Rapid Erosion Devastates Deep Time!

Erosion takes place slowly, over millions of years, right? That's what mainstream science tells us anyway. Or, does erosion happen far more quickly than we're led to believe?
Host Trey and Dr. Timothy Clarey discuss this fascinating topic on episode 67 of The Creation Podcast!
To become a member on KZbin: / @icrscience
To become a patron: / instituteforcreationre...
-
Do you have questions about science or Scripture? Post them in the comments and we might answer them in future episodes.
Tune in every other Tuesday here on KZbin for new episodes. You can also find the audio version on Spotify, Apple Podcasts, and Amazon Music.
Don't forget to subscribe to our channel to get notified about all of our upcoming episodes!
Hope to see you next time on The Creation Podcast!
Join this channel to get access to perks:
/ @icrscience
Join us on Patreon: / instituteforcreationre...
---
Follow us!
Facebook: / icrscience
Instagram: / icrscience
X (Twitter): / icrscience
LinkedIn: / institute-for-creation...
Pinterest: / icrscience
TikTok: / icrscience

[@timhall5226]

Dr. Clarey, I lived at the 4800' elevation on the eastern side of the Sierra Nevada mountains where I built a home. Fencing a portion of the property to exclude deer, I removed basalt rock and stockpiled them for a future retaining wall project. I also collected some vesicular basalts from out in the valley when I was working in the area. I had a pretty good pile of them but when Spring came around, my pile of a pile rock took on the appearance of a pile of ash. Freeze and thaw cycles can destroy natural rock and geopolymers.

[@deanweaver4469]

I grew up in The Rocky Mountains. I learned a lot in my youth on erosion, dinosaurs. 🦕 I remember many times finding sea shells in the mountains. And wondered how could be. Now science and The Bible has answered many questions ❤🤠🙏

[@Bomtombadi1]

Really? You’re also aware how continental shelves colliding make mountains, and those existing around said collision point get pushed up with the mountain? Or are you just so incredibly stupid to think that you think those sea shells in the mountains should’ve just fallen back into the water because that’s where they belong?

[@Bomtombadi1]

@@travisbicklepopsicle of course he hasn’t. Apparently he’s aware of plate tectonics but still thinks these sea shelled organisms should just hop back into the ocean.

[@brookewollitz3124]

Lost in the arguments of the old-earth, laptop geologists is the fact that plate tectonics is a THEORY, just like evolution.... NO ONE has ever witnessed entire continents floating from one side of the globe to the other. We do see small movements via earthquakes etc but its only theorized exactly how we got the continents we see today

[@brookewollitz3124]

Lost in the arguments of the old-earth, laptop geologists is the fact that plate tectonics is a THEORY, just like evolution. NO ONE has witnessed a continent floating its way across the globe into its present position we see today. We have earthquakes that shake things up on a small local level, but the immense upheavals we see in the earths crust happened only once, as far as any observations can determine. We have zero evidence to the contrary, only speculation

[@brookewollitz3124]

Lost in the arguments of the old-earth, laptop geologists is the fact that plate tectonics is a THEORY, just like evolution. NO ONE has witnessed a continent floating its way across the globe into its present position we see today. We have earthquakes that shake things up on a small local level, but the immense upheavals we see in the earths crust happened only once, as far as any observations can determine. We have zero evidence to the contrary, only speculation

[@rcwagon]

Chimney rock was mentioned. If this is the one in Nebraska, on top of Scott's Bluff National Monument - NW of Chimney rock (ignoring signs posted about age) there is a survey marker - you can see how much has been eroded since the marker was installed.

[@stevepierce6467]

Not eroded, blasted away by army artillery practicing cannon fire in Civil War era, plus lightning strikes.

[@refuse2bdcvd324]

Where materialism fails, God's word speaks.

[@refuse2bdcvd324]

​@@philhart4849 the only way anyone can know God doesn't exist is if he has some means of observing everything that exists. Scripture deniers are not qualified to make that assessment. The existence of God is verified by both observable science and documented history. The Law of Biogenesis states that life only comes from preexisting life. That means the origin of life has to be an eternal living source. What do we know from documented history that fits that qualification? Only God. Please accept the rational conclusion; declare Jesus as your Lord, believe in your heart that God raised him from death and you will be saved (Romans 10:9).

