwide, it is entirely feasible that all of today?s coal seamswere formed by the volcanism, flooding, erosion, deposition, tectonism and hydrothermal activity during the global yearlonglood catastrophe and its aftermath.









The Origin o Oilby +r. Andrew A. &nelling on +ecember 6B, 6J

or more than !66 years oil has been theDblack gold that has fueled transport vehicles and powered global economic growth and prosperity. o how does oil form* and what is its origin?&hop )ow%asic Oil *eology9il deposits are usually found insedimentary rocks. &uch rocks formed as

sand, silt, and clay grains were erodedfrom land surfaces and carried by moving water to be deposited in sediment layers. As these sediment layers dried,chemicals from the water formed natural cements to bind the sediment grains into hard rocks.ools of oil are found inunderground traps where the host sedimentary rock layers have been folded andSor faulted. "he host sedimentary or reservoir rock is still porous enough for the oil to accumulate in spaces between the sediment grains. "he oil usually hasn?tformed in the reservoir rock but has been generated in source rock and subse7uently migrated through the sedimentaryrock layers until trapped.The Origin and Chemistry o OilFost scientists agree that hydrocarbons oil and natural gas$ are of organic origin. A few, however, maintain that somenatural gas could have formed deep within the earth, where heat melting the rocks may have generated itinorganically./ )evertheless, the weight of evidence favors an organic origin, most petroleum coming from plants andperhaps also animals, which were buried and fossiliEed in sedimentary source rocks.6 "he petroleum was then chemicallyaltered into crude oil and gas."he chemistry of oil provides crucial clues as to its origin. etroleum is a complex mixture of organic compounds. 9ne such chemical in crude oils is called porphyrinK

etroleum porphyrins = have been identified in a sufficient number of sediments and crude oils to establish a widedistribution of the geochemical fossils.2"hey are also found in plants and animal blood> see sidebar 8orphyrins$.)or"hyrinsorphyrins are organic molecules that are structurally very similar to both chlorophyll in plants and hemoglobin in animalblood./ "hey are classified as tetrapyrrole compounds and often contain metals such as nickel and vanadium. 6 orphyrinsare readily destroyed by oxidiEing conditions oxygen$ and by heat.2 "hus geologists maintain that the porphyrins in crudeoils are evidence of the petroleum source rocks having been deposited under reducing conditionsK"he origin of petroleum is within an anaerobic and reducing environment. "he presence of porphyrins in some petroleumsmeans that anaerobic conditions developed early in the life of such petroleums, for chlorophyll derivatives, such asporphyrins, are easily and rapidly oxidiEed and decomposed under aerobic conditions. >

ReerencesFcPueen, +.!., "he chemistry of oilDexplained by lood geology,5mpact /@@, 8nstitute for Creation !esearch, &antee,California, /01J."issot, %.., and *elte, +.H.,8etroleum ormation and 'ccurrence, 6nd ed., &pringer-erlag, %erlin, pp. >05>/, /01>.!ussell, *.., rinciples of etroleum Geology, 6nd ed., FcGrawHill %ook Company, )ew Iork, p. 6@, /0J.

evorsen, p. @6.The Signiicance o Oil Chemistry8t is very significant that porphyrin molecules break apart rapidly in the presence of oxygen and heat.@ "herefore, the factthat porphyrins are still present in crude oils today must mean that the petroleum source rocks and the plant and animal$fossils in them had to have been kept from the presence of oxygen when they were deposited and buried. "here are twoways this could have been achievedK/. "he sedimentary rocks were deposited under oxygen deficient or reducing$ conditions.J6. "he sedimentary rocks were deposited so rapidly that no oxygen could destroy the porphyrins in the plant and animalfossils.BHowever, even where sedimentation is relatively rapid by today?s standards, such as in river deltas in coastal Eones,conditions are still oxidiEing.1 "hus, to preserve organic matter containing porphyrins re7uires its slower degradation in theabsence of oxygen, such as in the %lack &ea today.0 %ut such environments are too rare to explain the presence of porphyrins in all the many petroleum deposits found around the world. "he only consistent explanation is the catastrophicsedimentation that occurred during the worldwide lood. "ons of vegetation and animals were violently uprooted and killed

