"Radiometric Dating" is a misnomer

Some articles explaining the fallacy of "radiometric dating" of soil and rock:


Volcanic lava proving radiometric dating does not work (Andrew Snelling, PhD Geology)

The-fallacies-of-radioactive-dating-of-rocks (Andrew Snelling, PhD Geology)

Radiometric-dating-breakthroughs (Carl Wieland, MD)

Problems with the U - Pb Radioisotope Dating Methods (Dr. Andrew Snelling, PhD Geology)

Little Known Facts About Radiometric Dating (Tas Walker, PhD Mechanical Engineering; BS Earth Science)

Radiometric Dating and the Age of the Earth (Ralph Matthews, PhD Radiation Chemistry)

Diamonds are a Creationist's Best Friend (Jonathan Safarti, PhD Chemistry)

More Bad News for Radiometric Dating (David Plaisted, PhD Computer Science)

Evidence of catastrophic geology: Case 9

"Large Igneous Provinces".  You probably have not heard of this term before.  They are defined as short duration events (i.e. catastrophes) during which large volumes of magma (lava) were produced and placed.  In 2013, a team of scientists from the University of Houston reported confirming finding the largest volcano on earth under the ocean east of Japan.  The volcano was named the "Tamu Massif" (Texas A and M University, where the lead researcher started the study 20 years prior).  The volcano is a part of the Shatsky Rise underwater mountain range and is a "shield volcano" (sides formed by magma).

The unusual shape of the lava deposit - low and broad - qualifies it as a large igneous province.  Most volcanoes that erupt under water are small with steep sides.  The broad and flat shape, however, indicates that the molten lava erupted at such an enormous rate that it traveled rapidly across the ocean floor for a long distance before it could solidify (i.e. very fast).  Lava cools due to exposure to the seawater and hardens to igneous rock.

Large igneous provinces are widespread across the planet and are evidence of a catastrophic period beyond what we can imagine.

As reported by the Univ. of Houston:

"By integrating several sources of evidence, including core samples and data collected on board the JOIDES Resolution research ship, the authors have confirmed that the mass of basalt that constitutes Tamu Massif did indeed erupt from a single source near the center."

The lava flows spread for hundreds of miles relatively rapidly, and the massif covers 120,000 square miles.

Seismic refraction data and coring data appear to indicate that some of the lava flow layers (singular events) were 75 feet thick (i.e. 75 feet of deposition in a matter of days or weeks for each event).

Empirical evidence of catastrophic geology: Case 1

In 2002, Canyon Lake (man-made lake north of San Antonio, NW of New Braunfels) flooded after the watershed feeding the lake was subjected to 35 inches of rain in one week.  The embankment dam has a wide emergency spillway that did its job and concentrated the overflow to a certain area of the embankment and its downstream target area.  In just 3 days, the flood waters carved a canyon 1.5 miles long and up to 80 feet deep.  The waters did not erode massive soil deposits, they cut through a limestone rock formation !  The geology in this area consists of materials of the Glen Rose geologic formation, that consists of inter-bedded limestone rock, marly limestone, nodular limestone, weak limestone, and rocky clay-marl.  Although the marly materials are relativley erodible, the rock layers are not.




Here is a photo during the flooding as it carved through a road crossing (South Access Road):

Someone considering only uniformitarian geology concepts might typically believe canyons and gorges are formed by rivers slowly eroding the landscape over "millions of years".  The Canyon Lake gorge is one of many examples of empirical evidence that this is not the case.  At the deepest cut this 3 day localized flood carved out up to 80 feet deep inter-bedded limestone materials.  Are canyons formed by baseline flow river water over a long period of time, or a lot of flood water over a short period of time?  Evidence before us indicates the latter actually occurs.  The former is hypothesized and not empirical.

Here is another photo of the gorge carved in 3 days:

Here is one exposing faulting and also exposing boulder deposits (left):

Here is a close up of the boulder deposits that were placed during the 3 day flood event:

And here is another view of the eroded gorge.

