The Global Flood in the Christian Religion occurred.

Plate TectonicsPlate tectonics is not "just" a theory. Plate motions have been measured using high-precision GPS and have been found to be in exceptionally good agreement with predictions [45]. In fact, my opponent's arguments requires plate tectonics to raise up the ocean floor and build the mountains post-flood. He just needs it to happen a lot faster than possible.We don't yet fully understand the forces that drive plate tectonics. It's surprisingly hard to get funding for a field trip to the upper mantle. The dominant theory is currently slab pull (my opponent's theory #2) coupled with mantle convection [46]. As such, mantle drag is not a problem to be overcome but the driving force propelling the plates.Jumbled FossilsMy opponent objects that we have not examined every fossil. I addressed this argument in Round 2, Point 2, Paragraph 2. Let me be more specific. We don't need to examined every fossil on Earth. It's the fossils that we have examined that contradict fossilization via global flood.The trilobite and the crab lived in similar environments, filled the same niches, had similar body plans and required similar taphonomic conditions to fossilize. If the global flood had fossilized them then we would expect them to be found together at least occasionally. That we never find them together demonstrates that either the fossils were not produced by the flood or that every fossil we find is exceptional.Now consider all of the fauna and flora that trilobites are found with and those that crabs are found with. And once again, none of these are ever found with the others. Crab fossils are never found with rugose corals, placoderms or the bulk of the brachiopods. Trilobite fossils are never found with modern fish, dolphins or mafia informants.Extend this line of reasoning to include every environment where fossils form and it becomes rapidly apparent that fossils occur in a succession that cannot be explained by a global flood.Baltic AmberMy opponent appeals to Baltic amber as an example of jumbled fossils, leaving us wondering how hundreds of thousands of tons of tree sap is supposed to trap insects and dry during a global flood. His source states that the fossils "contain fossil insect and plant remains which are native to all types of climatic zones ranging from near-Arctic to tropical." This once again fails to produce jumbled fossils from different eras (e.g.: trilobites and crabs). The processes creating the amber were operative over millions of years and some climate change likely occurred during that time so this isn't even unusual. Moreover, Baltic amber is not found in situ but is reworked by glaciation, rivers and oceans [47]. A mix of fossils is expected under these conditions.Marine Fossils in the AndesConventional plate tectonics has no problem with these. Catastrophic flood tectonics require forces that would shatter the continents, so there would be no Andes, much less fossils.Global Flood SedimentsIn round 1 my opponent argued that sediments had been transported by the flood from the Appalachians and mountains in Canada westward to Colorado. Oddly, these sediments failed to be transported to Canada or the Atlantic Ocean. If the flood transported all that sediment all the way to Colorado then it should have deposited even more sediment closer to source. This is not what we observe.StrataSadly, I'm unable to open the image that my opponent provided. I'll assume that it's similar to this one from AiG: http://cdn-assets.answersingenesis.org...; />This is precisely what we would expect from a global flood, though on smaller scale. Layer after layer of monotonous debris flow deposits. I'm not arguing that the global flood couldn't produce any strata, I'm arguing that it couldn't produce the strata that we observe. The exquisitely preserved fossils of the Redwall limestone were not produced by a massive flow of limey mud. The finely sorted aeolian sand of the Navajo sandstone was not transported from the Appalachians to Colorado as a debris flow.Deformed StrataAs mentioned in round 2, folding of sedimentary rock is not a feature of soft sediment deformation [23]. Folded strata cannot be formed by deformation of soft sediment as this leads to very different structures [24, 25].My opponent then falls back on a "we haven't seen every rock" argument to try and explain the paucity of soft sediment deformation. The rocks that we haven't seen aren't the problem, it's the rocks that we have seen. Soft sediment deformation should be abundant if there had been a global flood. Most of the rocks that we have seen don't show it so either they weren't deposited by a global flood or they're exceptional. That the overwhelming rocks exposed at surface should be so exceptional is ridiculously implausible.Polystrate FossilsThe flood can't explain coal, much less polystrate fossils in coal. Forming