Since the Hawaiian Islands have already
been discussed, lets discuss the number of animals found in the fossil
record.
According to global flood advocates, the global flood is responsible for
the majority of the geologic column and it represents the remains of the
preflood world. One biosphere was destroyed in this global cataclysm
meaning that all the fossils we find lived on earth simultaneously prior
to the flood. Thus we should be able to look at the number of living
creatures and determine if it is possible for all the animals to live on
earth at the same time. If not, then the global flood model has a
tremendous problem. Only one biosphere was destroyed but if more than one
biosphere is represented in the record, then the single global flood model
can't be correct.
What do we see? There are clearly too many animals found in the geologic
column. This is from my book Foundation, Fall and Flood, and I also for
the first time post the references with this extract. There is more
discussion below the references
The following is from Foundation, Fall and Flood
****start***
Too Many Animals
Advocates of the global flood claim that all the fossils are the remains
of animals that died in the flood. Morris states,
"Still further, the creationist suspects that the fossil record and
the sedimentary rocks, instead of speaking of a long succession of
geologic ages, may tell rather of just one former age, destroyed in a
single great worldwide aqueous cataclysm."37
If this claim is true, that the fossil record represents the remains of a
single prediluvial world, then there should not be enough fossils to
overcrowd the world. Most animals would be destroyed in the Flood, not
preserved. Thus if the geologic column consists of one single biosphere
which was destroyed in one year, there should be very few fossils and
certainly not enough of them to fill up today's earth. But this isn't what
we see. What we see are too many animals, which means that we have buried
in the geologic column more than one biosphere.
Whitcomb and Morris cite with approval a paleontologist who estimates that
the Karroo Formation of southern Africa is believed to contain 800 billion
fossil vertebrates with an average size of the fox.38 There are 126
billion acres on the surface of the earth. Only 30 percent of this area is
land, giving a land area of 38 billion acres. If 800 billion animals were
spread over the 38 billion available acres, there would be 21 animals with
an average size of a fox, per acre, from this deposit alone. This does not
include all the vertebrate fossil deposits throughout the rest of the
world. Assuming that the Karroo beds are only 1% of the fossil vertebrates
in the world (the Karroo beds occupy much less than 1% of the sedimentary
column) means that 2100 animals per acre occupied the preflood world.
Since an acre is 4840 square yards, each animal would have only 2 square
yards, or 18 square feet, of territory. That is an area only 4.2 wide by
4.2 feet long. This can be put in a setting that most Americans can
understand. The average house lot is about a quarter acre. Can you imagine
every house in your neighborhood surrounded by 525 hungry animals the size
of a fox? I, for one, would not venture out of doors. Obviously this is
far too many animals. [I don't believe Morris' numbers but if they are
right, then this is the consequence--grm]
Too Many Plants
If we further consider the quantity of plant matter which must have
occupied the single preflood world envisioned by young-earth creationists,
these results pale in comparison. There are an estimated 15 x 10^18 grams
of carbon contained in the coal reserves of the world.39 An acre of
tropical forest contains 525 kilograms of plant matter per square meter.40
Assuming an 18% carbon content of plant matter41 we have 94.5 kilograms of
carbon per square meter. Multiplying this by the number of square meters
on land, we have approximately the quantity of carbon contained in coal,
15 x 10^18 grams. One can account for all the carbon in coal only by
postulating a tropical rain forest over the entire world.
But this is impossible, because many of the animals in the fossil record
require low productivity regions to survive. Grazing animals that live on
grass can not live in tropical rain forests, because carpeting grasses do
not live there. Now we have too many animals on each acre and almost too
much plant matter. But we are not through.
Whitcomb and Morris believe that oil and natural gas are the result of the
decay of plants and animals that lived before the flood. These authors
state,
"The exact nature of the organic material has been as yet quite
unsettled, but there seems little doubt that the vast reservoirs of
organic remains, both plant and animal, in the sedimentary rocks
constitute a more than adequate source."
"Although the details are not clear, the Deluge once again appears to
offer a satisfactory explanation for the origin of oil, as well as the
other stratigraphic phenomena. The great sedimentary basins being filled
rapidly and more or less continuously during the Flood would provide a
prolific source of organic material, together with whatever heat and
pressure might have been needed to initiate the chemical reactions
necessary to begin the transformation into petroleum hydrocarbons. Of
course, not all organic debris deposited during the Flood was converted
into oil; apparently certain catalysts or other chemicals were also
necessary, and where these were present, it was possible for oil to
form."42
If all the oil were the result of the decay of organic matter, then there
is far too much oil and natural gas in the world. There are 201 x 10^18
grams of carbon in the hydrocarbons of the earth. In all of the world's
living things, there are only 0.3 x 10^18 grams of carbon. There is 670
times more carbon in petroleum than there is in every living plant and
animal on earth. Surely the world was not 670 times more crowded at the
time of the Flood than it is today!
