Creationists: why is there no single 'salt layer' that spans the globe and would be evidence of a flood?

Question

Scientists have known since the '80s of an Iridium layer. This layer of dirt contains high levels of an isotope of iridium found in meteorites and volcanic debris.

There are more than 100 sites world wide and all of them dated to circa 65 million years ago (and I should point out that many people have conducted this testing, some to prove the theory of a meteor wiping out the dinosaurs wrong). The results are unanimous and conclusive.

So if there was a world-wide flood, the oceans would have flooded the land and just as we find in tidal flats, as the water receded the salt would have condensed on the land and left a rather thick film (about a foot thick) over most or all of the dry land.

This would be a single layer (as it all occurred at the same time) and every core drilling for oil as well as the drilling for iridium would have found it.

Yet, no such layer has ever been found.

Explain, please?

Sage: 40 years of studying a variety of sciences. This stuff isn't "Top Secret". Start with your library (Encyclopaedia Britannica is a good start).

Suspendor: you have no experience with flooding if you think all the water runs off the land.

Sage: you have access to wikipedia and google - don't let me stop you from researching this stuff. I've provided enough keywords you can use to search it out in a night.

Try "K-T iridium extinction dinosaur", "tidal salt industry", and "flood salt layer".

Answer 1

I think I'm gonna hurl...

Some of these answers are ludicrous!

Supposing there was a flood where did all the excess water come from? The amount of water on the earth is fixed - it's called the water cycle, no net gain or loss.
Oh yeah, the water apparently receeded...what the hell? Where did it all go to, down a giant plughole in the earth? Water can only be lost from the ocean in 2 ways - evaporation or absorption by the seabed, but since the seabed is already saturated with water, the only way is evaporation.

Should seawater have covered the land, there should definately be a salt layer - the only loss of water is by evaporation. it didn't get zapped by lightning or whatever, in fact the earth would look like a giant salt plain, which in itself is ridiculous as there would virutally be no drinking water left on land for the supposed animals which survived.

If the Discovery channel's documentary is anything to go by, it was just a story blown out of proportion, perhaps there was localised flooding in the middle east and some guy was smart enough to herd his animals onto a raft - global flooding cannot occur without any geographical evidence left behind, it simply is too great an event (if it ever happened at all).

Answer 2

If you'll read the Bible in Genesis it tells us that the earth was encircled with water and only a mist fell upon the ground. Until Noah's flood it had not rained on the earth.

Genesis 1:6-8 And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters.
And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament, and it was so. And God called the firmament heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day.

And God said, Let the waters under the heaven be gathered
together unto one place, and let the dry land appear and it was so. And god called the dry land Earth, and the gatherint to gether of the waters calle dhe Seas; and God saw that it was good.

The oceans didn't flood the earth. The fountains of the great deep were opened. The water rose 15 cubits upward above the tallest mountain. Vs. 20 of chapter 7

Gen. 8:1-4
And god remembered Noah, and every living thing, and all the cattle that was with him in the ark; and God made a wind to pass over the earth, and the water assuaged (subsided)
the fountains also of the deep and the windows of heaven were stopped, and the rain from heaven was restrained; and the waters returned from off the earth continually: and after the end of the hundred and fifty days the waters were abated.
and the ark rested in the seventh month, on the seventeenth day of the month, upon the mountains of Ararat. And the waters decreased continually until the tenth month; in the tenth month, on the first day of the month, were the tops of the mountains seen.

The oceans can't produce this amount of water.

Answer 3

There is no reason to believe that the salinity of the ocean was the same then as it is today. Also, to say that because no such layer has been found, and therefore does not exist is rather ignorant. In fact you argue against your own belief, for if fossil shells for example can be found in the mountain tops, then so too most probably your layer of salt. But you likely wouldn't find it anyway due to the changing geologic processes of the Earth (earthquakes, volcanos, rain, rock formation).

Answer 4

if the earth (with geological formations as they currently are) were completely covered in water, the water would be diluted to the point where one could drink it.

However, there is not enough water on earth to cover all those peaks. So the generally accepted theory among Christians is that those formed AFTER/during the flood.

The water didnt dry up, it RECIEDED, thus actually washing more minerals away from the land.

And besides, back then the ocean wouldn’t have been quite as salty anyway. So I’d need to know your sources and what figures you are using to calculate this.

