The Siberian traps is an ancient basaltic eruption, a giant series of volcanic explosions and lava flows that cover an area the size of Alaska. Basaltic flows are devestating in small scale, such as when they happen in Iceland. This was much more massive, so devestating and so long-lasting that it wiped out 90-95% of life on earth, even in the oceans. The landscape would've been a burning, boiling, exploding wasteland. Fortunately, the hot spots are no longer active today. They spent their energy millions of years ago.
Based on measuring radioactive metals and minerals brought to the surface and crystalized in the rock (i.e., providing us with exact ratios of radioactive products and their by-products in each individual crystal), geologists have measured this event to have occurred over the course of nearly 100 thousand years sometime around 260 million years ago, coinciding perfectly with a global massive, but slow, die-off in the fossil records that's usually referred to as the Permian-Triassic extinction.
My question is this: what do you make of this event? There is ample evidence, such as the geology of the Siberian traps, to indicate this ancient volcanism, but no record of these massive, worldwide die-offs in the entire human historic record (which makes sense if the events were over long before human beings existed). How do you account for the geological evidence? Obviously this wasn't a single flood if took 100,000 years for the die-off to occur, nor does the geology suggest water, but instead suggests fire, molten explosions that likes of which mankind has fortunately never had to deal with.
Just a curiosity of mine. Thanks for your time.
Herugrim2011-12-27T09:01:28Z
Well two things, first if they used Radiometric dating, that does not necessarily give you an accurate answer as those who radiometric date automatically assume the Earth is billions of years old and as such calibrate the machines based off of this assumption(in order to get a date you have to know how much of a certain element or isotope was present at it's creation and unless we have a sample of something at it's creation then we don't know 100% how much of an isotope was present in the beginning Hence why radiometric dating is flawed). If they assumed the Earth was only 6,000 years old then they would get significantly different data.
Second is that because you already assume the Earth is billions of years old you already have made up your mind about something like the FLood. Even though the Flood is your best answer. It says in the old testament that the flood started with a great noise and shaking. It is possible that God used a massive meteor to break apart the water vapour/ice canopy covering the earth and when it struck the Earth it caused immense amounts of geological activity. So all your eruptions and lava flows could easily have happened during this time. And before you talk about dust clouds and such, remember that after the meteor hit it would have rained for forty days and forty nights, ensuring that a dust cloud wouldn't get a chance to cover a large area.
Unfortunately I do not have all the answers, and though you assert things strongly, I do not believe you have them either!
Just to name a few! For example:
1. Polystrate fossils: " Probably the most widely recognized of the polystrate fossils are tree trunks that extend vertically through two, three, four or more sections of rock—rock that supposedly was deposited during vast epochs of time. However, organic material (like wood) that is exposed to the elements will rot, not fossilize. Thus, the entire length of these tree trunks must have been preserved very quickly, which suggests that the sedimentary layers surrounding them must have been deposited rapidly—possibly (and likely) during a single catastrophe (see Ham, 2000, p. 138). As Leonard Brand explained, even if the trees had been removed from oxygen, “anaerobic bacteria cause decay unless the specimens are buried rapidly” (1997, p. 240). Consequently, it is irrational to conclude from such evidence that these formations built up slowly over millions of years. The logical explanation for such formations is that they must have been formed quickly under cataclysmic conditions. Ken Ham has observed: “For example, at the Joggins, in Nova Scotia, there are many erect fossil trees that are scattered throughout 2,500 feet of layers. You can actually see these fossil trees, which are beautifully preserved, penetrate through layers that were supposedly laid down over millions of years” (p. 138). In what surely must be a classic case of understatement, Rupke wrote concerning the Joggins polystrate fossils: “Only a wholly uncommon process of sedimentation can account for conditions like these” (1973, p. 154). "
2. Coal mine finds? Artifacts Found in Coal Mines!
How? Hammers, gold chains, etc? Many sources, but this one has many artifacts: http://www.s8int.com/page12.html
3. The bone yards? How
4. Fingerprints of Creation! Polonium Halos: Unrefuted Evidence for Earth's Instant Creation! How do you answer this scientist on these radioactive halos? http://www.halos.com/ http://www.robertvgentry.com/
While I do not agree with this scientist. I do it on aesthetic reasons since I am no scientist.
5. the deluge evidence world wide, the sagas, the remains on every mountain, the evidence of the Chinese language totally separated from religious issues, though totally backing the Bible story up. The fact that you have, as the Bible shows us, the evidence for subtropical polar regions, etc, etc.
There are many things that each may not be able to explain, I would think.
You should be aware that there are at LEAST two kinds of Creationists...
1) Young Earth Creationists (believing the world is approx 6000 years old) and all evidence such as "Siberian Traps" was formed in that precise manner 6000 years ago.
2) Creationists that know that God creates as He chooses and that the 6 "days" of Creation were not necessarily literal 24-hour periods but potentially much longer. Time is a CREATION of God, and He is not bound to it.
2 Peter 3:8 But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.
It's certainly possible that mankind, created as we were on the 6th day... came many years after the formation of the world and simple vegetable matter formed on the 3rd day. However Christians (like God) are not bound by a strict understanding of time - knowing that God is above all created things.
If God wanted to create the world completely in 6 literal days - it is completely possible.
For evolutionists - a 6000 year creation is a death knell - as (viable) mutations could not possibly have occurred sufficiently quickly in so short a span of time. One of the reasons why it is touted so vehemently.
BOTTOM LINE: It really doesn't matter one way or the other to Christians. Jesus Christ is Lord and came to the world to save us sinners. Whether He chose to Create one way or another - who cares?
This question should probably be posed to young earth creationists, I suppose. I firmly believe in creation and just see this as another interesting scientific discovery that I see no reason to bat an eye at. Check out books on the gap theory sometime. I was taught young earth creationism when I was younger, but the Bible itself convinced me otherwise.
If humans can create computer and planes, how much more satan who takes his power from the blood of humans, plants, animals, thunder and other natural occurences that God created.
when adam and eve sinned, satan came in and the world and everything was no longer perfect.
there is always a perfect explanation for every puzzle if you are patient enough to seek it. especially about the creation process. we may not have the full picture but God will always explain if you ask properly and diligently.