[@bradkjeldahl]

Thanks again for another great podcast ! One of my favorite evidences of recent creation is the flat layers. Having a background in farming and always being interested in soil, I note that there is no evidence of black dirt or any soil being formed between these layers. Along with that is how all the multitudes of evidence all lead to verifying God's word. From Minnesota, Brad Kjeldahl

[@AlexanderosD]

Even as a kid I thought it was a bit silly that humans, who rarely ever make it to 100yrs, will walk into the see and say "that's a gazillion years old!" And then fade into dust like they never existed in the first place.

[@Bomtombadi1]

What does this have to do with the topic?

[@Bomtombadi1]

@@SavedbyGraceAlone1962 and no explanation, as usual

[@Bomtombadi1]

@@SavedbyGraceAlone1962 I asked what it has to do with the topic, nitwit. But let me guess: you’re a biblical literalist. Therefore, because you didn’t see the specific word “explanation” in my request on what this stupid comment had to do with the topic, I didn’t actually ask for an explanation? Have I got that right? Now, what does this have to do with the topic? Just so there is no confusion, be specific.

[@torahtrucker]

@@SavedbyGraceAlone1962let’s hear it.

[@adventisthermesjustinwilso361]

Well said

[@akmurf7429]

Dr. Clarey's book, "Carved in Stone" Is the most comprehensive complete book I've read on the Genesis flood of Noah. When the Huttonian and Lyellalian presuppositions are ignored, and just the evidential observations are considered, the Bible makes perfect sense. And when you consider the coastal erosional deposition, it points to rapid erosional runoff, not uniform erosion over millions of years. Coastal erosional deposits are not uniform. Gulf of Mexico whopper sands for example. Massive deposition in an isolated coastal area. keep up the good work ICR.

[@paulbriggs3072]

Anyone who studies tidal beach erosion and runoff found in hundreds of different variations on thousands of beaches around the world as documented in countless science papers, can find a small scale simulation for nearly any geological form found on earth. From drumlins, to flood ripples, to parabolic dunes, to canyons, and buttes, water gaps, terrace formations, rounded boulders and gravel, gentle fluvial forms on level areas, landslides, tsunami scouring, even karst formation all have been observed in miniature on beaches all formed by flowing water identical to large scale formations found elsewhere on earth but attributed to anything but the Flood.

[@IAMhassentyou]

For the word of God is alive and active. Sharper than any double-edged sword, it penetrates even to dividing soul and spirit, joints and marrow; it judges the thoughts and attitudes of the heart. Hebrews 4:12 All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, so that the servant of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work. 2 Timothy 3:16-17 Your word is a lamp for my feet, a light on my path. Psalm 119:105

[@SuperReznative]

AMEN Maranatha

[@michaelbrown7430]

Grand Canyon and St Helen

[@stevepierce6467]

Grand Canyon, millions of years. St Helens, 40+ years

[@mmaimmortals]

Erosion rates is one of my favorite evidences of a young earth. Another is C14 in dino fossils, diamonds, and coal.

[@timothykeith1367]

It seems that erosion is more rapid than plate movement

[@mmaimmortals]

@@timothykeith1367 Yes, indeed. In fact, the uplift of continents has to be offset by a greater mass decrease in elevation somewhere else. That's because energy is lost to heat and friction during subduction. In other words, more crustal or continental mass has to be going down than is being pushed up. So, ironically, uplift via subduction actually contributes to the problem of losing continental mass.

[@Kaz.Klay.]

It's contamination I say!!! Lolo

[@alantasman8273]

@@timothykeith1367Subduction and understanding the thermal properties of subducted materials has shown that at the time of the flood landmasses were moving at the speeds of meters per minute during the flood ..land masses were moving so fast that the collision of one land mass with the one known today as the Asian landmass uplifted the Himalayas very quickly.

[@stevepierce6467]

No C14 in dino fossils.

