When examining the record of the rocks with its vast assemblage of fossils, two propositions have been offered to explain the cause. The Global flood mentioned in Genesis in the Bible, which occupied about a year and the evolution theory with its proposition of a slow deposition of the sediment over millions of years.

Which of these two explanations best fits the facts.

I have shown in the two articles “Evolution’s Time Scale” and the “Geological Hoax” that evolutionists have artificially arranged the fossil record to show a sequence of fossils from the simple to the complex and assigned imaginary dates in millions of years to certain fossils, that they have named index fossils. They have then used these index fossils to assign their imaginary dates to the rock strata that they were found in.  As the Global flood of Noah’s day completely shatters this artificially created geological timetable, it is important to the theory of evolution to treat the record of the Global flood as mythical.  I say the record of the Global flood because it has been recorded as an historical fact by eyewitnesses who have never been shown to be dishonest or unreliable.

.

The Fossils are found in Sedimentary Rock

The first thing to take note of is that the strata layers have been formed by water-laid sedimentary rock. This lends credence to the story of the flood. As it is generally considered that the lower layers are the oldest we should in a general way find some sort of sequence of fossils. The seabed life forms are usually found in the lowest rocks, then the more mobile fish life appear, next amphibians and these are followed by animals and birds that could more easily move to the higher areas of land.  As humans came later than animals whether one accepts evolution or the bible, and they were able to take action intelligently to try and avoid the rising waters, fewer fossils would be found.   There would also be many examples of the strata sequences being out of order, because of the post flood reworking of the layers while they were still soft and pliable. Does this accord with the record of the flood? Yes!

How can this sequence be explained? If the global flood is used to explain the phenomena, the answer is usually very simple. With enormous volumes of water running off the continents it stands to reason that as these waters plunged into the sea the first life forms covered would be those on the seabed. This would be followed by the fish life. Amphibians could swim and crawl onto land. .Animals and birds would be in the higher layers because of their ability to reach higher elevations. Finally there would be very few humans found because according to the Bible, mankind was created last and had only been on earth for about 1656 years when the flood came. The earth is a very large place and 1656 years is a very short time to produce much of a population starting from two humans particularly when we realize that it took 5823 years to reach one billion by the year 1830 CE.

As I have shown in other articles on this site, the seven days of creation were each thousands of years long, therefore animals and other forms of life were a long time around before man. Vegetation was created on the third creative day and sea life was only created on the fifth creative day, so sea life was created thousands of years after the creation of vegetation and also thousands of years before animals.  Finally  man only appeared at the end of the sixth creative day.  Therefore these other forms of life must have been around much longer than humans.

Supporting the record of the flood in a general way, this sequence appears in the fossil record,  but there are many examples of the sequence being out of order. Why? Because the flood lasted a year and during that year the earth itself must have suffered many upheavals, with earth movements and tidal action overlaying sediments with new sedimentary layers. Also even after the global flood many large local floods would continue to occur while the earth was settling down and would contribute to remixing and depositing new sedimentary layers over other older sedimentary layers.  Water had also to cut its way through large soft sedimentary deposits so as to find ways to flow to the new, deeper seabeds that had formed to accommodate the large amounts of water now present.

.

What about the Water?

Where did all the water go that caused the flood? Well the seabed is many miles deep in places. In fact I believe that in one place it is actually nine miles deep. There is nothing comparable with this in regard to the visible landmass on earth. This is exactly what we should find if the flood was a reality. Furthermore many of our high mountains are composed of water laid sedimentary rock. How much water would be required to deposit a mountain of sediment and also how much water be required to fill a basin nine miles deep?

The Bible furthermore explains the main source of the water that caused the flood.
of  (Genesis 1:6-8) 6 And God went on to say: “Let an expanse come to be in between the waters and let a dividing occur between the waters and the waters.” 7 Then God proceeded to make the expanse and to make a division between the waters that should be beneath the expanse and the waters that should be above the expanse. And it came to be so. 8 And God began to call the expanse Heaven. And there came to be evening and there came to be morning, a second day.

