Flood Geology and Conventional Geology Face Off Over the Coconino Sandstone

Flood geologists have been using the Coconino Sandstone in the Grand Canyon to argue that a global flood reworked much of the planetary geologic record. Flood geologists’ arguments may seem convincing at first, but after analyzing their articles and videos as well as the conventional geology literature, it is found that the Coconino does not support a global flood. Flood geologists have been largely directing their efforts toward refuting generalized statements from critics in the popular science literature. By placing so much emphasis on finding data that could be used to refute critics, opportunities were missed to increase scientific understanding of the Coconino. Flood geologists’ findings were consistently framed to argue for aqueous deposition, which they implicitly equate to global flood deposition. It is shown that an astronomical difference exists between the two.

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
Perspectives on Science and Christian Faith
Published
2024-08-23
DOI
https://doi.org/10.56315/pscf9-24helble
Primary Topic
Botany and Geology in Latin America and Caribbean
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Flood Geology and Conventional Geology Face Off Over the Coconino Sandstone

Timothy Helble
Perspectives on Science and Christian Faith
Botany and Geology in Latin America and Caribbean
article

Flood Geology and Conventional Geology Face Off Over the Coconino Sandstone

Timothy Helble
article en

Abstract

Flood geologists have been using the Coconino Sandstone in the Grand Canyon to argue that a global flood reworked much of the planetary geologic record. Flood geologists’ arguments may seem convincing at first, but after analyzing their articles and videos as well as the conventional geology literature, it is found that the Coconino does not support a global flood. Flood geologists have been largely directing their efforts toward refuting generalized statements from critics in the popular science literature. By placing so much emphasis on finding data that could be used to refute critics, opportunities were missed to increase scientific understanding of the Coconino. Flood geologists’ findings were consistently framed to argue for aqueous deposition, which they implicitly equate to global flood deposition. It is shown that an astronomical difference exists between the two.

Perspectives on Science and Christian FaithVol. 76(2)
Openalex Percentile: Top 90%
Botany and Geology in Latin America and Caribbean
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.