[@tzgardner]

One interesting geologic evidence I've heard was helium in rocks. Helium dissipates from rocks like they would from a balloon. Can't remember all the details but it was something like . . . we still find helium in rocks, so they couldn't be millions of years old because the helium would have dissipated by now.

[@mmaimmortals]

I remember seeing an article some years ago about a helium shortage scare. It's used in a lot of medical equipment and the author seemed concerned we were running out of helium and shouldn't be putting it in balloons. Millions of years in the rocks supposedly, but we managed to pull most of it out in just a few decades...

[@Bomtombadi1]

So a vaguely sourced article about helium in rocks means they aren’t million ma of years old? Even though not all rocks are of the same properties and they’d more than likely dissipate helium at different rates?

[@I8thePizza]

@@Bomtombadi1Exactly - there should be no helium in any rock that is millions of years old. One of the most valid proofs of a young earth.

[@Bomtombadi1]

@@I8thePizza that’s not what I said. I didn’t agree with you at all. How did you come to this conclusion? Because it’s yet another sound bite you creationists like latch onto until you’re AGAIN shown to be idiots when it’s not only debunked but impressively so?

[@I8thePizza]

@@Bomtombadi1 Sorry that scientific facts get in the way of your evolution religion.

[@deannesanv8931]

I don’t know that these are evidence for youth, but they are evidence for a flood. I grew up in the middle of South America. Within sight, there was a huge mountain that we called White Mountain. It was made of a white substance that we called chalk. It was a perfect place for children to play and hike. We played capture the flag there, and hiked up and around that area. There was a canyon (which we called lover's canyon) where you could take small pieces of layers out like little drawers, carve something into the soft rock, and slide them back in where they were. There was also a little cave. Nearby, was Dead Man’s Valley, with deep gulleys and holes - lots of evidence of erosion, with pillars and paths of clay dirt left in interesting formations. I have wondered for years if White Mountain is a large diatomaceous earth deposit. Like I said, this was in the middle of South America, far from the coast. A mountain of diatoms in such a spot would be evidence of a huge flood. I wonder what this mountain is made of. Locally, near Bennington, Vermont, maybe 20-25 years ago, they cut through the rock to make a new road. The revealed layers are very curved, folded beautifully. This is evidence that something dramatic happened while those layers were still soft. There is no evidence that the rocks cracked to get in these shapes, which would be the case if they were hard rocks when the folding occurred. The layers would all need to have been laid down in quick succession for them to be soft enough to bend like that. I have read Carved in Stone. I actually had it out a few days ago to show my son some of he pictures. :) The Old Man of the Mountain is/was in New Hampshire, not Vermont. Daniel Webster said, "Men hang out their signs indicative of their respective trades; shoemakers hang out a gigantic shoe; jewelers a monster watch, and the dentist hangs out a gold tooth; but up in the Mountains of New Hampshire, God Almighty has hung out a sign to show that there He makes men.” I am glad we went up to see the face while it was still there. At the time of its collapse, I somewhat facetiously said that God was no longer making men in New Hampshire - not the calibre of men Daniel Webster was referring to. God had taken down His sign. The corruption in government and the degradation of society here is evidence of that. Of course, God doesn’t “make” men act in certain ways or do the right thing. That is their choice. It is up to each man to decide whether or not to believe in the God of Israel and the Messiah He sent, and allow God’s standards to guide his life. The most influential men here in New Hampshire are not making the right choice.

[@douglindauer7327]

Good information from Dr. Clarey ... when you could understand him. I often had to read the CC to get what he was saying because he sometimes talked too fast. Trey was very good as a contrast.

[@projectdesign4675]

I grew up in Santa Barbara Calif.....as a little kid and into my adulthood we loved to walk along the beach, and every so often we would watch a house tumble into the sea......there must be millions of three bedroom/two baths out in the surf!

[@Kaz.Klay.]

Lolo. Expensive and insured I'm sure

[@paulbriggs3072]

The Santa Barbara area is now known to have been washed over by debris flows thousands of years ago leaving rounded boulder, gravel, and sand particle evidence. Recent articles attest to this new evidence. I submit it was the last of the flood's drainage 5300 years ago (using the Septuagint dates of the more ancient Greek Old Testament as opposed to the post Dead Sea Scroll manuscripts in Hebrew).

