The Global Flood in the Christian Religion occurred.

If you notice that my text may sound rushed, that's probably because it is. My PC has recovered and now I just found out that I have seven hours left for this round. Now onto my rebuttal. Argument 1 Tectonic plate movement In my opponent's text, he implies that a entirely catastrophic, supernatural, and destructive flood would not be able to cause tectonic movement. What we also realize is that he agrees with the fact that our continents were once one. We and a number of other scientists readily agree with this theory. Although a global flood does sound like a fantastical method of explanation, I'm sorry but all the evolutionary explanations for tectonic movement are utterly ridiculous. Since my opponent didn't specify his accepted viewpoint concerning this, I will debunk a few theories. Theory 1 Plates slide by gravity from the elevated mid-ocean ridge to the depressed trench. Theory 2 Plates are "pulled" into the mantle below trenches by chemical phase changes during melting, Theory 3 Plates are "pushed" apart along mid-ocean ridges by slow injection of magma into vertical cracks. Problems "Each of these mechanisms (alone or together) cannot overcome the viscous drag at the base of the plate, and cannot explain how the difference in elevation developed or how the plate boundary originally formed. The absence of sufficient mechanism for plate motion, the uncertainty regarding the existence of sea-floor spreading, and the doubts about subduction cause us to question the popular geologic syntheses known as 'plate tectonics. '"[1] Solution Noah's Flood solves these issues and others. Large quantities of volcanic rocks on the sea floor support this idea. The presence of low density crustal rock down to a depth of 700 kilometers within the mantle below trenches can be attributed to rapid under thrusting. Altogether a Global flood would be able to accomplish tectonic movements. Argument 2 Jumbled fossils To begin this argument, I would like to bring up a point I stated earlier which my opponent agrees with, since he made no attempt to disprove it. In my second argument in the, well, second round, I brought up the fact that we have hardly scratched the world's surface which is supported by many scientists. [2], [3],[4],[5]. We haven't even begun to search to arrive at a conclusion. Nevertheless, one example of this is the Baltic amber deposits. "The Baltic amber deposits have been found to contain fossil insect and plant remains which are native to all types of climatic zones ranging from near-Arctic to tropical. Competent zoologists have concluded that the Baltic amber fossils were the result of some worldwide cataclysmic process. " [6] Argument 3 Fossils sky high In this round, the major point I have proven is the absurdity of plate tectonic motion under slow changes. Since the next best explanation is a global flood, the fossil were undoubtedly laid by the flood in the Bible. Argument 4 Global spread of layers In my previous round, I had thought I had relatively refuted your arguments, but since a clearer explanation is wanted, I will present my case. It appears as though my opponent has defused conception of what a global flood would create. A global flood would not be able to gather the sediments of the world and deposit them in one even layer. It would simply carry a large amount of sediment and deposit it over vast areas until it had run out of that material. What it would create is exactly what we see today. [7],[8] To address the later two questions pressed upon me, I would like to demonstrate the error of these two with the following picture. . http://encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com... What we see here are small yet even and well ordered layers of strata. Surprisingly these sediments were deposited by several mudslides caused by the Mt. Saint Helen's eruption. [9] If we magnify this catastrophic result, we will end up with the strata we see today. Another interesting feature caused only by a global flood is the issue of Polystrate fossils. [10] The typical Evolutionist's explanation is rapid burial or accumulation of volcanic material around a periodically erupting stratovolcano. However, This explanation doesn't "cut it" when it comes to coal beds. Coal beds, of course, requires vast spans of time to form. [11],[12]. Polystrate fossils have been discovered lying vertically through several layers of strata. [13] A global flood can easily explain this error. As for folded rock layers the rock in the picture you graciously provided for me, it does have slight fracturing due to erosion and movement. However the rest is undoubtedly folded. This can only be explained by pressure when they were soft. For there abundance, I think I've made my position quite clear. We have barely explored earth and claiming their scarcity is highly absurd. Argument 5 The water's source In my text, I was merely demonstrating the fact that earth does indeed have enough water to flood it's surface. I also stated that the mountains and the ocean floor depth we have today was created by the tectonic movements in the flood. The origin of the waters is then quite simple. If there was enough water to flood the earth and the oceans weren't as deep as they are now, the best basin for the extra water is underground. Actually this has been confirmed by many scientists. [14] In the bible, the method of forcing these underground seas under extreme amounts of pressure is given. "All the fountains of the great deep broken up. " Once the earth split, out would pour prodigious volumes of lava as well as water. this would create what is known as continental flood basalts. "For example, the Deccan Traps of India are over a mile (2000 m) thick and spread over nearly 200,000 square miles of the Indian subcontinent (500,000 km) The Siberian Traps in Russia are even thicker (more than 480,000 cubic miles [2 million km3] in volume), however, they are slightly smaller (130,000 square miles [340,000 km]). " [17] I thank my opponent for strengthening my argument. Ice caps were actually formed in the ice age after the flood. [15] As I've explained before, salt levels would have been much lower during the flood. To add onto my case, if the ocean were millions of years old, the oceans would be to salty for any organism. [16] Argument 6 Tectonic solutions I'm going to make this brief. Volcanoes have been in huge quantities in our past. History has shown that there have been volcanoes who dwarf Mt. St. Helen's. For example, Yellowstone eruption, soon after the Flood, which produced at least 480 cubic miles of ash. [17] And there are many examples of these. However, just because they aren't world known doesn't disprove their existence. Pompeii is a good example. It happened in 79 A. D. but was rediscovered in the mid-18th century. [18] As for the Chicxulub crater, I highly ignore this idea. If a meteor would happen to crash with it's destructive properties, it wouldn't single out one type of species and leave the rest. Dinosaurs died out as all organisms go extinct. Argument 7 With the ocean's concentration of salt being at a minimum, and several locations budding with growth because of that, the herbivores would easily be satisfied. The carnivores could quickly find food in the dead organisms left behind. Experience has shown that most carnivores prefer to eat carrion than to kill live animals for food. Also, the Flood must have left behind many residual pools of water and marine life. As these waters retreated or dried up, fish and other marine animals were stranded in lakes, ponds, and streams on land. This could also have served as food for the ark-released carnivores. In fact, experience shows that many normally non"fish-eating carnivores, such as lions, will eat fish if it is available, and do so in preference to hunting their usual prey. Response to AIG AIG does have a world view that they clearly state. The sites my opponent has stated take an evolutionary aspect to their thinking. Both sides take the same evidence and interpret it according to their world view. Conclusion This debate has been rather interesting, and my opponent has debated quite well. Unfortunately all my evidence and responses weren't able to be included. I now await my opponent's response. Sources [1] . http://www.icr.org... [2] . http://www.theatlantic.com... [3] . http://news.nationalgeographic.com... [4] . http://www.smashinglists.com... [5] . http://mysteriousuniverse.org... [6] Nilsson, Heribert, Synthetische Artbildung, Reprint from English Summary (Evolution Protest Movement of North American, Victoria, B. C. , 1973), pp. 1194-1195. [7] . https://answersingenesis.org... [8] . https://answersingenesis.org... [9] . http://www.icr.org... [10] . http://en.wikipedia.org... [11] . http://www.ket.org... [12] . http://www.uky.edu... [13] . https://answersingenesis.org... [14] . http://beginningandend.com... [15] . https://answersingenesis.org... [16] . https://answersingenesis.org... [17] . https://answersingenesis.org...-