Counterexamples to an Ice Age

From Conservapedia
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Aschlafly (Talk | contribs) at 00:28, 27 August 2012. It may differ significantly from current revision.

Jump to: navigation, search

The theory of an Ice Age was first proposed in the mid-1800s and was widely rejected by leading scientists. But, like the politically motivated claims of global warming, the Ice Age theory became useful to liberals seeking to cast doubt on the Flood as the explanation for numerous geological observations. Indeed, the primary effect of the Ice Age theory today is to misleadingly pull students away from learning about the Flood and the overwhelming evidence for it in the geological record, such as the "giant ripple marks, 50 feet high and 200-500 feet apart."[1]

The Ice Age theory was proposed before the acceptance of the continental drift, which took away one of the basic claims of the Ice Age theory: that ice carved the Great Lakes and then melted to yield its massive amounts of fresh water. The continental drift suggests that freshwater from the Flood, which split the continents, also filled the basins of the Great Lakes at the same time.

Counterexamples to the Ice Age theory include:

  • many of the high, steep bluffs along the Mississippi River face southward rather than the northward direction that would result from carving by northern ice.
  • computer simulations have failed to model an Ice Age with any plausible parameters.
  • water is receding in the Great Lakes too quickly to support the time period proposed by Ice Age theory.
  • the soil in the Great Plains is too flat and soft to support a theory they were covered by glaciers.
  • "Ice Age fossils often display a strange mix of animals that would not be expected to coexist. ... Warmth-loving animals are found as fossils much farther north than they would venture today."[2]

(please add)