respectively, so that huge amounts of organic matter were buried so rapidly that the porphyrins in it were removed from theoxidiEing agents which could have destroyed them."he amounts of porphyrins found in crude oils vary from traces to .>Wor > parts per million$./ #xperiments have produced a concentration of .@W porphyrin of the type found in crude oils$from plant material in 4ust one day,// so it doesn?t take millions of years to produce the small amounts of porphyrins found incrude oils. 8ndeed, a crude oil porphyrin can be made from plant chlorophyll in less than /6 hours. However, other experiments have shown that plant porphyrin breaks down in as little as three days when exposed to temperatures of only>/V 6/VC$ for only /6 hours. "herefore, the petroleum source rocks and the crude oils generated from them can?t havebeen deeply buried to such temperatures for millions of years.The Origin Rate o Oil &ormationCrude oils themselves do not take long to be generated from appropriate organic matter. Fost petroleum geologists believecrude oils form mostly from plant material, such as diatoms singlecelled marine and freshwater photosyntheticorganisms$/6 and beds of coal huge fossiliEed masses of plant debris$./2 "he latter is believed to be the source of most

Australian crude oils and natural gas because coal beds are in the same se7uences of sedimentary rock layers as thepetroleum reservoir rocks./> "hus, for example, it has been demonstrated in the laboratory that moderate heating of thebrown coals of the Gippsland %asin of -ictoria, Australia, to simulate their rapid deeper burial, will generate crude oil andnatural gas similar to that found in reservoir rocks offshore in only 65@ days. /@However, because porphyrins are also foundin animal blood, it is possible some crude oils may have been derived from the animals also buried and fossiliEed in manysedimentary rock layers. 8ndeed, animal slaughterhouse wastes are now routinely converted within two hours into high7uality oil and highcalcium powdered and potent li7uid fertiliEers, in a commercial thermal conversion process plant/J seesidebar ,nimal Wastes 1ecome 'il $.Conclusion



https://answersingenesis.org/geology/the-origin-of-oil/#fn_1





https://answersingenesis.org/geology/the-origin-of-oil/#porphyrins
























https://answersingenesis.org/geology/the-origin-of-oil/#animal-waste







https://answersingenesis.org/geology/the-origin-of-oil/#porphyrins













https://answersingenesis.org/geology/the-origin-of-oil/#animal-waste



All the available evidence points to a recent catastrophic origin for the world?s vast oil deposits, from plant and other organicdebris, consistent with the creation account of earth history. -ast forests grew on land and water surfaces/B in the preloodworld, and the oceans teemed with diatoms and other tiny photosynthetic organisms. "hen during the global loodcataclysm, the forests were uprooted and swept away. Huge masses of plant debris were rapidly buried in what thusbecame coal beds, and organic matter generally was dispersed throughout the many catastrophically depositedsedimentary rock layers. "he coal beds and fossiliferous sediment layers became deeply buried as the lood progressed.

As a result, the temperatures in them increased sufficiently to rapidly generate crude oils and natural gas from the organicmatter in them. "hese subse7uently migrated until they were trapped in reservoir rocks and structures, thus accumulating toform today?s oil and gas deposits.Animal 2astes %ecome Oil"urkey and pig slaughterhouse wastes are daily trucked into the world?s first biorefinery, a thermal conversion processingplant in Carthage, Fissouri./ 9n peak production days, @ barrels of high7uality fuel oil better than crude oil are made

from 6B tons of turkey guts and 6 tons of pig fat.rom the loading bay hopper, a pressuriEed pipe pushes the animalwastes into a brawny grinder that chews them into peasiEe bits. A firststage reactor breaks down the wastes with heat andpressure, until the pressure then rapidly drops in order to flash off the excess water and minerals. "hese are shunted off todry into a highcalcium powdered fertiliEer."he remaining concentrated organic soup is poured into a second reaction tank,where it is heated to @V 6JVC$ and pressuriEed to J pounds per s7uare inch >6 kilograms per s7uare centimeter$.*ithin 6 minutes the process replicates what happens to dead plants and animals buried deep in the earth?s sedimentaryrock layers, chopping long, complex molecular chains of hydrogen and carbon into the shortchain molecules of oil. )ext,the pressure and temperature are dropped, and the soup swirls through a centrifuge that separates any remaining water from the oil. "hat water, because slaughterhouse waste is laden with nitrogen and amino acids, is stored to be sold as apotent li7uid fertiliEer."he oil produced can be blended with heavier fossilfuel oils to upgrade them or simply used to power electrical utility generators. "he good news is that it appears this thermal conversion technology can also be adapted toprocess sewage, old tires, and mixed plastics. And it is also energy efficient. 9nly /@ percent of the potential energy in thefeedstock is used to power the operation, leaving 1@ percent in the output of oil and fertiliEer products.

-ow &ast Can Oil &orm5by +r. Andrew A. &nelling on Farch /, /00'riginally published in Creation !"* no " +March !--6/ #60#$.

