Here is an example of what happens with repelling poles in this video:
How do you get layers with repelling poles to stay together? You don’t. So it’s not polar flips that caused this. Besides, what is going to have more of an effect on the next layers poles? 1) A magnet pole that is 1,000 of miles away? 2) Or one that is butted right up against it that has a magnetic field of it’s own?
- Astrophysical observations show that the rotation of the earth has been slowing (and the number of days per year has been decreasing) since it first formed. Calculations based on these observations show that there is a very close agreement between the predicted number of days in a year, the measured number of days based on coral growth characteristics, and the measured age of fossil corals. The results are consistent with fossil coral ages extending back some 400 million years ago. How do YECs account for these correlations?
- Response: This is basically the same question asked earlier about corals it’s just done in a different way. I will answer this the same way I answered the other question. Old earth believers are taking the average growth to calculate this. Which means corals grow at different rates. No one know the rate of coral growth from the past so basically this is an assumption based on something that cannot be proven. Today the conditions for corals is not favorable and many are dying. Do you think corals will grow normally in unfavorable conditions? No they want. So the past was more favorable for growth from which it is easy to conclude that corals grew much faster in the past.
- Evidence gathered from core samples taken by the Glomar Challenger show that the Mediterranean Sea has been subjected to repeated cycles of drying and re-flooding over a period of millions of years. Analysis of the core samples reveals a geologic history that involved multiple cycles of deposition of sediments, compression of the sediments into stone, erosion of the stone into canyons (some larger than the modern Grand Canyon), and reburial of these canyons under thousands of feet of new sediments. Contained within these sediments are multiple layers of evaporites and weathered interfaces that take thousands of years to accumulate and that can only form under exposed conditions. How does the YEC model explain this evidence?
- Response: The problem here is this is based on figures that do not include the flood. So why would they support the flood? And some of what was asked here has already been answered in previous responses. It seems that the more I go into these questions the more they are the same just asked in a different fashion.
- Over 160 impact structures that were formed by the collision of extra-terrestrial objects with the earth have been identified. The vast majority of the impacts that formed these massive structures, which occur at various depths in the geologic column above the so-called Flood basement rock, were not recorded by humans. Considering that numerous other earth-altering events (earthquakes, floods, volcanoes, etc.) have been regularly recorded throughout human history, it seems odd that so few of these impacts were noted in historical documents if, as YECs contend, humans have been present on earth since shortly after its inception. Some YECs argue that most of these impacts occurred during the chaos of the Flood, and were, therefore, not recorded. How could these collisions of nuclear bomb proportions have occurred during the Flood without causing massive waves that would have smashed the wooden Ark like a toy?
- Response: How can one know that these meteors would have nuclear bomb proportions? This is actually an assumption based on making the YEC model not work. But let’s take a closer look. The meteors were only needed to bring down the canopy. And while the meteors entered our atmosphere where the barometric pressures were double because of the canopy, there would have been much more friction to slow down the speed of the meteor before it hit. Also taking into account that the canopy itself slowed these meteors down somewhat upon impact means the meteors back then would not had hit with the same forcible impact as they would today. So nuclear bomb proportions is over kill. Of course when one is looking to discredit something to the emf degree over kill is always in order.
- Oil contains certain chemicals that derive from the organic materials from which it was formed. The distribution of these chemicals in oil correlates with the sequence of these organic precursor materials as they appeared in the geologic column. For example, there is no oleanane in oil deposits older than the last epoch of the Cretaceous because the angiosperms from which this chemical is derived did not exist prior to that time. A similar time line exists for chemicals in oil such as 24-norcholestane (which is not present until the appearance of the diatoms) and vitrain (which is not present until the appearance of land plants). How is this relationship explained in terms of the Flood model?
- Response: Oil does not take millions of years to form. In fact that claim is based upon assumptions made about the geologic column. There is a process that is done on turkey and chicken by products (stuff that’s usually thrown away), that when the near to same conditions of how crude oil is found in underground is applied twice, the by products break down to form a petroleum product known as bio-diesel (a form of oil that is used as fuel) in about 2 hours. And there are many things that can be broke down to make this. They are currently working on a process to turn tires into bio diesel or gas. They will do the same with common trash and one company is reportedly doing this with raw sewage. So it’s not what existed, its what broke down to make it. There is also what’s called hydrothermal oil. The video below shows oil being made by nature right before your eyes.
- The Atacama desert in Chile contains river beds that have not had water running in them for 120,000 years. Some areas of this desert have been in a hyper-arid condition for at least 20 million years. How can these facts be accounted for in terms of the YEC model?
- Response: It would first have to be ascertained how the ages of what history is claimed, was concluded. Asking a vague question with no real information won’t get a good answer. But since it is this way I will ask questions on what I see in the questions. 1) How does one know that the river beds have had no running water 120,000 years? Since there is no information on how I can only conclude that this was assumed. And the claim about 20 million years, same question.