Notice that the Bible gives a reasonable explanation for the source of the water by showing that God had raised a large body of water above the earth that formed a canopy around the earth. This canopy produced a hothouse condition on earth that was ideal for the proliferation of large vegetation. Dinosaurs are always pictured, surrounded by rich large lush tropical vegetation backgrounds. The canopy prevented ozone from being mixed into our atmosphere according to Donald Patten the writer of the book the “Biblical Flood and the Ice Epoch.” Donald Patten says that because ozone is poisonous, when once the canopy was removed the ozone began to be mixed into our atmosphere bringing death earlier than before, and that this is one of the reasons why modern animals are smaller than those before the flood and also why the human life span has decreased so much because ozone affects the longevity of living things.

When the canopy collapsed torrential rain occurred and the rainbow appeared for the first time because this was the first time that sunlight shone through raindrops producing the rainbow.  Let us just very briefly consider the sequence of events as explained by the Genesis account, which I have explained in much greater detail in the article “The Scientific Accuracy of Genesis”

.

The Sequence in Genesis

1. Gen 1:1 God creates the universe (composed of stars and planets and galaxies) Stars give light and this shows that light was already available in the universe.
2. Gen 1:2 The Bible describes the condition of the earth at that time and describes it as being in darkness and covered with water, in spite of the fact that the stars and planets were already in existence as mentioned in the first verse. This indicates that some sort of obstruction was preventing the suns rays from reaching the earth, probably some sort of gaseous cloud as often seen in the universe.
3. Gen 1:3-5 God then said  “let there be light” and then describes how the light from the sun reached the earth for the first time. This would mean that the obstruction was dispersed in some way. From God’s viewpoint the earth would now be a circle with the suns rays hitting one side of the earth and leaving the other side in darkness. God then is recorded as calling the sunlit side day and the dark side night.
4. Gen 1:6-8 Shows God raising some of the water to form the canopy. The expanse between the canopy and the water-covered earth below, he then proceeded to call heaven. Here for the first time we see that God calls the universe, heaven at verse one, and he also calls the expanse, heaven referring to our atmosphere where birds fly. The canopy was the main source of the water that fell at the flood although the release of subterranean waters may have also contributed.
   
5. Gen 1:9-12 shows how God caused the earth’s crust to wrinkle, creating deep basins into which the water flowed and formed the seas, causing the dry land to appear. With the appearance of dry land, God began to create vegetation. The vegetation served to absorb the carbon present in the atmosphere, gradually purifying it and putting oxygen back into it. The canopy kept the earth in a hothouse condition and there was probably a lot of carbon initially in the atmosphere, doubtless caused by the many volcanoes that were present because of the upheavals that occurred with the earth’s crust as the deep sea basins were formed.
6. Gen 1:14-19 shows that the canopy and the heavily laden carbon atmosphere thinned out sufficiently, through the purifying action of the vegetation, to allow the luminaries to appear in the expanse or atmosphere. This thinning out process resulted in the sun and moon becoming more discernable
7. From then on God carried on with his creation of sea life and animal life etc.

What is also interesting is that the Bible describes the condition of the earth after the establishing of the canopy in this way

(Genesis 2:5-6) 5 Now there was as yet no bush of the field found in the earth and no vegetation of the field was as yet sprouting, because Jehovah God had not made it rain upon the earth and there was no man to cultivate the ground. 6 But a mist would go up from the earth and it watered the entire surface of the ground.

.

Pre-Flood Conditions

This is what the condition of the earth would be like. Donald Patten explained that trade winds are caused by a temperature differential. In other words, because it is hot at the equator and cold at the poles, we get wind movement. Hot air arises and the cold air gets pulled in. By evaporation the water is raised into clouds, which are then moved around and deposit their contents in the form of rain.
Now if a canopy does exist the earth would be uniformly warm because the canopy would create a hothouse condition and this would produce a somewhat tropical climate. Because there would be no temperature differential under a canopy, there would be no trade winds and so the earth would be watered by a mist and no rain. This is exactly what the Bible says about the condition of the earth. How did the Bible writer know this scientific principle?

All of this is absolutely in harmony with science, even to providing the source of the water for the flood.
Furthermore after the canopy fell the sun would be clearly seen for the first time and when the sun’s rays shown through raindrops then the rainbow would appear.