Answer 5

This event is narrated in both the Bible and the Qur'an. A careful examination of the two versions will show that the Qur'anic version could have come from no other source but God alone . One important difference between the two accounts is that whereas the Bible describes the flood as a worldwide flood (see Genesis Ch. 7) the Qur'an mentions it as a local flood affecting the people of Noah (see Qur'an 7:59-64). Today it is acknowledged that no record exists of a worldwide flood occurring at the time specified in te Bible. How did the author of the Qur'an avoid this mistake unless the author was God Himself? The closest thing in history to a flood like the one described in the Bible and the Qur'an, is a discovery made by Archaeologist Sir Charles Leonard Wooley. In 1929 he discovered remains from a flood which occurred around 4000 B.C. His findings are described in the book entitled The Bible as History by Werner Keller. Keller tells us: "The incredible discovery at Ur made headline news in the United States and in Britain" (The Bible as History, 2nd Revised Edition, Bantam Books, 1980, p.27). But was this a worldwide flood? After describing the extent of the flood, Keller explains; "Looking at the map we should call it today 'a local occurrence"' (p.28). "In other words." writes Keller. that flood was "obviously not of sufficient magnitude for the Biblical Flood" (p.29). Furthermore, he says; "A flood of the unimaginable extent described in the Bible still remains 'archacologically not demonstrated" (pp.29-30). Another comparison will again demonstrate that the Qur'an was not copied from the Bible. In the Bible we are told that God drowned the Pharaoh and his army when they pursued Moses, on whom be peace. and his people (see Exodus 14:28). The clear indication in that description is that the body of the Pharaoh perished in the sea. However, the Qur'an dared to differ and prove true. In the Qur'an we find that God promised to preserve the body of the Pharaoh as a sign for later generations (see Qur'an 10:90-92). True to the Qur'anic promise, the mummified body of the Pharaoh was discovered by Loret in 1898 at Thebes in the Kings' Valley (see The Bible, the Qur 'an and Science by Dr.Maurice Bucaille, p.238). From there it was transported to Cairo. Elliot Smith removed its wrappings on July 8,1907 and gave a detailed description in his book entitled the Royal Mummies (19l2).

From which source did the author of the Qur'an derive this information? How did the author of the Qur'an know that the Pharaoh's body was preserved whereas the knowedge that the ancient Egyptians mummified their dead was not discovered until recently? And how could the author of the Qur'an predict that the body of the Pharaoh will be discovered later, unless the author was God Himself?
Source: Common Questions people ask about Islam
Author: Shabir Ally

Answer 6

Ja....zeh first answerer is right, watch the discovery channel...unless you think you're too good for learning.

The "chance", "Big Bang", what-have you theories of beginning just don't make sense to me logically. There HAD to be a G.O.D. (Guiding Organizing Design) process.

Here's a VERY simple experiment: Next time you do your laundry, throw all of your shirts up in the air. Do this millions and millions of times. Will they EVER land folded neatly in a stack? Nope. According to chance theory, eventually they would...but they won't. Simple logic.

Answer 7

You're working from the premise that there is no God.

Logically, if there is a God who is all powerful, he could obviously account for the salt-less layer.

Why does there have to be a salt-less layer anyways? You know that Christians don't account that the flood came from the oceans, but instead it came from the canopy and from underneath the earth. There were obviously oceans preceding the flood, and there still are. There are also clouds in the sky at all times, which come from the moisture on the earth being evaporated.

Working from that premise, it's not too hard.

Answer 8

Do you mean the story of Noah? that flood was not throughout the ENTIRE world. It happend in an area in the middle east. They have a story about it on Discovery channel. Noah only brought a few animals, pretty much his own animals, and his "ark" was 8 rafts tied together with a second story up top.

Answer 9

Because this great flooding was probably accompanied by massive amounts of lightning. The salt (which is a good conductor of electricity) would have been pulled into the sky to help trace the lightning around the world and aid in its travel. This is kind of how the water that is in the ice caps was made fresh. I believe it was originally salt water that they were formed from. There is some salt around, like in the salt flats, but for the most part it was pulled back into the oceans at the last moment.

Answer 10

I for one, would like to know where you get this information at so I may read it myself and go from there.....

Books?

Web sites?

What do you have to back up this claim?

Thanking you in advance

*****Answering you back - I am sorry sir, but I feel like your answer is a cop out to my honestly legitamate question. I am not here to argue - I am here to learn. If you have something to teach us, then give us more to go on!

I asked for direct proof of where to read this - just stating 'start with the encyclopedia' does not give me concrete directions. I could read for weeks and never come across what you have just stated...

Besides, if it was this well known, why have I (and other open minded people) not heard of this before?