[@truthisbeautiful7492]

Pictured rocks in upper Michigan is one of the most beautiful places in the US. Great to hear about it's rapid erosion.

[@WNYXeb777]

Not a little water and lots of time ( Lywellian timescale ) but lots of water and lil time ( Flood paradigm ). St. Helens is a perfect micro laboratory of sedimentation, erosion, polystrate trees formation all in a very little time.

[@WNYXeb777]

Might add that when age tested radiometrically rock that was only a couple years old was coming out at hundreds of millions years. So much for that time scale. S'all right they cant explain polystrate trees either.

[@Bomtombadi1]

Lots of water and lil is also called the infantile paradigm those people who inhabit reality!

[@WNYXeb777]

those who refute the facts the are cosmically stubborn and ignorant. Hurry Boldgary is waiting.@@Bomtombadi1

[@jamesfreeman2253]

You mad bro​@@Bomtombadi1

[@Bomtombadi1]

@@jamesfreeman2253 only at creationists

[@user-gk6ge2jq9q]

Great video!

[@robinrader5916]

One aspect of erosion not discussed is liquefaction. The monuments are an example of great material removal by liquefaction. A tremendous amount of material was removed almost instantly. In the 64 earthquake monuments were formed in earthquake park. Unfortunately these quickly eroded as the silt did not cement. These monuments were only about 50 high. Yet they had the same aspect.

[@Vernon-Chitlen]

Can you explain how naturalists explain how so much coal is under the oceans when the world’s coal formed at one time.

[@globalcoupledances]

Wikipedia "Coal"

[@Vernon-Chitlen]

@@globalcoupledances Sorry dude. The shallow seas swamp hypothesis doesn't work. Level the ocean basins and continents and the earth would be covered by 8,800 feet of water. So at one time the earth didn't have so much surface water. The water is a relic of Noahic flood. The coal being made of the vegetation prior to the flood.

[@jeanbaue8266]

There is evidence in peat bogs in the British islands that oil and coal are still forming. I saw this info over 35 years ago, but I expect I read it in a publication by Answers in Genesis, ICR, other creation science institutions. Recent miners have found 19th century tools and a hat(!) buried in a coal seam. I'd say, "You can look it up," but Google might caution you! 😅

[@jeanbaue8266]

As we drove up Kitt Peak, 35 miles southwest of Tucson, we saw about 10-12 layers of sedimentary rock folded over on itself. I saw it as evidence of a major catastrophic event with powerful forces lifting sediment which was still pliant and twisting and folding it like taffy candy!

[@globalcoupledances]

@Vernon-Chitlen - Do you know the age of Carboniferous layer?

[@howardlarsen2540]

Uluru is 1 o'my fav.Flood proofs

[@annieoaktree6774]

Brilliant. Once specific spot on the planet with a very specific topology has (relatively) fast erosion, therefore every spot on the planet over all time must have equally fast erosion. Sometimes there just aren't words... 🙄

[@mmaimmortals]

This is not limited to "one specific spot on the planet". All coast lines have a very, very fast erosion rate relative to deep time. There is an historical account of a couple buying an old tower and having it moved away from the coast line to save it. A few decades later they found themselves in danger of losing it again because they didn't get far enough away from the coast. Furthermore, any cliff you see with a vertical face is eroding much, much faster than deep time allows.

[@annieoaktree6774]

@@mmaimmortals Does the top of the Appalachian or Rocky Mountains erode as fast as the coast? Some of the arguments you guys dream up are just too dumb for words.

