googlef87758e9b6df9bec.html A Sure Word: Understanding Rock Layers

Wednesday, December 26, 2007

Understanding Rock Layers

If you’ve ever driven in a hilly countryside, you’ve no doubt seen layers of rock exposed like a cliff-face beside the road. Many geologists and evolutionary scientists interpret these layers as being laid down gradually over vast periods of time. Think of them as tree rings for rocks - more layers means older rocks. Right? Well, Darwin thought so.

It was supposedly while Darwin was reading Principles of Geology, by Charles Lyell that he got his idea for evolution. Lyell promoted the priniciple of uniformitarianism to explain the geological record; That is, the same geological processes that operate today also operated in the distant past. In the case of rock layers, each layer was laid down in succession over vast amounts of time. Darwin saw how tiny processes accumulating over millions of years could amount to enormous changes. So, when he observed the tiny changes in the beaks of finches, he believed that, given enough time, these tiny changes could eventually change the finch into an entirely different animal.

But is it true that long periods of time are needed for rock layers to be formed? Actually, we have seen layers form right before our eyes!

During a beach restoration project (see my blog on erosion) in Queensland Australia, 8,000 cubic meters of sand was drugged from the Tweed River. It was shipped by barge and pumped onto the southern Gold Coast beach through a pipe in a mix of water and sand. It only took about 1 hour, yet it was later noticed that the sand had been laid down in fine layers (see photo).

In Louisiana, a new flow line pipe for natural gas (combined with condensate and salt water from the host rock) became almost completely chocked off in only 3 months. Attempts to use high-pressure air to clear the pipe were unsuccessful. When the pipe when inspected, they found that an enormous amount of scale had accumulated in the short amount of time. The photo shown here shows a cross section cut from the pipe: notice the fine layers evident in the rock.
Perhaps the most remarkable example of rapid layers occurred in 1980 with the eruption of Mt. St. Helens. 18 billion cubic feet of rock, ash, dirt, steam, and melted snow flowed down the side of the mountain at estimated speeds at 90 mph. In a few short days, this and subsequent ash flows laid down as much as 600 feet of sediment on the north face of the mountain slope. In this photo, we once again see the fine layering remarkably similar to the formations claimed by evolutionists to take millions of years to form.
No one alive today saw the Grand Canyon being formed but we can try to explain how it was formed using various models. The uniform model used by evolutionists explains that the layers were laid down over millions of years then the Colorado River slowly carved out the canyon. This is entirely based on speculation since we haven’t been able to observe the rocks for millions of years. Creationists, however, believe the canyon was formed in the catastrophic event of the Flood. The features of the canyon closely resemble other catastrophic events like the Mt. St. Helens eruption so our model IS supported by observational evidence. Indeed, the Grand Canyon is good evidence that the Flood occurred.

A large part of science is supposed to be about observation. We can’t observe the past. But when we see rock layers being formed in months, days, or even hours, why should I believe the evolutionists who say it took millions of years?

1 comment:

Doppelganger said...

"It only took about 1 hour, yet it was later noticed that the sand had been laid down in fine layers "


Were these layers couplets?

And did the 'little grand canyon' form by cutting though rock? Or are we to believe that the sheer sides of the real Grand Canyon were at one time soft mud and just turned to stone?