Mudstone: Geologists Should Have Read Morris and Whitcomb First

Posted in Creation/Evolution, Genesis Flood on December 26th, 2007 by dhawkinsmo

“The entire [Biblical] account plainly yields the inference that tremendous quantities of earth and rock must have been excavated by the waters of the Flood … and the materials that were eroded must eventually have been redeposited somewhere, and necessarily in stratified layers, such as we find everywhere around the world today in the great sedimentary rock systems.” –Henry Morris & John Whitcomb, The Genesis Flood, 1961, p. 123.

“Many ancient shale units, once examined carefully, may thus reveal that they accumulated in the manner illustrated here, [in moving water] rather than having largely settled from slow-moving or still suspensions. This, in turn, will most likely necessitate the reevaluation of the sedimentary history of large portions of the geologic record. Elucidating the mechanisms of mudstone deposition not only helps to better understand the rock record but also benefits hydrocarbon exploration, hydrogeology, and coastal and shelf engineering.” — Schieber et al., December 2007

Wow. How did a hydraulic engineer and a theologian know that mudstone was deposited in moving water 46 years ago, but mainstream geologists are just now realizing it? Simple. They realized that the Genesis Record is an accurate record of history after all. And they realized that the reasons people reject the account of the Genesis Flood are often philosophical, not scientific.  So Morris & Whitcomb studied the evidence and wrote a book explaining scientifically how the account of the Flood is true. Now, after much educational effort on the part of organizations like ICR and AIG, mainstream geologists are slowly coming back around to catastrophism as an explanation for the geologic record. Also, critics like Glenn Morton who say that “ICR theories on oil formation were useless to actual oil exploration” are mistaken. Creationist theories could actually enhance oil exploration and provide new ideas about where to find it as this recent article from the leading journal Science makes clear. Just think how advanced our geologic knowledge would be if all geologists would have read The Genesis Flood as part of their graduate programs!

Science 14 December 2007:
Vol. 318. no. 5857, pp. 1760 – 1763

Accretion of Mudstone Beds from Migrating Floccule Ripples

Juergen Schieber,1* John Southard,2 Kevin Thaisen1

Mudstones make up the majority of the geological record. However, it is difficult to reconstruct the complex processes of mud deposition in the laboratory, such as the clumping of particles into floccules. Using flume experiments, we have investigated the bedload transport and deposition of clay floccules and find that this occurs at flow velocities that transport and deposit sand. Deposition-prone floccules form over a wide range of experimental conditions, which suggests an underlying universal process. Floccule ripples develop into low-angle foresets and mud beds that appear laminated after postdepositional compaction, but the layers retain signs of floccule ripple bedding that would be detectable in the rock record. Because mudstones were long thought to record low-energy conditions of offshore and deeper water environments, our results call for reevaluation of published interpretations of ancient mudstone successions and derived paleoceanographic conditions. Read more »

Glenn Morton: Mistaken Critic of Young Earth Creationists?

Posted in Creation/Evolution, Genesis Flood on December 18th, 2007 by dhawkinsmo


Glenn Morton is a professional geophysicist who is involved in oil exploration for major oil companies. He is also a former YEC (Young Earth Creationist) who has had fairly high level contact with prominent YEC scientists such as John Baumgardner, John Morris, Steve Austin and others. At some point, Mr. Morton decided that the YEC view is wrong and he became an OEC and an outspoken critic of the YEC view. His criticism is quite vehement: he claims YECs are dishonest, hide data and are “cowards.” Here’s a typical example of his strong language …

“Yes, I will make more serious allegations about YEC leaders. I have challenged any of them to come here and debate with me one on one in the gym so that they won’t be swamped. Not one of them will do it. They are all cowards. They play you like a fiddle telling you nonsense and letting you and your fellows go out and take the heat for them. Baumgardner is the only one I have ever seen come out on very rare occasions. And this is only the second time I have seen it in 12 years. Why do you think these cowards huddle out of the light? Like cockroaches, they can’t stand the light of scientific data and so run for cover quickly when it comes their way.”

Read more »

Burrowing Shrimp and The Global Flood of Noah

Posted in Creation/Evolution, Genesis Flood on December 7th, 2007 by dhawkinsmo

“The preponderance of evidence favors the hypothesis that the [eight meter long] structures are escape burrows of animals that had colonized, or were concentrated in, the lag and were suddenly buried by the deposition of the massive sand.”–Journal of Paleontology (May, 1990). See 2nd citation next page.

Glenn Morton is a professional petroleum geologist and critic of Young Earth Creationists. He recently challenged Dr. John Baumgardner to explain Animal Burrows in the fossil record because Morton believes they present a great challenge to the YEC/Flood view. I don’t know if Dr. B will take the time to join Morton’s discussion, but I am. We have only just begun this discussion at TheologyWeb and it should be interesting. You can read what Morton says at this link … Morton says that “YECs have not addressed the burrow problem” but I found that they have indeed, if only recently. These pictures come from an article in the prestigious journal Science entitled “Supershrimp: Deep Bioturbation in the Strait of Canso, Nova Scotia,” (Science, Vol. 192, pp 790-791).This genus of shrimp, Axius, has been found in water almost 700 meters deep and digs very deep burrows (evidently greater than 3 meters), and can burrow very quickly (the animals are able to escape the dredge). The article says …

Although several square meters of bottom were excavated to a depth of 3 m, no live shrimp were recovered. The burrow systems are evidently deeper than 3 m, and the animals are able to escape the dredge by seeking lower levels. The dredge was used to remove the upper meter of sediment in several areas of high burrow concentration. Fresh sediment was then used to refill excavated areas. Overnight, burrows were reestablished in the same densities, and in approximately the same locations. (p. 791)

I found out about this article by reading prominent YEC author John Woodmorappe, “Are soft-sediment trace fossils (ichnofossils) a time problem for the Flood?,” (Journal of Creation 20(2) 2006, p. 113). In speaking of these shrimp, Woodmorappe says Read more »

Hydroplate Theory Prediction: Underground Water

Posted in Creation/Evolution, Genesis Flood on December 6th, 2007 by dhawkinsmo


Richard A. Kerr, “Looking—Deeply—into the Earth’s Crust in Europe,” Science, Vol. 261, 16 July 1993, pp. 295–297. Water from the stone. The brines are another surprise that is opening researchers’ eyes to the merit of deep drilling. “When I started 25 years ago, the idea was that the deeper you go into the crust, the drier it gets,” says Kehrer. Conventional wisdom had it that kilometers of overlying rock squeeze shut any cracks, cutting off the fluid flows that deposit ores and chemically alter the rock at shallower depths. But after the drill bit had penetrated more than 3 kilometers of dry rock, it broke into water aplenty. Core samples retrieved from 3.4 kilometers were veined with open cracks more than a centimeter wide that had presumably carried fluids. That was only a hint of what was to come at 4 kilometers, where more than half a million liters of a gas-rich, calcium-sodium-chloride brine twice as concentrated as seawater poured into the well. Abundant fluids gushed from depths as great as 6 kilometers. “This has been a real sensation,” says Kehrer. “The surprise is that there are fluids of that amount.”

The drilling stopped at 9.1 kilometers because they could not go further. Was Walt’s predicted saltwater still flowing? Yes it was …

But the abundant brines that had poured into the well at shallower depths continued to flow in at below 8 kilometers, surprising many geophysicists.

Read more »