[@mmaimmortals]

@@annieoaktree6774 "Does the top of the Appalachian...?" I would assume not. I would naturally assume some difference in the erosion rates between mountains and coastlines. But generally speaking, the more vertical a geological face is, the faster it will erode. Understanding that such erosion is a also a function of local climate, rock type, and more. "...arguments you guys dream up..." The problem with this claim is that it is irrelevant how much difference there is between mountain erosion and coastal erosion. If deep time were true, the coast lines eventually erode all the back to any given mountain range, and then the base of the mountain range becomes the coast line that is experiencing accelerated erosion as compared to inland erosion. Furthermore, uplift of mountain ranges cannot overcome the net effect of worldwide erosion. For every inch of uplift in a mountain range, land somewhere else must be pushed down in order to provide the uplift mechanism. The net effect can never be that land continually uplifts perpetually or for indefinite periods of time. Gravity pulls things down and there is no energy source that can keep lifting equal masses up perpetually. Neither gravity nor plate tectonics are perpetual motion machines. For any given "subduction" zone, more mass goes down toward the center of the earth than comes up above sea level. It's basic physics. During this alleged process, energy is always lost to heat and friction. Please don't misquote me here as saying that plates aren't moving or being pushed up or down. That is not what I am alluding to.

[@johnmiller4859]

Providence Canyon, GA

[@truthisbeautiful7492]

Would rapidly melting glaciers also be related to this? Some researchers in Greenland have claimed the glaciers are melting faster then expected.

[@ryans8081]

Look up the "lost squadron". After being forced to crash land in greenland in the midst of world war 2 in the early 1940's due to a bad winter storm, the planes were uncovered in a rescue mission in the late 1980's and early 1990's, but the planes were found buried under 250 feet of Ice and drifted 3 miles from their original location. 250 feet of ice in 50 years averages to 5 feet of ice per year; at that rate, the 10,000 foot thick ice caps on greenland would've been laid down in 2,000 years, about the time since Christ, which fits perfectly within the biblical timescale of the ice age taking place quickly in the centuries following Noah's Flood about 4,500 years ago.

[@corin777]

​@@ryans8081I thoroughly enjoyed that read. Thank you for sharing!

[@shipwright6122]

Darwin’s arch collapsed in the Galapagos a few years ago!

[@I8thePizza]

Good point. And it was 4 billion years old, right? Ha ha ha. I can't keep a straight face when the evolutionists start telling us the fairy tales.

[@MusicManWes]

Awesome presentation! If evolutionary theory were true, the Earth's surface would look very, very different and the fossil record would look very different!

[@mmaimmortals]

If deep time were a reality, there would be no land above sea level today. Zero.

[@jimhrn8522]

Yeah, there wouldn't be a fossil record,no flood no fossils.

[@007gracie]

@@travisbicklepopsiclemany of us have advanced degrees - published papers are easily studied. Scientists interpret facts. Verify for yourself but realize there’s a religious component to “evolution”. The concept is linked to reincarnation & ultimately implies we will become gods ourselves. (This is well documented in ancient writings. Nothing new.) It’s all occult thinking. That’s why denying this concept makes ppl angry & offended. The genetic code has disproven this ridiculous “life from a rock” theory.

[@therick363]

@@mmaimmortalswhy wouldn’t there be land?

[@mmaimmortals]

@@therick363 Assuming there would have been liquid water at roughly equivalent volume on earth as today, erosion would have wiped the continents clean away in under 1 million years.

[@michaelpfister1283]

I always thought it was inconsistent that the evolutionary geologist explains the Grand Canyon as the result of erosion by the Colorado river, but doesn’t question why the Hawaiian islands are still there…

[@stevepierce6467]

Two different things: Colorado River slowly eroded a flat inland plateau. Hawaiian Islands emerged from the sea as volcanoes. Hawaii is a very recent arrival on the earth in geologic terms.

[@kellyoneill189]

Mt St Helen's

[@clarestucki5151]

Total insanity. Hawaii is not eroding away, the islands are mostly expanding and growing thru volcano eruptions.

[@timothykeith1367]

The entire Hawaiian islands are erupting?

[@billpayne5]

Not so. See chrome-extension://efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/pubs.usgs.gov/of/2011/1051/pdf/ofr2011-1051_report_508_rev052512.pdf "Shoreline change along Kauai, Oahu, and Maui beaches is dominated by erosion. However, shoreline change is highly variable along Hawaii beaches with cells of erosion and accretion typically separated by only a few hundred meters on continuous beaches or by short headlands that divide the coast into many small embayments. Twenty-two km or 9 percent of the total length of beach analyzed was completely lost to erosion during the analysis period (table 5)."

