14.  The layers of rock found around the world, some miles thick, contain fossils that order themselves from simple to complex.  There is no mixing.  For example, human and dinosaur bones are never found together and trilobite fossils are never found in the upper layers.  To a YEC, this is all explained by mobility (faster moving animals would make it to the top layers before being killed), ecological zonation (they died where they lived such as animals that lived near the water would be buried first) and hydraulic sorting effects (some bodies would float and different densities of plant materials would accumulate and be fossilized at different layers). This explanation is testable.

 

If evolution is true, finding a mixture of fossils would falsify evolution.  But if the entire fossil record were layed down during a year long flood, there should be some mixing or at least gradations of change.    

 

"Quite apart from all the other reasons to object to this remarkable explanation, there could only ever be a statistical tendency for mammals, for example, to be on average better at escaping the rising waters than reptiles.  Instead, as we should expect on the evolution theory, there literally are no mammals in the lower strata of the geological record.  The 'head for the hills' theory would be on more solid ground if there were a statistical trailing off of mammals as you move down the rocks.  There are literally no trilobites above Permian strata, literally  no  dinosaurs (except birds) above Cretaceous strata. Once again, the 'head for the hills' theory would predict a statistical tailing off".  Dawkins, The Greatest Show On Earth

 

As Shermer writes: “Not one trilobite floated upward to a higher stratum? Not one dumb horse was on the beach and drowned in a lower stratum?  Not one flying pterodactyl made it above the Cretaceous layer?  Not one moronic human did not come in out of the rain?  And what about the evidence provided by other dating techniques such as radiometry? 

 

Or as Hayward writes, “Then you begin to wonder: why is there not a single human fossil below the topmost layer?  Were there no inhabitants of the coastal plains overwhelmed in their sleep?  No cripples or sick folk unable to flee?  And why are the pterodactyl fossils all in the middle layers?  You would think that at least one or two of them would have flapped their way to the hilltops.  Then there is the little problem of vegetable fossils."  

 

As R.J. Schadewald has put it:  "A scenario with magnolias (a primitive plant) heading for the hills, only to be overwhelmed along with early mammals, is unconvincing.  And when marine fossils are found in many places above those of land animals and plants, [this theory] loses all credibility, too.”

 

This is a huge problem for YECs, and I would propose a terminal blow.  It is a primary issue and rises above all other secondary flood debates. The most basic trend in the fossil record, after finding millions of fossils over hundreds of years, is not explained by the most fundamental prediction of a universal Noachian Flood.

 

 

15. DNA evidence shows a bottleneck occurred in human populations about 60,000 years ago. We know from DNA evidence that it was a small population of 600 - 2,000 that later colonized the globe from Africa. Not 8 individuals a few thousand years ago from the Middle East.  Studying human lice even confirms this (see this page on this web site).  Several popular books and movies detail these findings (see Journey of Man, this page)  Lastly, the Christian evangelical geneticist Francis Collins established a web site that also discusses this - see page this web site.

 

16. Fossil Dung (Coprolites) - the fossil record is full of fossil dung. Since the flood lasted over a year, it is impossible that animals were still eating and forming dung when they would have long been dead.  Link

 

 

Comments - There are many more issues (see talkorigins.org), and the books by Coyne and Prothero reviewed on this web site page  discuss other topics such as glacial tracks in the Permian rocks of southern lands, and fossil tree Glossopteris distribution (Coyne) that are best explained in an evolutionary theory of earth's past.  

 

Genesis 6:17 - "For behold, I will bring a flood of waters upon the earth to destroy all flesh in which is the breath of life under heaven. Everything that is on the earth shall die".  And 7:4 ..."and every living thing that I have made I will blot out from the face of the ground".

 

Lastly, is this not a type of genocide, on a scale never imagined by the most evil men on earth?  Theologians write that there were millions of people living before 'the flood'. What about the children, the thousands of pregnant women with the unborn? Were the unborn "corrupt", and expressing "the wickedness of man"?  Is the concept of original sin really adequate to excuse God from a form of genocide? Even worse, if God did want to wipe practically everyone out, why not just snap his celestial fingers? Why make the children, infants and others die suffering through drowning rather than do a quick and painless reboot, like you restarting your stuck computer? Surely, there must have been cultures with their own dialects and customs; only one would survive.

 

"Kill a man, and you are an assassin. Kill millions of men,

and you are a conqueror. Kill everyone, and you are a God".  

~ Beilby Porteus, British Clergyman

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

From: Mr. Deity: In Defense of Killing Babies (Noah's Flood and Dennis Prager)

www.youtube.com/watch?v=3lmi4IJo1tU

 

 

Conclusions - by making a list with two columns, one can compare the major issues and the opposing explanations involved in examining the Noachian Flood narrative.  Both views are presented clearly on the Internet.  Do the YEC and theological explanations, when closely examined, really make sense?    Let us strive to use reason and skepticism when looking at questions of beliefs and origins, no matter how emotionally attached we are to them.  As an early scientific pioneer once said:

 

"I do not feel obliged to believe that same God who endowed us with sense, reason, and intellect had intended for us to forgo their use".  ~ Galileo Galilei

 

What about a local flood?  That does not seem to be what the bible is saying and its intent.  If it were local, why bring two of each kind of land animal on board the ark to repopulate?  Why describe the waters going well above the mountain tops?  Why take birds on board since they could just fly away from a local flood?

 

Also, see The Impossible Voyage of Noah's Ark (1983).  Still a good read.

 

See Noah's Ark (part 2 addresses "hyperevolution" after the Flood)

 

 

References

 

How Many Animal Species Inhabit Our Planet?  Link

 

 

Pro Flood

 

Was There Really a Noah's Ark & Flood?  Link

 

What Do the Fossil Reefs Tell Us?  Link

 

Catastrophe (C-A.net)  Link

 

Order in the Fossil Record  Link

 

Institute for Creation Research Link

 

Answers In Genesis  Link

 

Christian Answers.net  Link

 

 

Con Univeral Flood

 

Old World Ministries  Link

 

Problems with a Global Flood  Link

 

Flood Geology  Link

 

A Visit to the Institute for Creation Research  Link

 

Noah's Flood and Creation Science   Link

 

Why the Flood is Not Global  Link

 

Glen Morton's C-E Page  Link

 

Noah's Flood - debunked (Part 1):  YouTube - Potholer54

 

Grand CAnyon carved by floodwater - debunked:  YouTube - Potholer54

 

The Great Flood - cartoon

 

The Defeat of  Flood Geology by Flood Geology (2011)

 

Listing of Problems with Flood Geology

 

 

 

 ~ Biomed