Excitement for flood geologists and YECs in general!

[a_haworthroberts]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-24272552
An earthquake (probably, though yesterday's killer quake's epicentre was far from this location; the local 'trigger' appears to have been associated seismic activity pushing up a 'mud volcano' with rock and associated methane) causes the formation of a new island in a day (there was a report on this on the BBC Six O'clock News, though I will need to watch it again on iplayer as I was very busy at the time, and it will also be on the ITV News at Ten). An earthquake - not a massive flood.

Yes - it must be another nail in the coffin of GRADUALISM (never mind the fact that this island will probably be - according to BBC TV News - just a temporary phenomenon).

They are already getting excited at the CMI Facebook page. https://www.facebook.com/creationministries (where they are, apparently coincidentally, repeating their garbage about how geologists would wrongly assume Surtsey to be very old if they had not witnessed its formation)

This is how a fundamentalist 'know-it-all' bigot (initials PL) has approached the science behind either Surtsey or today's event or both:
"This news literally blows away evolution".

Proof positive that young earth creationists are ignorant, brainwashed, and deluded. Or simply liars.

According to an oceanographer quoted in the BBC News website article:
"The seabed near the Makran coast has vast deposits of gas hydrates, or frozen gas having a large methane content. These deposits lay compressed under a sediment bed that is 300m-800m thick. When the plates along the fault-lines move, they create heat and the expanding gas blasts through the fissures in the earth's crust, propelling the entire sea floor to the surface."

[Brian Jordan]

Gradualism? Semantic nonsense. I have several grades of sandpaper, followed in fineness by several grades of wet-and-dry paper. Where does gradualism stop and catastrophism start in the world of abrasives?

[jon_12091]

Gradualism? Semantic nonsense. I have several grades of sandpaper, followed in fineness by several grades of wet-and-dry paper. Where does gradualism stop and catastrophism start in the world of abrasives?

Probably with the coarsest grit, the orbital sander and contact with exposed flesh....

Needless to say the vast majority of mudstone on the planet was NOT deposited by mud volcanoes. Creationist hyperbole and wish fulfillment fantasies strike again....

[a_haworthroberts]

http://www.icr.org/article/7733/
NO comment.

http://www.icr.org/article/7693/
Further confirmation that the answer to any geological feature seen today on planet Earth is THE GENESIS FLOOD.
Apparently slow processes cannot form any appreciable amounts of oil or natural gas - and even if they did any really old oil and gas (older than 4,300 years mind) would have been eaten by those unbiblical bacteria by now.
Science is easy.
I don't have any answer to hold for all the claims here - and Wikipedia has a 'liberal' bias some YECs insist - but has he tried publishing his findings in a peer-reviewed science journal?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petroleum#Formation
Also - is the YEC position that the mountains rose and the ocean floors sank as the Floodwaters drained or while they were still rising? I thought it was supposed to be the former. Yet Clarey writes: "The depth of burial must have been enhanced by rapid tectonic subsidence, as well as simultaneous formation of adjacent mountain uplifts". In context his comments imply that this all happened DURING the Flood and as it buried masses of sediment ie he also says in the previous paragraph that the great Flood was "an event that rapidly deposited thousands of feet of sediments across the continents, burying and placing huge amounts of marine sediments—containing algae and plankton—on the continental crust".

What is the official Flood Geology position on when Psalm 104 verse 8 (make sure you use the 'correct' English translation) took place - while the waters were depositing sediment or when the waters were draining away?
Or are these one and the same process as regards the buried sediment (I'm no geologist).

[Brian Jordan]

I suppose that if mountains go up, something must go down and at roughly the same time. On the other hand, while the rain came down the "waters of the deep" are supposed to have gone up at the same time. What sort of cavern or vacuum did that leave? One where the earth could sink instead of forming mountains? It surely would have displaced or prevented any returning water.
Pose a nonsensical scenario and you get nonsensical contradictions.