Too Many Plankton
There are also too many microscopic animals. Most limestone is deposited
by bacteria and invertebrate animals. The Austin Chalk, which underlies
Dallas, is a 400-foot thick limestone bed made of the remains of
microscopic animals, called coccolithophores or coccoliths. It is about
70% coccoliths. The coccolithophore is a small spherical animal, between 5
and 60 micrometers in diameter, each having about 16 coccoliths that
separate upon the death. According to Stokes Law these animals would fall
through the water at a rate of .1 millimeter per second. To fall through a
100 foot (33 meter) depth of water would take 4 days.
The time required to form the Austin Chalk is far longer than one year.
The coccolith skeleton, when pressed flat, is about 1 micron or one
millionth of a meter thick. A deposit of coccoliths 400 feet thick must
represent many thousands of years of deposits. One hundred twenty-one
million coccoliths could be stacked up like coins across the four hundred
feet. The length of time necessary to deposit these 121 million coccoliths
can be calculated by assuming the maximum density of living
coccolithophores in the waters above. Such measurements can be made during
an event known as a red tide.
Occasionally, growth conditions become so favorable that they grow beyond
all reason. As many as 60 million creatures per liter of water grow and
quickly use up all of the oxygen and nutrients in the water and then die.
Their decay continues to use any oxygen entering the water and also gives
off poisons. Fish who swim into one of these areas often die from lack of
oxygen and the absorption of toxins emitted by the dead microorganism.
These water blooms last only a few weeks as the microorganisms deplete the
water's nutrients rapidly and die. However, even at their most dense, 60
million microorganisms per liter, only 39 layers of organisms are stacked
in a single cubic centimeter. Thus, to stack 121 million coccoliths would
require the death of nearly 8 million organisms. A 100 foot water depth,
filled to the maximum with coccospheres, would only generate a thickness
of six feet of chalk! The four hundred feet of chalk of the Austin
formation would require 66 such blooms. If it required two weeks between
each bloom to recharge the nutrients and one week for the bloom to occur,
it would take 4 years to deposit the chalk. And these values are wildly
optimistic for the deposition of chalk. This size bloom is not possible.
The coccolithophores remove calcium carbonate from the water to make their
skeletons. In water depth of 100 feet there is not nearly enough calcium
to deposit such a volume of chalk. One hundred feet of seawater contains
only enough carbonate to deposit a little over 1-millimeter of carbonate.
Thus, no bloom of the size mentioned above can even occur. Using the
two-week recharge and one-week bloom mentioned above, it would take 7,000
years to deposit the chalk. Obviously, the chalk under Dallas would
require much more time to deposit than merely one year. In southern
Louisiana, the chalk is 2100 feet (640 meters) thick. I have drilled it.
This would take considerably more time than seven thousand years.
Additionally, the quantity of chalk seen in the world is far too great to
have been contained in the preflood world hypothesized by young-earth
creationists. The Austin Chalk is a chalk deposit that stretches from
Mexico along the coast of the Gulf of Mexico into Louisiana, a distance in
excess of 800 km. In Mexico, the Austin Chalk is named the San Felipe
Formation. A glance at the geologic data shows that the band is about 160
km wide and appears to average 120 meters in thickness.43 In the chalk in
Texas alone there are enough dead coccolithophores to cover the earth to a
depth of 3 centimeters. But Texas is not the only place on earth that has
deposits of chalk. In Alabama and Mississippi, the chalk is known as the
Selma. The Niobrara chalk - 5,000 km long, 1,400 km. wide and 6 meters
thick - runs through much of the western part of the Great Plains of the
United States.44 The Niobrara would add another 7 centimeters of cover to
the earth. Throughout Europe Upper Cretaceous chalks cover large areas.
The White Cliffs of Dover are made of chalk that is as much as 215 meters
thick in parts of England. This chalk sweeps across southern Scandinavia,
Poland and into south Russia where it attains an amazing thickness of up
to 1000 meters. It is stopped by the Ural Mountains. The chalks of western
Europe are enough to cover the entire earth to a depth of 83
centimeters.45 West of the Urals, in the Central Asian Tuar-Kyr mountain
range, a deposit of chalk 20 meters thick is found. In Israel, Jordan,
Egypt, Syria and Saudi Arabia, an Upper Cretaceous chalk is around 180
meters thick. If all the fossil record was the record of the destruction
of one preflood biosphere, as Morris suggests, it must have been a crowded
place. The worldwide quantity of dead coccoliths would cover the earth to
a depth of one meter.
