> AR: The original question was about the amount of salt in the soils and
the >removal of the salts, not about the concentration of salt in the flood
waters.
GRM: You can't ignore the fact that the salt found sandwiched in the
sedimentary rocks MUST have come from the flood waters if your theory is
true.
>AR: If you concieve of the Flood as one homogenous mess, then this could
be a >problem.
It wasn't totally homogenous, but salt, as you might have observed, is very
soluble in water. IF the salt found in the sedimentary column every touched
the flood waters, it would dissolve. And you are being inconsistent here.
Those who believe in the global flood talk about how destructive and
erosive the initial stages were, how they eroded the continents to nubbins
yet here you don't want the flood to have eroded and added the salt to the
water's salinity. You can't have it both ways Allen.
>I have been surfing during rain storms off Ala Moana where the surface of
the
>ocean disappears under 6 to 8 inches of continual splash. After 10 to 20
>minutes the surface is covered with a layer of fresh water you can drink
by >just putting your face in the water. The fresh water layer stays in
place for >a another 30 to 40 minutes. There were rains for 150 days
during the the >Flood which could leave a layer of fresh water continually
on the surface of >the flood waters.
In order for this to occur the waters must remain tranquil. If the waters
were tranquil, they couldn't have eroded the vast sedimentary deposits of
the world. Are you a believer in a tranquil flood? Henry Morris wouldn't
like you if you are.
glenn
Foundation, Fall and Flood
Adam, Apes and Anthropology
http://www.flash.net/~mortongr/dmd.htm
Lots of information on creation/evolution
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Jul 31 2000 - 20:58:58 EDT