Many people today* including scientists* have the idea that oil and natural gas must take a long time to form* even millions of years.&uch is the strong mental bias that has been generated by the prevailing evolutionary mindset of the scientific community.However, laboratory research has shown that petroleum hydrocarbons oil and gas$ can be made from natural materials inshort timespans. &uch research is spurred on by the need to find a viable process by which man may be able to replenishhis dwindling stocks of li7uid hydrocarbons so vital to modern technology.&rom Sewage to Oil"he / Farch /010 edition of 3he ,ge newspaper Felbourne, Australia$ carried a report from *ashington (&A$ entitledN!esearchers convert sewage into oil?. "he report states that researchers from %atelle aboratories in !ichland, *ashington&tate, use no fancy biotechnology or electronics, but the process they have developed takes raw, untreated sewage andconverts it to usable oil. "heir recipe works by concentrating the sludge and digesting it with alkali. As the mixture is heatedunder pressure, the hot alkali attacks the sewage, converting the complex organic material, particularly cellulose, into the

longchain hydrocarbons of crude oil.However, the oil produced in their first experiments did not have the 7ualities neededfor commercial fuel oil. &o, the report says, in &eptember /01B %atelle 4oined forces with American uel and ower Corporation, a company specialiEing in blending and recycling oils. "ogether they have made the oil more Nfreeflowing?using an additive adapted from one developed to cut down friction in engines. A fuel has now been produced with almost thesame heating value as diesel fuel. "he process from sewage to oil takes only a day or twoO"he researchers are now buildinga pilot plant. As the report states, potential economic benefits of this new technology are tremendous, since the processproduces more energy than is consumed during normal sewage disposal, and the surplus energy products can be sold at aprofit. %onuses include an 1 percent reduction in waste volumes, and the eradication of poisonous pollutants such asinsecticides, herbicides and toxic metals that normally end up in sewage.9f course, one cannot claim that this is the way oilcould have been made naturally in the ground in a short time period. "he starting raw material is manmade and hot alkalidigesters don't occur naturally in the ground.Coal to Oil in 'a0oratory9f greater significance are laboratory experiments that have generated petroleum under conditions simulating thoseoccurring naturally in a sedimentary rock basin. %etween /0BB and /012, research experiments were performed at the

C&8!9 Commonwealth &cientific and 8ndustrial !esearch 9rganisation$ laboratories in &ydney Australia$. 8n their reports/,6 the researchers noted that others had attempted to duplicate under laboratory conditions geochemical reactionsthat lead to economic deposits of li7uid and gaseous hydrocarbons, but such experiments had only lasted for a few or several hundred days, and usually at constant temperatures. Conse7uently, the differences in timescale and other parameters between geological processes and laboratory experiments being so great meant that scientists generally7uestioned the relevance of such laboratory results. "hus, in their experiments, the C&8!9 scientists had tried to carefullysimulate in a laboratory under a longer time period, in this case six years, the conditions in a naturally subsiding sedimentaryrock basin."wo types of source rock were chosen for this studyDan oil shale torbanite$ from Glen +avis )ew &outh *ales,

Australia$, and a brown coal lignite$ from oy Iang in the atrobe -alley -ictoria, Australia$. %oth these samples wereimportant in the Australian context, since both represent natural source rocks in sedimentary basins where oil and naturalgas have been naturally generated from such source rocks, and in the case of the %ass &trait oil and natural gas fields,sufficient 7uantities to sustain commercial production."hese two source rock samples were each split into six subsamples,and each subsample was individually sealed in a separate stainless steel tube. "he two sets of six stainless steel tubeswere then placed in an oven at /VC and the temperature increased by /VC each week, After @, /, /@, 6, 6@, and2 weeks that is, at maximum temperatures of /@VC, 6VC, 6@VC, 2VC, 2@VC, and >VC$, one stainless steel tubefrom each series was removed, cooled and opened. Any gas in each tube was sampled and analysed. !esidues in eachtube were extracted and treated with solvents to remove any oil, which was then analysed. "he solid remaining was alsoweighed, studied, and analysed.&our +ears to ,imic 6Nature3"he results are very illuminating. At less than 2VC, 2@ percent of the oil shale had been converted to a paraffinic crude oil.