Too Many Diatoms
A deposit that is similar to chalk is diatomaceous chert. These siliceous
deposits are made of little more than dead diatoms. A diatom is a small
single-celled animal that lives in the sea. As diatoms collect on the
ocean floor and are buried deeper and deeper, they are compressed and
changed from a form known as diatomite, which is used in swimming pool
filters, to opal. Upon further burial, with increased temperature and
pressure, the opal is changed into chert. The Monterey formation of
California is such a deposit. It is the light-colored rock that forms much
of the landscape of southern California. The deposit is 1,200 kilometers
long, 250 kilometers wide and averages half a kilometer in thickness. This
single deposit of dead diatoms is large enough to cover the earth to a
depth of nearly 1 foot, or 0.28 meters.
But this is not all. There are over 300 such siliceous deposits around the
world. If each one of them is only one-fourth the size of the Monterey,
then there are enough dead diatoms to cover the earth uniformly to a depth
of 21 meters, or 70 feet! So we now have a preflood world which contains
2,100 terrestrial animals per acre (none of which are human), a tropical
rain forest everywhere, 20 meters of dead diatoms over the entire globe
and 1 meter of dead coccoliths. Where is everyone going to live? And we
are not through.
Too Many Crinoids [see picture at end of this post--grm]
The Mission Canyon formation in the northwestern United States is part of
a truly remarkable deposit. It is largely made of the remains of dead
crinoids, which are deep-sea creatures called sea lilies. Clark and Stearn
report,
"Much of the massive limestone formation is composed of sand-sized
particles of calcium carbonate, fragments of crinoid plates, and shells
broken by the waves. Such a sedimentary rock qualifies for the name
sandstone because it is composed of particles of sand size cemented
together; because the term sandstone is commonly understood to refer to a
quartz-rich rock, however, these limestone sandstones are better called
calcarenites. The Madison sea must have been shallow, and the waves and
currents strong, to break the shells and plates of the animals when they
died. The sorting of the calcite grains and the cross-bedding that is
common in this formation are additional evidence of waves and currents at
work. Even in Mississippian rocks, where whole crinoids are rare fossils,
and as a result, it is easy to underestimate the population of these
animals during the Paleozoic era. Crinoidal limestones, such as the
Mission Canyon-Livingstone unit, provide an estimate, even though it be of
necessity a rough one, of their abundance in the clear shallow seas they
loved. In the Canadian Rockies the Livingstone limestone was deposited to
a thickness of 2,000 feet on the margin of the Cordilleran geosyncline,
but it thins rapidly eastward to a thickness of about 1,000 feet in the
Front Ranges and to about 500 feet in the Williston Basin. Even though its
crinoidal content decreases eastward, it may be calculated to represent at
least 10,000 cubic miles of broken crinoid plates. How many millions,
billions, trillions of crinoids would be required to provide such a
deposit? The number staggers the imagination."46
In just this one deposit, there are enough crinoids to cover every square
inch of the earth to a depth of 1/4 inch. Where would the vertebrate
animals (in the Karroo Beds mentioned earlier) live if the whole world
were covered with crinoids? But this deposit is not the only crinoidal
deposit. Rocks of the lower Mississippian age are largely composed of
crinoidal calcarenites - translation: dead crinoids. Further north in
Canada, the deposit of crinoidal limestones is called the Rundle, and it
is called the Lisburne limestone in Alaska. Both of these beds contain
vast quantities of dead crinoids. Farther south, the crinoidal limestone
is called the Leadville Limestone in Colorado, the Redwall in Arizona, and
the Chappell in Texas, the Burlington and Keokuk limestones in the
Mid-Continent region. The Burlington alone contains another 719 cubic
miles of dead crinoids.47 It is called the Edwardsville Formation in
Indiana. This Mississippian crinoidal rock unit is called the Ft. Payne in
Tennessee, Kentucky and Georgia. But this is not the extent of this
crinoidal limestone.
In Australia there is a deposit of crinoidal limestones called the Namoi
and Bingleburra Formations.48 In Libya near the Timenocaline Wells, there
is a 6 foot bed of crinoidal limestone.49 White crinoidal limestones are
found along the banks of the Zilim River in the south part of the Ural
Mountains.50 Belgium boasts a crinoidal limestone that reaches 2,100 feet
thick.51 Without further documentation, which could have been provided,
these crinoidal limestones are found in Egypt, Central Asia, and China. A
Mississippian crinoidal limestone even tops Mt. Everest! With crinoids all
over the Northern Hemisphere, where did land animals live? Where did the
tropical rain forest live? Where did the diatoms come from? Where did the
coal come from?
When it is realized that almost all of the limestone deposits in the world
are biologic in origin, a problem quickly arises. There are 6.42 x 10^22
grams of carbon in the limestones of the earth and only 3 x 10^17 grams of
carbon in the biosphere of the earth. The flood must have buried 214,000
times more living matter in limestone alone than is currently on the
earth.
