This is another in the series on the poisons put out by the global flood.
This one will attack the problem a bit differently. It will consider the
amount of mercury (element symbol Hg) which must have been released by the
erosion of the pre-flood igneous type of rock which was then made into
sedimentary rock containing fossils. The YEC paradigm requires that there
be very little sedimentary rock prior to the flood. This is because none
would have been made at creation (it would be a deception to make rocks
appear sedimentary which were in fact not sedimentary).
Thus we can calculate how much igneous rock must have been eroded to form
the presently observed volcanic rocks. The total of sedimentary rocks can
be calculated as 630 x 10^6 km^3.(see R. Morton [this is me] "Prolegomena
to the Study of the Sediments," CRSQ, Dec. 1980, p. 162-167) All of this
material must have come from igneous rock.
Given that igneous rocks are around 3.3 g/cc (3300 kg/m^3) and sedimentary
rocks are around 2.5 g/cc we can correct for this and we find a .75
reduction factor to put the sedimentary rocks back to igneous. Thus 477 x
10^6 km^3 or 4.77 x 10^17 cubic meters of igneous rocks must have been
eroded.
An earlier version of this note was criticized for not making explicit an
assumption. The assumption is this. Within the YEC model, the prediluvial
rock, which mostly would have been granite and basalt, must have been
mechanically crushed, and then rapidly altered chemically to separate the
feldspar and quartz fractions. Only in this way can the vast quantities of
sand and shale seen in the sedimentary rocks be explained. For God to have
created the vast quantities of sand and shale on the primeval earth would
be a case of God deceptively creating the appearance of age when no such
appearance would be needed. On the primeval earth, only a thin layer of
soil would be required, not 40-60,000 feet of it. By the process of
mechancial crushing and rapid chemical weathering, much of the mercury
contained in the rock would have been released. This is consistent with
what is known to occur in the weathering of basalts in which 90% of the
mercury in the basalts is released to the environment in about a century.
"If Kilauea lava typically cools with about 1,000 [micro]g/kg of mercury
and proceeds to release 90 percent, then this still constitutes only a
minor source of the element. The 1840 eruption produced about 400 x 10^6
m^3 of lava weighing perhaps 16 x 10^9 kg. Thus this lava contained a
total of 16 x 10^6 g (16 tons) of mercury, of which about 14 tons was
released in about a century. In contrast, Halemaumau yields 260 tons
annually when it is not erupting." ~B. Z. Siegel and S. M. Siegel, 1987,
"Hawaiian Volcanoes and the Biogeology of Mercury," in R.W. Decker et al,
ed. Volcanism in Hawaii, U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 1350, V.
1., p. 827-839, p. 833
What is the mercury content of the crust of the earth? .1 ppm (p. D15,
Table 20, Parker, R.L., 1967, Composition of the Earth's Crust, in
Fleischer, Michael, ed., Data of Geochemistry, Sixth Edition: U.S.
Geological Survey Prof. Paper 440-D) Using the very conservative value of
.1 parts per million (ppm) we find that the flood would have ground up and
released
.0000001 * 4.77 x 10^17 cubic meters x 3300 kg/m^3 x .9= 1.4 x 10^14 kg or
1.4 x 10^17 g or 1.4 x 10^23 micrograms. I place this in all 3 units
because of the need below.
All of this would have been released into the oceans for the fish to ingest.
The volume of the ocean is 1.4 x 10^21 liters. So the amount of mercury in
a liter is:
1.41 x 10^23 micrograms/1.4 x 10^21 liters = 100 micrograms per liter of
water.
How bad is it? Consider this:
"Typically, plant-cell damage takes place with aqueous solutions
containing as little as 10 [micro]g/L of Hg ion." ~B. Z. Siegel and S. M.
Siegel, 1987, "Hawaiian Volcanoes and the Biogeology of Mercury," in R.W.
Decker et al, ed. Volcanism in Hawaii, U.S. Geological Survey Professional
Paper 1350, V. 1., p. 827-839, p. 830
An expert might question the relevance of this fact to the flood since the
above refers to plants growing in mercury-rich ground water. Since plants
were not taken on the ark, they must have survived by floating on the
surface of the flood waters. And many young-earth creationists have
suggested that such vegetable mats were responsible for the coal bed
formation. Thus, the damage which mercury laden waters would cause to
these floating plants is something that must be addressed by global flood
advocates.
The EPA does not allow more than 2.4 micrograms/liter, which is the EPA's
Critical Maximum Concentration for fresh water discharge from an industrial
site. This was set up to protect aquatic life from deleterious effects from
mercury. (John E. Gray and Richard F. Sanzolone, "Environmental Studies of
Mineral Deposits in Alaska," U. S. Geological Survey Bulletin 2156,
(Washington: U. S. Gov. Printing Office, 1996), p. 5
How about for animal ingestion? This was found on the internet:
"The EPA has set a limit of 2 parts of mercury per billion parts of
drinking water (2 ppb= 2 micrograms/liter). The EPA requires that
discharges or spills of 1 pound or more of mercury be reported."
http://atsdr1.atsdr.cdc.gov:8080/tfacts46.html
For those who don't know, 100 micrograms per liter is 50 times more than
the EPA would allow for an anthropogenic releas. I guess the EPA would
initiate regulatory action against Noah's flood for polluting the oceans.
In order to avoid a creationist objection that the mercury might escape to
the atmosphere, I would point out that rainfall effectively removes
mercury. And given that the Flood is envisioned as a major rainfall event,
mercury would probably not pollute the atmosphere. An experiment that
monitored mercury in the atmosphere over the Ord mine in Arizona showed
that after a rainfall, the atmospheric mercury content was reduced to zero.
(J. H. McCarthy, Jr., J. L. Meuschke, W. H. Ficklin and R. E. Learned,
"Mercury in the Atmosphere, "Mercury in the Environment, U. S. Geological
Survey Professional Paper 713, (Washington: U. S. Gov. Printing Office,
1970), p 38)
"Experiments using nanogram amounts (1/1000 of a microgram) have shown
inhibition of immune function. One study showed that 16 tiny amalgam
fillings in the mouth of a monkey induced a significant increase in mercury
and antibiotic resistant bacteria in mouth and intestine. Another study
showed 12 amalgam fillings in sheep caused a 50% reduction of kidney
function."
http://www.ephca.com/ci&cme.htm
What this means is that the global flood would be very harmful for Noah,
the fish and life on earth. Belief in the global flood makes the Bible
which is God's word, look foolish and wrong. YEC advocates would do well
to realize the problems their viewpoint adds to God's word.
I would like to thank Steve Smith for his gracious critique and help in
rooting out errors in my original post. Any errors remaining are my
responsibility.
glenn
Adam, Apes and Anthropology
Foundation, Fall and Flood
& lots of creation/evolution information
http://www.isource.net/~grmorton/dmd.htm