A Creationist Geology Model

One model of how global catastrophic events might be the origin of our current geologic profile, and cause a cataclysmic global flood (i.e. events must still obey the laws of physics within the model formed by our creation entity), is the catastrophic plate tectonic model. This model follows much of the evidence used to support uniformitarian (gradual) plate tectonic theory but also solves inconsistencies or failures of the uniformitarian model. The creation model recognizes that cold rock denser than the mantle materials below surrounded the original super-continent and began to sink at the start of the flood year. Runaway subduction would sink the ocean floor in that area, displacing mantle material and start large-scale movement throughout the mantle. In areas where the mantle was pulling apart, rifts would form in the ocean floor. As ocean plates separated rapidly, hot mantle material would rise, vaporizing copious amounts of water (super-heated jet streams of steam along rift lines). Steam condenses in the atmosphere and falls as rain, a lot of rain ("and the flood gates of heaven were opened" Genesis 7:11). The catastrophic model has been supported by computer modeling that impressed even uniformitarian geologists (Beard, J,. "How a super-continent went to pieces", New Scientist 137:19, 16 January 1993) and provides reasoning to support magnetic field reversals and large cave formation, and explains high-pressure minerals and uplift of today's mountain ranges. The model is more complex than i am explaining, you can review the scientific literature for more information such as:


"Catastrophic Plate Tectonics: A Global Flood Model of Earth History", 1994, Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Creation, authored by PhD scientists Steven Austin, John Baumgardner, D. Russel Humphreys, Andrew Snelling, Larry Vardiman, and Kurt Wise.


"Catastrophic Plate Tectonics: The Geophysical Context..."

Runaway-Subduction-the-Driving-Mechanism-for-the-Genesis-Flood


As noted by Jonathan Sarfati of Creation Ministries International (CMI):

"under Uniformitarian plate tectonic theory, plates are moving too slowly to penetrate past the upper layers of the mantle; rather, they should blend in long before they reach the lower mantle. Yet studies show that the subducted plates have penetrated much further, and are still relatively cool. This is consistent with the subduction being fast enough to penetrate the mantle, and recently enough so they have not had time to heat up."

Some suggest that the catastrophic volcanism of mantle origin associated with extinction events was triggered by asteroid impacts. Tectonic plate motion over the hotspots was periodically disturbed, as shown by clearly marked bends in the sea mount ranges, the Hawaii-Emperor chain being probably the best example. The idea of impact-triggered volcanism became more and more common in the literature in the early 1990s. It is reasonable to attribute these disturbances to impacts during the overall catastrophe on a global scale. Extraterrestrial impacts might explain a sudden conversion of metastable material in the upper mantle to a denser phase—a prerequisite for the catastrophic plate tectonics model.


As a side note, an interesting theory related to impact dynamics is "shock dynamics":

http://www.newgeology.us/

but this theory has not received sufficient vetting.

The geologic record associated with asteroid craters is a topic of its own and quite fascinating.  Some references that relate crater evidence with catastrophic geology:

A Biblically Based Cratering Theory

Impacts and Flood - How Many? and Other Issues

Catastrophic Impact Bombardment Surrounding the Genesis Flood

An Impact Flood Submodel - Dealing with Issues

Geologist Tas Walker has developed a geology model consistent with catastrophic events including a massive flood, and this model is graphically illustrated below. The hydrological considerations explain many geological features that are difficult to explain under uniformitarian models (Oard, M., Defining the Flood/post-Flood boundary in sedimentary rocks, Journal of Creation 21(1):98–110, 2007).

Of continuing debate today among creationist scientists and geologists who are encouraged by the remodeled geology type theory is where the flood to post-flood boundary is located within the framework of the uniformitarian geology theory.  Although there are many non-conformities, gaps, and inverted formations (old ones on top of supposed younger ones), and therefore some creationist geologists (reconstruction model type theory) suggest dumping the geologic column entirely and redeveloping a new one.