[@stevepierce6467]

@@timothykeith1367 Some spots are more volcanically active than others at any given moment, but yes, the Hawaiian islands are erupting!,

[@scienceandbibleresearch]

How does all this square up with the more than 500 million years worth of nuclear decay in the Grand Canyon?

[@WNYXeb777]

Curious - how/where did you attain your time scale and decay reference?

[@scienceandbibleresearch]

@@WNYXeb777: From ICR scientists in their RATE study.

[@WNYXeb777]

@@scienceandbibleresearch oh you mean in radiometric analysis which has been proven flawed and inaccurate or by George Lyell's geologicformate where he admitted it was a concocted fantasy.

[@scienceandbibleresearch]

@@WNYXeb777: Radioactive decay measurements are not flawed. Christian scientists from ICR confirmed more than 500 million years of decay in the Grand Canyon 19 years ago.

[@scienceandbibleresearch]

@@WNYXeb777: They're not flawed. ICR's Dr. Andrew Snelling confirmed more than 500 million years of decay in the Grand Canyon 19 years ago.

[@A-childOfGod-pp4ge]

I have a question…where do you find planets, space and “millions of years old” in the Bible?

[@Gottesknecht123]

The first sentence Gen 1:1 talks about Time Space Matter. There are several verses about Stars, meteors etc. One major Problem is the Definition of heaven in the bibel. There was no word like space so they said heaven in the Translation. So you can interpret space in many verses instead of heaven

[@A-childOfGod-pp4ge]

Genesis 1 Complete Jewish Bible Parashah 1: B’resheet (In the beginning) 1:1 “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.” It’s about the Beginning of Creation, not man’s made up phrases of time, space and matter. No offense. God Created a sun, moon, stars and clusters of stars, galaxies. Where does it say meteors or asteroids or planets? And I’m not sure who “they” are, but there is no such thing as “space”. The dome over Earth is called a dome/sky/heaven/firmament. Genesis 1:6 6 “God said, “Let there be a dome in the middle of the water; let it divide the water from the water.” 7 God made the dome and divided the water under the dome from the water above the dome; that is how it was, 8 and God called the dome Sky. So there was evening, and there was morning, a second day. 9 God said, “Let the water under the sky be gathered together into one place, and let dry land appear,” and that is how it was. 10 God called the dry land Earth, the gathering together of the water he called Seas, and God saw that it was good.” Blessings 🙏🏼❤ @@Gottesknecht123

[@FaithLikeAMustardSeed]

Yeah, they lost a lot of credibility right off by rejecting true biblical cosmology. Waters Above and below!

[@ravissary79]

​@@Gottesknecht123the ancient model of the heavens most obviously referenced in scripture is a 3 layered set of heavens. Heaven CAN mean: the sky, space, or God's invisible abode/ the throneroom. Ancient man defused this through observation vs revelation. Descriptions of the throne room are from visions recorded in scripture, but the rest everyone can see to a limited degree so the logic is: The first heaven is where birds fly, clouds float, this is sometimes called "The air", ie: the domain of the devil, the Prince and Power of the Air, a scriptural title. This is an accessible domain as mountains are often above the clouds. But ancients saw that some things above were more regular, less fickle, and these were visible but much farther away, inaccessible... seemingly perfect. This is the second heaven, or Outer-Space. Ancients had all kinds of speculative ideas about this domain and made complex calculations of the heavenly bodies, but consistently failed to surmise their size/or composition. The third heaven can be thought of as the highest level of another dimension, like a reality parallel our own from which God can observe the universe, while both remaining outside it's usual processes, but it's a kind of half way point where God may also meet with angels, or where human souls may be entertained as his guests in some way described by prophets and poets which defies simple descriptions. This is still a highly functional way of thinking about the heavens.

[@A-childOfGod-pp4ge]

I replied but it got deleted by YT I guess. You are wrong, respectfully ❤@@Gottesknecht123

[@annemaritellertsen805]

What is the evolutionists explanation on why the Amazon river, that carries a lot more water than the Colorado river, has not carved out its surroundings if the Colorado river is the cause of the Grand Canyon? And why has not the Colorado river dug deep all through its path? Look at the surroundings of the Colorado river south of Las Vegas.

