Re: Earth Rotation and the Flood

Glenn R. Morton (grmorton@waymark.net)
Mon, 05 Oct 1998 18:09:46 -0500

At 08:00 AM 10/5/98 -0700, Arthur V. Chadwick wrote:
>At 07:49 PM 10/4/98 -0500, Glenn wrote:
>
>>Are these cycles the fortnight cycles? If so, there is no problem. Leaves
>>today last quite a long time in lakes and streams prior to their
>destruction.
>
>These very delicate lace-like leaves would have to have stood vertically in
>the water column, unsupported, with no evidence of decay, while daily tidal
>currents swept repeatedly across them, for two months (at least). Not a
>chance. There is a problem with that interpretation. But maybe it would
>be easier to explain away the leaves than to attempt to reinvestigate the
>data on the cycles.

I guess my point and skepticism still revolves around the length of time
that the leaf could last. For years I heard everyone say that everything
must be buried rapidly or it could fossilize, and by 'rapidly', it was
almost always meant, 'Instantaneously. I have since found that bones can
last for years on the surface before being trampled into the ground where
they form fossils. I heard that leaves must be buried instantly yet they
can last for weeks. What is the evidence (other than personal belief) that
makes you think the leaves can't last for 8 weeks in the water? Do you
know how fast the tidal bores were in your rhythmite which would bend the
leaf? And remeber that the fulcrum or bend point would clime up the leaf
as time went by because of the daily addition of sediment.

Just a few questions.
glenn

Adam, Apes and Anthropology
Foundation, Fall and Flood
& lots of creation/evolution information
http://www.isource.net/~grmorton/dmd.htm