There are far too many dead animals to have fit on the preflood earth as
envisioned by the global flood advocates. The fossil record can not even
begin to be considered the remains of one preflood biosphere. It would
have been too crowded! Glenn Morton, Foundation, Fall and Flood, (DMD
Publishers, Spring TX, 1999), p. 83-86
37. Henry M. Morris, The Troubled Waters of Evolution, (San Diego:
Creation-Life Publishers, 1974), p. 21.
38. Whitcomb and Morris, The Genesis Flood, op. cit., p. 160.
39. John M. Hunt, "Distribution of Carbon in Crust of the
Earth," American Association of Petroleum Geologists, 56:11(1972), p.
2273-2277.
40. Edward J. Kormondy, Concepts of Ecology, (Englewood Cliffs:
Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1969), p. 128.
41. Alvin Nasan and Philip Goldstein, Biology, (New York: Addison-Wesley,
1969), p. 234.
42. Whitcomb and Morris, The Genesis Flood, op. cit., p. 434.
43. D. G. Bebout and R. A. Schatzinger, "Regional Cretaceous Cross
Sections - South Texas," in D. G. Bebout and R. G. Loucks, editors,
Cretaceous Carbonates of Texas & Mexico, (Austin: Bureau of Economic
Geology, 1977), p. 4 see also the cross sections in the back of the book.
44. H. C. Jenkyns, "Pelagic Environments," in H. G. Reading,
Sedimentary Environments and Facies, (New York: Elsevier, 1978), p. 369.
45. In Europe there are three main lobes of chalk deposition:
London-Paris basin 700 km x 300 km x .25 km thick
Scotland-Germany 1100 km x 600 km x .5 km thick
Poland - Carpathian front 800 km x 400 km x .5 km thick
Peter A. Ziegler, Geological Atlas of Western and Central Europe,
(Amsterdam: Shell Internationale Petroleum Maatschappij B. V., 1983)
enclosure 32.
Using the area of ellipse
pi x 350000 x 150000 x 250 = 4.1233 x 10^13 m^3
pi x 550000 x 300000 x 500 = 2.5918 x 10^14 m^3
pi x 400000 x 200000 x 500 = 1.2566 x 10^14 m^3
The sum total is 4.2607 x 10^14 m^3
American chalks 90% coccoliths 10% shale
European chalks are 99 percent coccoliths; 1% is shale see (Peter A.
Scholle, Michael A. Arthur and Allan A. Ekdale, "Pelagic
Environment," in Peter A. Scholle, Don G. Bebout, Clyde H. Moore,
Carbonate Depositional Environments, (Tulsa: American Association of
Petroleum Geologists, 1983), p.640)
This is 3.8346 x 10 ^14 m^3. Divided by the surface area of the earth 5.11
x 1014 m^2, yields enough to cover the earth to .75 meters thick.
46. Thomas H. Clark and Colin W. Stearn, The Geological Evolution of North
America, (New York: The Ronald Press, 1960), p. 86-88.
47. Robert H. Dott, Jr. and Roger L. Batten, The Evolution of the Earth,
(St. Louis: McGraw-Hill Book Co., 1971), p. 307.
48. D. A. Brown, K. S. W. Campbell and K. A. W. Crook, The Geological
Evolution of Australia and New Zealand, (New York: Pergamon Press, 1968),
p. 158.
49. Raymond Furon, The Geology of Africa, translated by A. Hallam and L.
A. Stevens, (London: Oliver S. Boyd, 1963), p. 146.
50. D. V. Nalivkin, Geology of the U. S. S. R., translated by N. Rast,
(Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1973), p. 334.
51. Roland Brinkmann, Geologic Evolution of Europe, translated by John E.
Sanders, (New York: Hafner Publishing Co., 1960), p. 46. see also Figure
14.
52. Whitcomb and Morris, The Genesis Flood, op. cit., p. 273-277.
53. See Martin J. S. Rudwick, The Meaning of Fossils, (New York: Neale
Watson Academic Publications, 1976), p. 82.
54. Rudwick, The Meaning of Fossils, p. 83.
When one looks at the amount of organic carbon on the earth, we find that
it is many times more than exists in the current biosphere and from the
above it is many times more than even a lush environment could allow.
petroleum nonreservoir 200 x 10^18 g carbon
Petroleum reservoir 1 x 10^18 g carbon
Coal 15 x 10^18 g carbon
Carbonate rocks 51,000 x 10^18 g carbon
living things .3 x 10^18 g carbon
J.M. Hunt, ""Distribution of Carbon in Crust of Earth,
p. 22
Most of the carbon in carbonate rocks comes from the remains of animal
life.
The picture shows the limestone chock full of crinoids. this is from NW
England in the Lake District.

|