In 1994, Steve Austin, Russell Humphreys, Larry Vardiman, John
Baumgardner, Andrew Snelling and Kurt Wise co-authored a paper in the 3rd
International Conference on Creationism, entitled "Catastrophic Plate
Tectonics: A Global Flood Model of Earth History"(pp 609-21). In this
paper, Austin et al. defined the post-flood boundary in a way that is
inconsistent with Henry Morris' view. Austin et al write:
"The definition of the Flood/Post-Flood boundary in the geologic column is
a subject of considerable dispute among creationists. Estimates range
from the Carboniferous to the Pleistocene. For our purposes here we would
like to define the Flood/post-Flood boundary at the termination of
global-scale erosion and sedimentation. Based upon a qualitative
assessemnt of geologic maps worldwide, lithotypes change from worldwide or
continental in character in the Mesozoic to local or regional in the
Tertiary. Therefore, we tentatively place the Flood/postFlood boundary at
approximately the Cretaceous/Tertiary(K/T) boundary. We believe further
studies in stratigraphy paleontology, paleomagnetism and geochemistry
should allow for a more precise definition of this boundary."~Austin et
al. op. cit., p. 614.
Morris' paper is, I believe a reaction against Austin et al., defining
the end of the flood so deep into the geologic column. For those who are
not familiar with geology, the column is as follows:
top
Cenozoic most mammal forms are found here
.....Neogene
.....Paleogene
Mesozoic age of dinosaurs some mammals
.....Cretaceous
.....Jurassic
.....Triassic
Paleozoic
.....Permian
.....Pennsylvanian
.....Missississippian
.....Devonian
.....Silurian
.....Ordovician
.....Cambrian
Precambrian
bottom
(Taken from Geological Time Table, B.U. Haq and F. van Eysinga, 4th ed.
Elsevier Science Publishers 1987)
Morris spends the first part of his paper trying to show that the entire
geologic column does not exist anywhere on earth. Morris says things like:
"It has long been recognized that the geologic column is an
arbitrary construct existing nowhere in full in any local
geologic column. Various concepts were used in the early 19th
century to combine all the scattered local columns into one
global standard column."~Henry M. Morris, "The Geologic Column
and the Flood of Genesis", Creation Research Society Quarterly
33:1(June, 1996), p. 50
This is factually wrong as the entire column in proper order exists at
over 20 places on earth including North Dakota and many other places
around the world. (see the Geologic Column article on my web page
http://members.gnn.com/GRMorton/geo.htm ). What is absolutely fascinating
is that Morris contradicts himself. After saying it does not exist
anywhere, he then cites an article by John Woodmorappe which admits that
the entire column (10 eras piled on top of each other in proper order)
exists in Poland. Morris writes:
"More recently, in a very comprehensive study of all the
local columns on all the world's continents everywhere,
creationist geologist John Woodmorappe (1981) demonstrated that
the standard column was actually non-existent anywhere. He
concluded that:
'. . .42% of earth's land surface has 3 or less geologic
periods present at all; 66% has 5 or less of the 10 present;
and only 14% has 8 or more geologic periods represented at
all.'
He also concluded that 'slightly less than 1% has all 10 periods
simultaneously in place.(p. 67)'"~Henry M. Morris, "The Geologic
Column and the Flood of Genesis", Creation Research Society
Quarterly 33:1(June, 1996), p. 50
So it exists. It is not a theoretical construct. This quotation is
self-contradictory, saying first that it doesn't exist; then saying that
it exists on 1% of the surface area.
However, I have always thought that young-earth creationists who cite this
article as proving that the geologic column is non-existent are being
disingenuous. The actual article has a few NEVER quoted sections.
Woodmorappe says:
"There apparently are regions on earth where all ten
geologic periods can be found superposd."~John Woodmorappe, "The
Essential Non-existence of the Evolutionary-Uniformitarian
Geologic Column: A Quantitative Assessment" Creation Research
Society Quarterly, (18:1) June 1981, p. 67.
and
"All ten geologic periods are undoubtedly represented in the
Swiety Kryzys (Holy Cross) Mountains of south-central Poland (20-
22E and 50-52N) as is evident from the local map of the mountain
region enclosed in the work of Ksiazkiewicz, Samsonowich, and
Ruhle. In fact, the presence of all or almost all ofthe geologic
column (in terms of sedimentary lithologies that are unambiguously
biostratigraphically dated) can be shown to occur over much of
Poland."~John Woodmorappe, "The Essential Non-existence of the
Evolutionary-Uniformitarian Geologic Column: A Quantitative
Assessment" Creation Research Society Quarterly, (18:1) June
1981, p. 67
How can an article that proves that the geologic column actually does
exist, prove that it doesn't exist? This is a truly amazing contortion!!!