[@xviewmytubex]

Their explanation is "we observed billions of years in our lab". =)

[@globalcoupledances]

I don't need an evolutionists explanation. Only geologist explanation

[@annemaritellertsen805]

@@globalcoupledances I want the evolutionist geologists explanation so I can learn how to refut them. Or even better, ask them the question so to put a stone in their shoe. All for the glory of God.

[@mmaimmortals]

@@annemaritellertsen805 I don't know their explanation for the Amazon specifically, but often times they will simply claim the feature is relatively young compared to very deep time. Like a few million years old as opposed to hundreds of millions of years old.

[@globalcoupledances]

@annemaritellertsen805 - What is an evolutionist geologists?

[@geoffsutton78]

I believe that the Earth is much older than 6000 years. I would hazard even as old as 10000 (Hebrew for "son" is the same as Hebrew for "Descendant"). But beyond that age logic doesn't follow and allow what is seen to match what is predicted. But I am willing to go with 6000 also.

[@therick363]

Has no one at ICR heard of the rock cycle??

[@mmaimmortals]

The alleged rock cycle is mythology. There is only one continental crust and it is mostly granite. Grantite has only ever been heated once. So there is no evidence of a rock cycle being real.

[@therick363]

@@mmaimmortals ohhhjj so you just blatantly lie about science! I see. Thanks for showing you’re as bad as this channel and the people at ICR. I especially love how you say the rock cycle is mythology-shows you don’t know what that word means. And when you say there’s no evidence of a rock cycle…means you don’t know what sedimentary and metamorphic rocks are.

[@blank-964]

👍

[@revv45acp71]

Thank you! I like the fact that Hawaii would not exist after a million years. I’m also impressed by the stunning absence of erosion between the layers in Grand Canyon.

[@alantasman8273]

I wonder what impact the tidal lock of the moon would have played in the wave movement in those 150 days of the flood as receding and then again flooding cycles would have churned, moved and laid down sediments further compacting and crushing the sediments?

[@therick363]

It’s not a bad thought experiment. But considering there was no global flood….

[@therick363]

@@alantasman8273 there’s that condescending we all know comes from creationists!! Classic. You didn’t respond for month and then ignored what I said. Classic. Try again but this time be an adult.

[@A-childOfGod-pp4ge]

Planets?

[@tzgardner]

Jupiter and Saturn are cooling off. They lose more heat than they get from the Sun. They couldn't be billions of years old because they are still warm. Neptune's magnetic field prediction was exactly right by a scientist who was a Christian but way off by secular scientists.

[@mikebosler7516]

👍🤚🙏🦕

[@myrthagunter4141]

The earth is not only eroding so many inches per year, it is also composting new material so many inches per year . Displacement , and replacement . What is eroding is in fact relocating upon the earth . The eroded material does not simply disappear . There seems to be a natural balance between, erosion , and decomposing replacement . Thank you . Enjoyed !

[@StudentDad-mc3pu]

The Islands of Hawaii mentioned here are a spectacular example of how we can be sure of deep time and of the disingenuous ignorance being pedalled here in the name of Jesus The oldest islands have been radiometricaly dated to 6m years. Islands were formed by the Earth's crust moving over a 'hot spot' in the mantle which produces magma. As the crust moves (at rate of 2-3 inches per year) magma errupts and produces a long chain of islands. The oldest island, Kauai IS heavily eroded, while the younger islands show far less and in some cases are still forming. What's my evidence. Well, Kauai has moved over 250 miles away from the hot spot, at rate of 3inces per year that would take about 6m years . When you Radiometircally date the islands you get consistently younger results from the North to the South. Of course, these presenters either know this and are lying, or should not be taling about things they know nothing about.

