Mycenae and Minoa

[juliod]

OK, so moving on to the next problem in understanding a creationist theory or chronology, here is the next question.

Did the Mycenean and Minoan civilizations exist before or after the great flood?

Since these civilizations were buried it seems that they were before the flood, and were submerged along with all the animals that were fossilized.

But there is a problem with this. Although we know almost nothing about these civilizations, the script known as Linear B, used in administrative records, was deciphered (by one of the greatest feats of intellectual effort) and shown to be a form of proto-greek. So these tablets (and hence the civilization) must have existed after the Tower of Babel incident.

On the other hand, if these nations existed after the flood (anbd Babel, whenever that was), then that brings them to within the scientifically-dated age (c. 2000 BC). That would imply that scientific dating techniques are accurate, and therefore the biblical chronology is wrong.

What a conundrum!

[YEC]

How then, gollum, do you explain the fossils of reptiles found in the Himalayan Mountains?...The flood is the only explanation for the curved sediment...

It appears that you have confused geology with theology. Try this.
Why would you believe non-expert creationist propagandists over trained geologists anyway? Is it because that is what you would like to believe?

The marine fossils on top of the Himalayan Mountains..and other mountains...clearly indicate they were underwater at one time.

The strata that makes up the mountains iindicate that they were deposided by water.

The recumbent folds indicate that they were still soft when the mountains were formed....or else the hard rock would have snapped crackled and popped and not folded.

Many of us have seen, especially in mountains and road cuts, thinly layered rocks folded like a doubled-over phone book. Other “bent” rocks are small enough to hold in one’s hand. How could brittle rock, showing little evidence of heating or cracking, fold? Rocks are strong in compression but weak in tension. Therefore, their stretched outer surfaces should easily fracture. Bent rocks, found all over the earth, often look as if they had the consistency of putty when they were compressed. They must have been squeezed and folded soon after the sediments were laid down, but before they hardened chemically. What squeezed and folded them?

Read more...

reference:http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebo ... #wp1374058

[MagusYanam]

Certainly, the rocks that compose Himalaya were underwater at one point - but this is no evidence of a Flood. To assume this is bad geology. The prevailing model is that Himalaya itself was caused by the Indian subcontinent (or rather, its corresponding tectonic plate) was pushed up onto the Asian continent, resulting in massive uplift (and tremendous stress on the rocks applied over millions of years, hence the banding demonstrated in the rock).

Now, I don't know too much about the geology of Himalaya, but I assume that this kind of stress applied over a long enough time will result in plastic deformation. Because India was at one point its own continent, parts of that plate would definitely have been underwater at one point in geological history.

Sorry, but you're going to have to come up with better evidence than this to convince me of a global Flood on a scientific basis.