Do Sand-Dune Sandstones Disprove Noah's Flood? | The Institute for Creation Research

Do Sand-Dune Sandstones Disprove Noah's Flood?

Science Writer Brian Thomas recently hiked in Colorado and came across some beautiful examples of cross-bedded sandstone. Why did he get so excited?

While hiking with a youth group in Colorado recently, I came across some beautiful examples of cross-bedded sandstone. They are called cross-beds because the sandstone layers appear to “cut” at an angle to the horizontal bedding. In some areas, the sandstone patterns looked like a giant letter Z. The image shown below is my cell phone snapshot. I shared my excitement with the kids over the significance of what must have seemed to them like just another tan-colored rock. Why are these cross-beds so important?

Their significance has to do with Noah’s Flood. Flood geologists can interpret rock layers like this one in terms of a worldwide watery destruction. The Flood powerfully explains why continents are covered with such thick, catastrophically water-deposited, fossil-bearing, sedimentary rock layers.

In contrast, secular geologists exclude the Flood from their thinking. They view the same layers through the perspective of long ages of regular Earth processes proceeding at familiar rates and scales. Some geologists object to the very idea of a historical Noah’s Flood since they think certain cross-beds represent ancient desert sand dunes—wholly deposited by wind. But water-deposited rocks occur both above and below cross-bedded sandstones. How could a desert exist amid Flood layers? That’s an important question, for if the Flood didn’t happen, then the many scriptural references to Noah can’t be trusted.

How does anyone know for sure that sandstone cross-beds came from ancient deserts? It turns out there’s a relatively easy way to discern whether or not a sand dune was deposited by water or wind. All you need is a protractor to measure the sandstone cross-bed angles.

Since I didn’t have my protractor with me on the trail, I took pictures so I could measure the angles later. Because that whole area is covered in widespread Flood layers, and since the sandstone looked like other Flood sandstones I had seen—like the Glorieta Sandstone in New Mexico—I strongly suspected that the cross-bed angles would match those of other Flood deposits.

Dr. Steve Austin summarized this area of research in his geology text Grand Canyon: Monument to Catastrophe. He cited the work of secular geologists who first noted the similarities between offshore sand dunes caused by storm surges and Grand Canyon deposits. He wrote that modern desert sand dunes can have steep faces, and their “sand beds usually slope at an angle of more than 25°.”1 So, if the angles average less than 25 degrees, you’re looking at water-deposited sand dunes.

After examining the cross-bed angles in the Colorado rocks, my hunch was confirmed. Some were almost 25 degrees and others were less than that, clearly signifying watery deposition. It turns out that secularists agree this particular sandstone was indeed water-deposited, but whenever they insist on desert dune sandstone, one need only ask if they put it to the protractor test. The Colorado sandstone that I saw—which came from a single ancient mega-surge—joins scores of other sandstone deposits from sediment-laden watery surges that unloaded their sediments across Earth’s continents.2 Truly, “the world that then existed perished, being flooded with water.”3

References

  1. Austin, S. A. 1994. Grand Canyon: Monument to Catastrophe. Santee, CA: Institute for Creation Research, 32.
  2. The Dakota Sandstone’s cross-beds indicate fast-flowing water extending from Colorado across the northern Great Plains.
  3. 2 Peter 3:6.

Image credit: Brian Thomas

* Mr. Thomas is Science Writer at the Institute for Creation Research.

Cite this article: Brian Thomas, Ph.D. 2014. Do Sand-Dune Sandstones Disprove Noah's Flood?. Acts & Facts. 43 (9).

The Latest
ACTS & FACTS
Continuous Environmental Tracking : An Engineering-Based Model...
Purpose The Institute for Creation Research is engaged in our biggest science initiative in the last two decades, and it could be our most important...

ACTS & FACTS
CET: Testing the Cavefish Model
Staff Writer Purpose The Institute for Creation Research (ICR) is testing an engineering- based model of rapid biological adaptation called...

ACTS & FACTS
Original Biochemistry in Fossils
Purpose In 1997, paleontologist Dr. Mary Schweitzer accidentally stumbled upon what appeared to be blood vessels and blood cells from a T. rex...

ACTS & FACTS
Debunking an Iconic Uniformitarian Ice Age Theory
Purpose The Milankovitch, or astronomical, theory holds that the timing of Ice Ages is controlled by slow changes in Earth’s orbital and...

ACTS & FACTS
ICR and Explaining the Ice Age
by Larry Vardiman, Ph.D., and Michael J. Oard, M.S.* Purpose There is strong geological evidence for an Ice Age, so the Institute for Creation...

ACTS & FACTS
Planetary Magnetism
Purpose In 1971, Dr. Thomas Barnes publicized a then “trade secret” of scientists studying the earth’s magnetic field, which...

ACTS & FACTS
Cosmology Research
Purpose Taking the Hebrew text of Scripture at face value without inserting gaps or revising the meanings, the universe is only about 6,000 years...

ACTS & FACTS
The Coconino Sandstone: Water, not Wind
Purpose The Coconino Sandstone is one of the most well-known formations in Grand Canyon. The blond-colored sandstone, just three layers down from...

ACTS & FACTS
Global Stratigraphy Supports a Progressive Worldwide Flood
Purpose Is there geological evidence for a global flood? Is there evidence that the waters rose and peaked on Day 150 as recorded in Genesis 8?...

ACTS & FACTS
Human-Chimp DNA Similarity Research Refutes Evolution
Purpose An oft-repeated claim of evolutionary propaganda is that the DNA of chimpanzees and humans is 98.5% identical. This high level of DNA...