[@billpayne5]

I'm afraid it is you who knows nothing about that of which you speak. Catastrophic Plate Tectonics (CPT) explains how the islands moved rapidly past the hot spot. The erosional shelf around Kauai is about an average of 2 km wide. Kauai is eroding at the rate of 0.11 m/yr and is said to be 5.1 Myr old (chrome-extension://efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/pubs.usgs.gov/of/2011/1051/pdf/ofr2011-1051_report_508_rev052512.pdf). 5.1 Myr * 0.11 m/yr = 561 km erosion in 5.1 Myr. Kauai is only a max of 51.3 km across. At the rate it is eroding today, it would be a flat-top sea mount in 466,000 yrs if eroded from one side only. Since it is being eroded by waves all the way around, then Kauai would disappear in about 200,000 years at current measured erosion rates. Or, in 5.1 Myr it would have eroded flat 25 times by now. The erosional shelf around the island, being an average of 2 km wide, at current erosional rates, would have eroded in 18,000 yrs. Post Flood wave action was more aggressive and would have eroded the 2 km shelf in a much shorter time. Remember, "the present is the key to the past" only if the past was like the present, which it decidedly was not!

[@rcwagon]

While radiometric dating was not mentioned in this particular broadcast, please understand that there are serious issues with all of the radiometric dating methods. An example from the Radiometric Journal and manu other sources - these from "Radioisotopes and the Age of the Earth" pages 127-128, K-Ar dating of the Haulalai basalt, Hawaii - two dates - 1.6 +/-0.16 million years anbd 22.8 +-16.5 million years. Eyewitness accounts of this flow place it at 1800-1801 so the radiometric dates should have indicated

[@allegory7638]

"Even at current rates of erosion , uh, I see like, the continents wouldn't be here at all, right?" If you make a lot of assumptions about past sea levels and the past size of said continents. What if the earth were completely under water, like in Gen. 1:2-8 ? That would significantly alter erosion rates.

[@Astromancerguy]

At 6:15 the east coast should have erroded to sea level in the time since the mountains formed? Um. The East Coast IS basically at sea level. Look at Florida! Funny when creationists prove science right.

[@christtheonlyhope4578]

Seems to me like the flood would be able to explain a lot of the things that secular scientists can't figure out. If only they would listen to God's word.

[@therick363]

There’s no scientific evidence for the flood

[@technicianbis5250-ig1zd]

Yes true, the flood explains geologic layers, fossils, ice age, continental drift, the biological bottle neck, folded rock layers and the decay of dna.

[@JungleJargon]

General relativity allows for time passibg by slower than time outside of galaxies.

[@44hawk28]

Just within the introduction to this man has made the worst argument.I've ever heard in the explanation of erosion. What he is explaining is that Recently, Our measurements of the erosion that's currently occurring around The Hawaiian Islands.Is about five inches per year. That means absolutely nothing. The erosion of the upper portion of the island that expands the island on occasion may have been different in the past because we do not know what the title structures were uttered fifty two hundred three thousand four thousand years ago. That's just from a less than 22nd remark.Made that was the stupidest thing That I have heard Someone who asserts themselves to be a scientist ever state. That is like saying because we've seen a few years of warming, The sky is falling. The inevitable claim of the climate scientist who knows nothing of which he speaks. Who literally wants us to get co two down below a hundred and fifty parts per million so that all the plants will die and all the people will be dead within six months to a year after that.

[@lawrencegreen8952]

THE INSTITUTE FOR CREATION'S APOLOGISTS CANNOT READ, SO THEY DON'T KNOW ABOUT THE 9TH COMMANDMENT! CLEARLY, THEY ALSO HAVEN'T REACHED THE AGE OF REASON.

[@StudentDad-mc3pu]

Nope. This is neither scientific nor logical.

[@giancarlospiridon9283]

You again 😂? Something wrong with the calculations done with your own erosion rates?

[@StudentDad-mc3pu]

​@@giancarlospiridon9283 It's the assumptions underlying this calculation that are false. In fact I just listened to some of it again to check I was not being too harsh and it's actually worse than I remembered. Casual misrepresentation of key concepts (that cliff is 3 Billion years old) and rapid erosion accounting for all erosion is just stomache churning.

[@WNYXeb777]

I bet most of what your inciting as science is just atheist based uniformitarianism and not anything that follows objective " Science ".

[@mmaimmortals]

@@StudentDad-mc3pu "...rapid erosion accounting for all erosion..." Instead, you think slow erosion should account for all erosion? Fast coastal erosion is the norm world wide.