coal requires large volumes of organic matter, commonly peat, with very little silicate. The flood has no mechanism to deposit vast beds of pure peat, so no coal. Polystrate fossils in coal requires little more than a tree falling over into a bog. Some trees even grow in this position.Water Source and SinkRingwoodite is a mineral composed of about 1% water and found about 600 km below the Earth's surface. To extract the water you need to melt it. So what you're going to get will be 100 ft of lava for every foot of water and the water will erupt as super-heated steam. This will thoroughly sterilize the planet's surface. Continental flood basalts don't begin to describe what you'll get. You're in for 'global flood-geologists don't have a name for this rock because it doesn't occur'. Please do not use this for the "fountains of the deep" because it kills everything.Lacking catastrophic plate tectonics, because they also kill everything, my opponent has no mechanism to raise and lower the Earth's topography to generate a global flood.Ice CapsAs much as AiG would love to have the ice age after the flood that's as ridiculous as high-speed plate tectonics. The GRIP and Vostok ice cores have been dated by multiple independent methods at hundreds of thousands of years old [26,27].Salinity/ToxicityThe notion that ocean salinity was lower pre-flood is without evidence and ignores the fact that salinity is governed by hydrothermal processes at mid-ocean ridges [21]. We can follow conventional geological data that suggests that ocean salinity hasn't changed much in the last few hundred million years or we can follow through the consequences of catastrophic plate tectonics, which erupt vast quantities of lava and converting the ocean waters into nickel-iron-rich fluid akin to mine waste effluent. Neither will be healthy for anything in the flood.Volcanoes and Ocean IslandsApologies to all. I posted the wrong image last round for the global distribution of volcanoes. That one is earthquakes. This one is volcanoes: http://www.visionlearning.com...; width="1144" height="606" />The point remains, there are a lot of them. My opponent wishes to erupt a supervolcano to make each one. Thousands of supervolcanic eruptions are unlikely to leave anything alive and will radically alter the global climate. They'd also have left an unmistakable layer in the geological record.Food-Chain CollapseThe water's salinity won't be at a minimum. It'll either be semi-saline or it'll be mine-waste as described above. Any seeds have spent nearly a year in the water and the overwhelming majority will be waterlogged an dead. The few "lucky" survivors not buried, drowned or washed out to sea will be trying to germinate in the salted or toxic muck left behind by the flood. The dead organisms have been rotting for over a year. There will be precious little left for the carnivores, though the stench will be impressive. The fish all perished when the fresh and salt waters mingled.Source IntegrityThe problem with AiG is that they begin with their conclusion, biblical inerrancy, and then pick their results to fit. This is dogma, which they label science, but is the opposite of science.I've attempted to avoid obviously biased sources in this debate. I'm sure Talk.Origins and Iron Chariots have some interesting points to make but, like AiG, I would not consider them neutral. I've stuck with sources such as the USGS, the Smithsonian and the like.DroppedUnfortunately, my opponent has dropped my points regarding: - Population Bottleneck, or lack thereof - The catastrophic effects of catastrophic plate tectonics - The existence of numerous civilizations during the time that the world was purportedly floodedConclusionsThere is no plausible mechanism to create even this meager 2400 meter deep global flood. All attempts to do so kill everything more complex than unicellular life and many attempts sterilize even those. The flood myth fails the following reality checks: - Biblical evidence is equivocal - No source or sink for the flood waters - The fossil succession - Strata that isn't debris flows (e.g.: aeolian sandstones, coal) - Paucity of soft deformation or dewatering structures - Absence of flood sediments where it ought to be (e.g.: Canada, the Oceans) - Catastrophic plate tectonics is impossible and would kill us all - Stratovolcanoes and ocean islands - Ice caps - All life not on the ark perishes - All creatures on the ark die shortly after release - Population bottlenecks not observed - Numerous civilizations at the time of the flood didn't even get dampNumerous physical, geological, biological and archaeological lines of evidence, presented above, demonstrate that a global flood never happened.In closing, I would like to thank Voice_of_the_People for a fun debate. Sources[45] http://books.google.ca...; Page 59, Section 4.4[46] http://geodynamics.usc.edu...[47] http://archaeology.about.com...