(Genesis 9:13-16) . . 13 My rainbow I do give in the cloud, and it must serve as a sign of the covenant between me and the earth. 14 And it shall occur that when I bring a cloud over the earth, then the rainbow will certainly appear in the cloud. 15 And I shall certainly remember my covenant which is between me and YOU and every living soul among all flesh; and no more will the waters become a deluge to bring all flesh to ruin. 16 And the rainbow must occur in the cloud, and I shall certainly see it to remember the covenant to time indefinite between God and every living soul among all flesh that is upon the earth.”

Now the important points to take note of, is the direct references to the appearance of the rainbow, the appearance of clouds and also its association with the fact that God says there will never be another global flood, again. Of course this is fact because the canopy is no longer there.
The question is: How could humans at that time know of these facts?

Let us examine the facts relating to the flood;

The source of the water that causes the flood was identified in Genesis chapter 1 as the canopy. This is basically scientifically correct and provides circumstantial proof that the flood actually occurred. During the 1950’s when I first began to read about the sedimentary strata while traveling around the country, I was impressed by the strata layers that I could observe. This is particularly true if one lives in Cape Town and looks at Table Mountain and Lions’ Head.

.

Lion’s Head and Table Mountain

Here is a picture pf Lion’s head  in Cape Town clearly showing the strata layers of sedimentary rock.

This Picture of Table Mountain shows the strata lines clearly visible.

I have added the next picture to show how Kloof-Neck breaks the strata in between and which in my opinion could only have been carved out while the sediment was still soft.

I have showed the close-ups to help you clearly identify the lines of strata in  the two photographs.

I believe that Kloof-Neck could only have been carved out while the sediment was soft and while the waters poured off the continent and plunged into the sea.

To summarize:- The parallel lines of strata that run from the top of Lion’s Head to Table Mountain are interrupted by a gap that we generally refer to as Kloof-Neck.  We ask why the gap? If the layers were solid, with each layer hardening first before the subsequent layers were added until all were hardened into hard rock then what force could possibly have carved out this gap leaving the layers that were alongside and obviously at one time joined together, intact? However if the layers were soft, and each layer had been added while the sediment was still reasonably soft as they would have been when laid by the global flood, it would be easy to see how the waters draining of the continent could carve a way through the soft sediment, as they poured into the sea. Furthermore it is obvious that to form these mountains by sedimentary layers the amount of waters must have been tremendous.  All of this is bad news for evolutionists.

On the other hand evolutionists, without any scientific evidence to the contrary have outlawed catastrophic causes for the interpretation of the fossil record, preferring to believe that the present is the key to the past. They have to reject the global flood because it prevents them from having their long geological ages. Floods can accomplish the depositing of sediment in a very short time. On the other hand evolutionists need millions of years to support their theory. They therefore are forced to believe that the strata layers were deposited slowly. They have artificially created a geologic time table based on their theory with the result that when the fossil sequences are shown to be literally upside down or missing in between the layers they have now to invent enormous over-thrusts of strata to explain why the sequence of fossils is out of order in places.

.

How Evolution Handles Problems

Imagine that according to the evolutionary  sequence  we should have four layers of strata. They may only find the top layer and the bottom layer in the real world. The evolutionist has to imagine that the two in-between layers that his evolutionary sequence required,  were eroded away, even if there is no evidence that this actually happened. However we ask why did the erosion only affect those two in-between layers? What caused the erosion to begin and stop?

Sometimes according to the  sequence of fossils in the geological column, the top layer should be at the bottom of the strata layers instead of being at the top where it is now positioned. The layers may appear to have been physically deposited quite naturally but the evolutionist now has to invent a massive over-thrust to account for this. He makes his decision based on the fossil content of the strata and not on evidence from the rocks. What is an over-thrust? You have to imagine that these strata layers were subject to such pressure that a fracture occurs and then the strata on the one side slid over the strata on the other side.

Then the layers were all eroded down until the bottom layer which is the oldest in the evolutionary sequence rested on the top of the younger layers as in C.