At 2@VC not only was generation of the oil complete, but Ncracking? of the oil had occurred extensively, with thermaldecomposition producing JW gas.8n the brown coal samples, however, during the first @ weeks of heating, gas mainly








carbon dioxide$ was produced, and the production rate increased over the next / weeks. -irtually no oil was formed upuntil this point. %etween 6@VC and 2VC, when the oil shale generated copious oil, the brown coal produced about /Wshortchain hydrocarbons and .6W oil, which resembled a natural light crude oil similar to that commercially recoveredfrom %ass &trait, the offshore oil fields in the same sedimentary basin as, and geologically above, the atrobe -alley coalbeds from which the samples used in the experiment came$."he products after 6@ weeks 2@VC$ resembled a carbondioxide rich natural gas. 9ver the same time period and at those temperatures, the brown coal samples had also beenconverted to anthracite the highest grade form of black coal$."he researchers concluded that overall, the fouryear 2VC$results provide experimental proof of oil shale acting as an oil source and of brown coal being a source first of carbondioxide and then of mainly natural gasScondensate. &ignificantly, these products of these slow Nmoleculebymolecule?, solidstate decompositions are all typical of naturally occuring hydrocarbons natural gases and petroleum$, with no hydrocarboncompounds called olefins or carbon monoxide gas being formed.Geologists usually maintain that these processes of oilformation from source rocks maturation events$ commonly involve one thousand to one million years or more at near

maximum temperatures.2

However, the researchers believe their series of experiments are the best attempts so far toduplicate natural, subsiding, sedimentary conditions. #xtensive conversion of organic matter to hydrocarbons has also beenachieved at less than 2VC under noncatalytic conditions with a minimum of water present.urthermore, the researchers maintained that their experiments clearly show that altering the timescale of source rockheating from seconds the duration of many previous laboratory experiments$ to years makes the products produced similar to natural petroleum.They went on to say=8n many geological situations much longer time intervals are available but evidently the molecular mechanism of thedecomposition is little changed by the additional time. "hus, within sedimentary basins, heating times of several years aresufficient for the generation of oil and gas from suitable precursors. "he precise point in this range of times from seconds toyears, at which the products ade7uately resemble natural gases andSor oils, remains to be established. Heating times of theorder of years during recent times may even improve the petroleum prospects of particular areas. looding of a reservoir with migrating hydrocarbons is more likely to produce a reservoir filled to the spill point than slow accumulation over a longgeological period with a possibility of loss =?.>

"hey also noted that it should be remembered their experiments Nrelate to a situation which is possibly unusual in thegeological contextDone in which hydrocarbons do not migrate away from their source rocks as they are generated.? @

%ut could these laboratory experiments really have simulated natural petroleum generation from organic matter in sourcerocks in only six years as statedOil &orming Under Ocean Now)o sooner had the discovery of ongoing natural formation of petroleum been published in the 4ournal >ature,J than 3he ,ustralian inancial @eview of ebruary 6, /016 carried an article by *alter &ullivan of 3he >ew ork 3imes under theheading N)atural oil refinery found under ocean?. "he report indicated thatN"he oil is being formed from the unusually rapid breakdown of organic debris by extraordinarily extensive heat flowingthrough the sediments, offering scientists a singular opportunity to see how petroleum is formed=.9rdinarily oil has beenthought to form over millions of years whereas in this instance the process is probably occurring in thousands of years=."he activity is not only manufacturing petroleum at relatively high speed but also, by application of volcanic heat, breaking itdown into the constituents of gasoline and other petroleum products as in a refinery.?

igure /. "he ocation of the Guaymas %asin in the Gulf of California.

"his Nnatural refinery under the ocean? is found under the waters of the Gulf of California,in an area known as the Guaymas %asin see ig. /$. "hrough this basin is a series of long deep fractures that link volcanoes of the undersea ridge known as the #ast acific!ise with the &an Andreas fault system that runs northwards across California. "hebasin consists of two rift valleys flatbottomed valleys bounded by steep cliffs along faultlines$, which are filled with @ metre thick layers of sediments consisting of diatomaceous ooEe made up of the opallike Nshells? of diatoms, singlecelled a7uaticplants related to algae$ and silty mud washed from the nearby land.



Along these fractures through the sediments in the basin flows boiling hotwater at temperatures above 6VC, the result of deepseated volcanicactivity below the basin. "hese hot waters hydrothermal fluids$ dischargingthrough the sediments on the ocean floor have been investigated by deepsea divers in minisubmarines."he hydrothermal activity on the ocean floor releases discrete oil globules up to /56 centimetres in diameter$, which aredischarged into hydrothermal the ocean water with the hydrothermalfluids.B+isturbance of the surface layers of the sediments on the oceanbottom also releases oil globules.Correct measurement of the oil flow rate atthese sites has so far not been feasible, but the in situ collection of oilglobules has shown that the gasSoil ratio is approximately @K/. argemounds of volcanic sinter solids coalesced by heating$ form via

