Replies

[[What is equally interesting is that the south of England and north of France don´t show any evidence of a great flood.]]

Britain as Evidence for the Flood

On July 18, 2007, Nature magazine’s news writer Quirin Schiermeier reported on a scientific study that has made headlines around the world. Since the 1980s, various scientists have proposed that the island of England was created by flooding. Recently, Sanjeev Gupta, from the Imperial College of London, and his research team explored the geological features in and around the island. From the study, Sanjeev and colleagues discovered some very interesting features that led them to an even more interesting conclusion.

Schiermeier wrote that Gupta and his team “used data from the UK Hydrographic Office, collected for the purpose of ensuring safe navigation, to map the sea floor.... More recent data was collected by ships equipped with GPS and high-resolution acoustic measurement devices” (2007). From the data, Gupta and his co-researchers concluded: “The data show a collection of landforms that, taken together, indicate a catastrophic flood origin” (Gupta, et al., 2007). They further stated: “Our study provides the first direct evidence that a megaflood event was responsible for carving the English Channel valley network” (2007). [NOTE: It might surprise the reader that, although megafloods are so massive, geological records of their impact are often subtle and difficult to identify according to Gupta and his colleagues (Schiermeier, 2007).]

http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/3407

Scientific Evidence for a Worldwide Flood

Two Vastly Different World Views, with Vastly Different Conclusions:

Let’s not kid ourselves. What this is all about is whether or not the Old Testament book of Genesis (along with the rest of the Old Testament, and the New Testament) is an accurate account of what happened around 4600 years ago with regard to a worldwide flood, and about 6000 years ago, with regard to Creation itself.

Was virtually all of the sedimentary strata laid down by a single Worldwide Deluge in a short amount of time, or is the evolutionary scenario of slow change, acting over eons of T-I-M-E, and the associated Geological Time Chart (with its millions and millions of years) a more accurate account of Earth history?

Very few of these upright fossil trees have attached roots, and only about 1 in 50 8 have both roots and rootlets attached. Such trees, and their — more often than not — missing roots, are discussed in much more detail in The “Fossil Forests” of Nova Scotia. 9 Likewise, many (if not most) of the large, fragmented, and broken-off Stigmaria roots are also missing their rootlets. 9

Many of these roots and rootlets, are also buried individually. 9 This strongly suggests that these trees did not grow in the same places where they were buried, but rather were uprooted and re-deposited there.

Similar circumstances occur at various other places in Nova Scotia, as well as in the United States, England, Germany, and France. Another place where large tree stumps are preserved without their roots attached is Axel Heiberg 10,11 Island in Northern Canada.