The question I would like to ask is this. Why was it that  only the strata  forming the overthrust eroded away? Notice that the strata on each side of the overthrust shows hardly any erosian at all. But almost 4 layers of overthrust are shown to have eroded away. In the case of the overthrust,  In a slide show that I saw a geologist demonstrated that the Lewis overthrust was not what it appeared to be. The geologist showed that a board displayed at the entrance to the area  explained the theory regarding the Lewis overthrust.  Apparently the  Lewis overthrust covers an area of some 13,000 square miles in the northern Rocky Mountains, stretching 300 miles from Montana up into British Columbia.  According to the evolution theory a whole mountain range composed of precambrian rocks (the oldest, according to the fossil content)  rest on top of cretaceous rocks (the younger according to the fossil content.)

The evolutionary  explanation was the overthrust concept which I have illustrated above in the diagram. However many small actual thrust faults provide us with knowledge of what to look for. The relative motion of one stratum over another causes the formation of an intermediate layer composed of ground-up particles from the two moving layers. The rubble  formed in this process are called fault breccia, and the layers may be many feet thick. In addition, on either side of the fault there may be extensive deformation in the two strata.

What was observed at the contact zone of the Lewis overthrust? According to the geologist, there was  no intermediate layer of fault breccia..The precambrian limestone lay conformably on the underlying cretaceous shale or sandstone at every point where the contact line was visible (Crows-nest Mountain, Chief Mountain, Cut Bank, Dry Fork Creek, and Marias Pass). There was no physical field evidence for the historical reality of the so-called Lewis overthrust. The only evidence for such an event was the fact that the fossils in the upper strata are said to be older than those in the lower strata by a billion years. Then taking the observer to the fault line in the Lewis overthrust the geologist  showed photographically that there was no breccia, indicating that the fault line was natural and in conformity. The slides shown actually showed him pointing to the fault line with his little pick and showed that there was no evidence of breccia at all. The layers appeared to have been deposited quite naturally.

We must remember that the global flood is a direct obstacle to the evolutionist. If the global flood is true then the artificial geologic time table created by the evolutionist is exposed as being fraudulent and he can say goodbye to his millions of years required to cover the fact that no evolution is visible today. The existence of the flood proves that the fossil record has nothing to do with evolution. Therefore it is very important to the evolutionist to assign the flood to the realm of myth.

.

Other Criticisms of the Flood

Apart from the physical evidence which supports the flood, namely the fact that the entire earth is covered with sedimentary rock there are the many legends from all over the world that explain that the world had been wiped out by water in the past. How can evolution explain this fact?  Why have these nations all chosen to ascribe world destruction to a flood and not to plagues or volcanic actions? Why a flood?
At first the criticisms of the Global flood began with arguments against the flood claiming it was merely a local flood. The ridiculous lengths that persons would go to establish their argument is very obvious with regard to these arguments. We may ask would Noah spend years of his life building an ark of the dimensions mentioned in scripture, when he could have merely moved somewhere else? No local flood could cover the top of the mountains. Then arguments were made that Noah could not have got all the animals into the ark. However the Bible shows that Noah was only to take with him animals that were representative of their kinds.
Moreover the fact that our modern animals were smaller than their pre-flood counterparts only supports the Bible if based on Donald Patten’s observation regarding to the effects of ozone on the size and longevity of life. However even that is not necessary because any sane man, and I am sure that Noah was quite sane would not select a great Dane when a much smaller example that could ultimately be the progenitor of both the great Dane and also a Pekingese was sufficient. It is all a matter of the Gene pool. God could have guided Noah’s selection because Noah would have known nothing about genes at the time.

Another argument that was used was that Noah could not control these animals for a year in the ark and provide them with food. However as some scientists have mentioned, some animals hibernate in winter months and sleep their way through these times without taking in food supplies, having stored sufficient food for their hibernation. It was even suggested that the hibernation of modern animals may be a throw back to the fact that perhaps most animals hibernated during the flood and now some have retained this characteristic. True or false God would certainly have taken care of this problem for Noah.