precipitation around the vents and spread out in a blanket across the oceanfloor for a distance of 6@ metres. "hese sinter deposits consist of claysmixed with massive amounts of metal sulphide minerals, together with other hydrothermal minerals such as barite barium sulphate$ and talc."heremains of unusual tubeworms that fre7uent the seawaters around thesemounds are also mixed in with the sinter deposits. "hus the organic matter content of these sinter deposits in the mounds approaches 6>W.1"hehydrothermal oil from the Guaymas %asin is similar to reservoir crudeoils.0 &elected hydrocarbon ratios of the vapour phase are similar to thoseof the gasoline fraction of typical crude oils, while the general distributionpattern of light volatile hydrocarbons resembles that of crude oils see "ableof analyses$ . "he elemental composition is within the normal ranges of typical crude oils, while contents of some of the significant organiccomponents, and their distribution, are well within the range of normal crude

oils. 9ther key analytical techni7ues on the oil give results that arecompatible with a predominantly bacterialSalgal origin of the organic matter that is the source of the oil and gas. /"his oil and gas has probably formedby the action of hydrothermal processes on the organic matter within the

diatomaceous ooEe layers in the basin. 9f crucial significance is the radiocarbon C /> $ dating of the oil. &amples haveyielded ages between >,6 and >,0 years, with uncertainties in the range @/0 years. // "hus, the timetemperatureconversion of the sedimentary organic matter to hydrothermal petroleum has taken place over a very short geological timescale less than @, years$ and has occurred under relatively mild temperature conditions.8t is significant also that thetemperature conditions in these hydrothermal fluids, of up to and exceeding 2/@ VC, are similar to the ideal temperatures for oil and gas generation in the previously described Australian laboratory experiments./6 igure 6a illustrates the oil generationsystem operating in the Guaymas %asin, while igure 6b shows how this process could be applied in a closed sedimentarybasin to the hydrothermal generation of typical oil and gas deposits.

Ra"id Oil &ormation"he generally accepted model of oil generation assumes longterm heating and maturing of the sedimentary organic matter

in subsiding sedimentary basins. "he organic matter undergoes successive and gradual increases in alteration, leading to aprocess of continuous oil generation. "he oil subse7uently migrates to be trapped in suitable host rocks and structures."hismultistep oil formation process has a low efficiency and converts only a minor fraction of the original organic matter of thesediment to oil./2 "here is difficulty in balancing and timing an ade7uate degree of oil generation occurring at intermediatestages in the sedimentary basin, and ample fluid available for ade7uate transport migration$ of the oil.Althoughconsiderable progress in the understanding of this multistep oil formation mechanism has been achieved, there are stillproblems that need to be solved. &uch a slow multistep mechanism differs significantly from hydrothermal petroleumformation. )o evidence is so far available on the extent to which this alternative singlestep oil generation process hascontributed towards the origin of presently exploited oil reserves.8t is very significant that this naturally producedhydrothermal oil is identical to conventionally exploited crude oils, as are the oil and gas products from the Australianlaboratory experiments. )evertheless, hydrothermal oil formation provides an efficient singlestep mechanism for petroleum

generation, expulsion, and migration which could have a considerable impact onour understanding of petroleum formation mechanisms and eventually assist us intapping resources in new areas./>"hus the rapid formation of oil and gas is not only

feasible on the basis of carefully controlled laboratory experiments, but has nowbeen shown to occur naturally under geological conditions that have been commonin the past.&ignificantly, these short timescales are well within those proposed bycreation scientists for the generation of petroleum from organic matter in sedimentslaid down during the lood. &ubse7uently, the discovery of the hydrothermallyproduced petroleum on the ocean floor in the Guaymas %asin of the Gulf of California is even more crucial to the case of the creation scientists and loodgeologists, when they argue that the fountains of the deep referred to in the %ook of Genesis were probably vast volcanic upheavals that broke open the earth's crust,pulveriEing rock which was then scattered as volcanic debris, and expelling lavas,gases, and hot li7uids, principally water.8ndeed, the bulk of the volcanic productswould have been superheated water, similar to the hydrothermal fluids found in theGuaymas %asin. "he rock record contains many layers of volcanic lavas and ashbetween other sedimentary layers, many containing organic matter. "hus thismodel for hydrothermal generation of petroleum is more than a feasible process for the generation of today?s oil and gas deposits in the timescale subse7uent to thelood as suggested by creation scientists.

https://answersingenesis.org/geology/catastrophism/how-fast-can-oil-form/#Table







https://answersingenesis.org/geology/catastrophism/how-fast-can-oil-form/#Back

a.snelling - flood geology

Documents