Morris then gets to the real point of this article which is to warn (as a
father warns his children) not to play with fire. He writes:
"Therefore, it is now becoming a cause for concern that a
growing number of young-earth creationists are seemingly about to
repeat the mistakes and compromises of the past, arguing that the
Biblical Flood cannot really explain the geological record after
all. Some are concluding thjat the Tertiary formations are to be
attributed to a number of post-Flood geological catastrophes, and
some are even alleging that the Flood can only account for the
Paleozoic rocks, or maybe not even all of these. Some are also
suggesting that at least a portion of the fossiliferous
Proterozoic rocks, were laid down by episodic events of some kind
before the Flood.
"If such equivocations continue, the Flood itself will
eventually be used only to account for the marine strata of the
Cambrian and Ordovician 'periods.' Sooner or later difficulties
will be found even in these, and the Flood will once again (as so
often in the past) be explained away as only a tranquil floof or
a local flood. Some (e.g. Davis Young, Glen Morton) have already
gone this whole route, starting out not too many years ago as
full-fledged Flood geologists but then allowing supposed
geological difficulties gradually to relegate the Flood to only a
trivial part , if any, of the geologic column."~Henry M. Morris,
"The Geologic Column and the Flood of Genesis", Creation Research
Society Quarterly 33:1(June, 1996), p. 50
This is clearly an attack on Kurt Wise, Steve Austin and Andrew
Snelling for their 1994 ICC paper where they put the post flood
boundary at the KT boundary. This is probably my favorite paragraph in
the article. He holds out two people as bad examples to let the Austin et
al. crowd know what the dangers are.
Morris further contradicts Austin et al by specifically arguing that the
Flood/Post-Flood boundary could not be as deep as the K/T boundary. Most
mammalian fossils are found in the Tertiary He writes:
"There are certain other geological considerations, as
compared with Biblical statements, that still further strengthen
this requirement. The Mesozoic strata, with their great numbers
of fossils of dinosaurs and other reptiles, as well as the
Tertiary strata, with their extensive mammal fossils, must have
been deposited by the Flood, in view of the Biblical stipulation
that all land animals died in the Flood (e.g. Genesis 7:22).
"The suggestion made by certain creationists (actually
young-earth creationists who do believe in the global Flood) that
only the Paleozoic strata should be attributed to the Flood, is
clearly refuted by that Biblical statement. How could
relatively trivial later catastrophes produce vast numbers of
lamd-animal fossils when the immensely greater global Deluge
produced practically none? Those who advocate this type of
scenario would have to assume that the Flood only drowned all the
animals, not burying any in the Flood sediments"~Henry M.
Morris, "The Geologic Column and the Flood of Genesis", Creation
Research Society Quarterly 33:1(June, 1996), p. 56
Morris warns once again:
"One can of course, find many difficulties in applying Flood
geology to the entire geologic column. These become especially
troublesome in trying to correlate all the local columns of the
world with each other and all within the context of one global
Flood.
"Biblical creationists are understandably tempted
frequently, when they undertake such studies, to abandon their
attempts, reverting back to the old Cuvierian ideas of multiple
global catastrophes yet trying somehow to confine them all within
the Biblical chronology of several thousand years since the
Genesis creation week. Some have gone back even further, giving
up the literal creation-and-flood record altogether, in reverting
either to progressive creationism or even to theistic
evolutionism."~Henry M. Morris, "The Geologic Column and the
Flood of Genesis", Creation Research Society Quarterly 33:1(June,
1996), p. 55-56
Once again, I find Morris to be inconsistent. In the Genesis Flood he
wrote;
"And from the viewpoint of Biblical catastrophism, this makes it very
difficult to determine precisely which deposits were laid down in the
Deluge proper and which are attributable to the disturbed centuries after
the Flood. This difficulty parallels the problem that geologists
encounter in trying to fix the exact limits of the Pleistocene Epoc. The
Pliocene deposits, on the other hand, and the Recent, or Holocene,
deposits on the other,
'The boundary between Pleistocene and Recent is as ill-defined as
that between Pleistocene and Pliocene. But this is exactly what we would
expect, in light of the Biblical implications concerning the character and
extent of the Deluge. Although the Flood subsided enough so that Noah and
the animals could disembark from the ark after only one year, the
profoundly disturbed and altered hydrological and isostatic balances of
the earth undoubtedly continued to manifest themselves in what might be
called residual catastrophism for many centuries at least."~John C.
Whitcomb and Henry M. Morris, _The Genesis Flood_ (Baker, 1961), p. 313
Henry is arguing for post-flood catastrophism just like Austin et al are.
Yet he does not want them to have the freedom to have a differing view
from his. But what is most disappointing, is that Morris himself
Foundation,Fall and Flood
http://members.gnn.com/GRMorton/dmd.htm