Another fact supporting the flood story is the fact that the fossil record indicates that  many animals are extinct and only represented by the smaller examples of their kinds. Apart from the flood of Noah’s day history does not record any other worldwide catastrophe that could wipe out so many examples of extinct life as the fossil record shows. Of course forgetting about their rejection of the catastrophe of the flood, evolutionists are forced to invent other catastrophes to account for the extinction of the dinosaurs. How many times I have read in an evolution book statements of this nature:-“What caused the dinosaurs to become extinct? We don’t know” and then they proceed to invent imaginative possible causes to account for this. Would it not have been easier to say:- “The Bible records the existence of a massive global flood that probably destroyed the dinosaurs and possibly many other forms of animal life not found around today” However they can’t because that would lay down the groundwork for the destruction of their theory. .

Has evolution got an explanation as to why the proportion of water to land is so much greater for water? Where did the water all come from?

Which explanation is the more reasonable? The Bible’s explanation of a global flood that is a satisfactory explanation for the fact that mountain ranges of sedimentary rock were laid down in a short time and are now subject to erosion, or the evolutionist’s explanation that strata layers were laid down over millions of years.. We may ask what happened to erosion during that time? The two forces are in opposition to one another. How can you slowly deposit a layer that will ultimately form hard rock and yet erode the slow forming strata while forming it. With a quick formation of the strata layer it is different. The speed of the formation of the deposit overrules the erosion factor. Once the formation has been laid the erosive forces come into play. Surely with regard to the slow deposition of the strata layers the one process cancels out the other. On the other hand, the speedy deposition of the strata layers caused by a Global flood, present no problem with regard to the forces of erosion.

I think that it is very obvious that this ancient document, the Bible that explains the sequence of creation, and also shows advanced knowledge. deserves serious consideration and does not deserve to be regarded as the source of myths.  Would a myth be able to supply factual scientific descriptions of the phenomena that it gives us. For the Global flood of the Bible to be rejected and ascribed to myth, the evolutionist needs to do better than that. He has to prove that the Bible writers were dishonest men and ignorant of the facts. This would be very hard to prove as the facts show that they actually had advanced knowledge ahead of their time, and this without even considering the other proofs of the Bible’s miraculous existence, like its fulfillment of prophecy and its survival to our day in the face of the opposition to it. No other ancient document can meet this criteria.

.

What the Flood Means to Us

More important is that the flood of Noah’s day constitutes evidence of what God can and did do when he considers that human civilization has become irreformable. The Global flood of Noah’s day is a reminder that God can just as easily destroy this present wicked world and therefore stands as a warning to us to make sure that we are doing the will of God today.

Other articles that I have written will show that God intends destroying this wicked generation and that the only survivors will be those that .are found doing his will. Because of the many religions that claim to worship God and the fact that the Bible shows wrong teachings are regarded as a subversion of truth. It becomes imperative that we need to search for the true religion. God assures us that it does exist.

(2 Timothy 2:18) . . .These very [men] have deviated from the truth, saying that the resurrection has already occurred; and they are subverting the faith of some. . .

(John 4:23) . . .Nevertheless, the hour is coming, and it is now, when the true worshipers will worship the Father with spirit and truth, for, indeed, the Father is looking for suchlike ones to worship him.

If you consider this article a reasonable approach to the subject of the Bible versus Evolution, one should remember that evolution is a philosophical religion. I say a religion, because all they have done is attribute the miraculous works of creation to a blind force that they call “nature.” Nature is just a descriptive term describing what has occurred without human intervention. For example:- A lake formed by a dam is not natural whereas a dam formed without any human intervention is natural or formed by nature. This descriptive term has been given miraculous powers by the evolutionist. How often we read that that nature has provided the protective covering for an animal or has designed the wings of a butterfly so as to look like an owl’s face for protection from natural enemies. So evolution attributes the work of God to a blind mindless force that they call “nature.” If this is not religion then what is? The problem is that evolution is a religion that offers no hope to it’s  believers. The Bible on the other hand, in addition to giving us explanations for the world that we live in also gives us the hope for something better and explains what we should do to have this hope.

I therefore suggest that if you wish to further your knowledge of the other side of the story, one not generally provided by the popular media, consider some of the articles in my list of articles and also examine the links in my site which can direct you to the sources of more accurate information.

.

Posted in Categories :- Geology, Religion, Science, all