#70 How Rock Data Proves a Global Flood + Dr. Tim Clarey

In past episodes, we've talked about dinosaurs, we've talked about cavemen, we've talked about the flood. Today, we're gonna discuss it again with Dr.

Jim Carey. You have pulled rock well data from every major continent. When I got done with one continent,

I started to see the patterns. When I got done with two continents, I saw the same patterns in three and four. You can see a global pattern in every continent.

How do you argue, and this is a global flood, versus this is just the natural progression of soil being stratified over time?

These look like you're just depositing layers brick by brick by brick, and that's the pattern we see all over the world. We'll get into how old you think the earth is in a little bit, but.

Hello, hello. Welcome to Biblically Speaking. My name is Cassian Bellino, and I'm your host.

In this podcast, we talk about the Bible in simple terms with experts, PhDs, and scholarly theologians to make understanding

God easier. These conversations have transformed my relationship with Christ and understanding of religion.

Now, I'm sharing these recorded conversations with you. On this podcast, we talk about the facts, the history, and the translations to make the

Bible make sense so we can get to know God our creator better. Hi, it's

Cass. I wanted to first start off by saying thank you for listening. I created this because I could not find it anywhere else on the internet, and it takes a very small team and a large upfront investment to make it all possible.

I really hope that you find it valuable. I would never expect anything from my listeners, and I'm always gonna do my best to first outsource support from brands.

However, if you do find value in this episode, I invite you to contribute an amount equal to the value that you have received, either through a one -time or a monthly donation linked in the show notes below.

I understand that not everyone, though, can donate monetarily, so I ask that if you love Biblically Speaking and you cannot donate, please show your support by subscribing to this channel wherever you're listening so that it tells the hosting platform to show

Biblically Speaking to more curious and confused Christians. In exchange for the support, I personally promise to you to always create the highest quality production possible.

Thank you so much for listening. Now let's get to the show. Hello, hello. My name is Cassie Mblino, and I'm your host today for Biblically Speaking.

In past episodes, we've talked about dinosaurs, we've talked about cavemen, we've talked about the flood. If you remember,

Dr. Robert Carter explained megasequences in the rocks, and Dr. Marcus Ross talked about how fossil order might reflect where animals lived before the flood.

And even most recently, Dr. Jeff Miller emphasized why it matters theologically if the flood was global or just local.

Today, we're gonna discuss it again with Dr. Tim Carey, or sorry, Dr. Tim Clary.

My dyslexia came in. For the past 12 years, Dr. Tim Clary, you have pulled rock well data from every major continent.

You've studied the megasequences of sediment that you believe map the fingerprints of the Biblical flood.

I'm really excited to get into that with you because you have such a widespread of data throughout the world.

Just a little bit about your background and credentials to talk about this. You are a geologist with the

Institute for Creation Research. You've spent over a decade compiling this rock data across the world, and you have a

PhD in geology with a background in oil industry stratigraphy, okay.

And you've authored many books like Carved in Stone, and you lecture widely. Welcome to the show. I'm really excited to take a new perspective on this topic.

Why did you take this approach when it came to studying the flood geology in the Bible? It's kind of an unorthodox marriage to see a geologist with so much

Biblical knowledge. Well, yeah, I don't know about as much Biblical knowledge just now, but I accept the

Bible as truth. And so that's one drawback that people say, well, you're just accepting the Bible as true. But when

I started this project, I said, let's start looking at these columns, these geological columns here in the

United States. First of all, there's a data set that was produced by a lot of state geologists through an oil and gas organization.

And they put out this what's called this so -called Kosuna data, but it doesn't really matter what it's called. So in the 80s, they put together all these rock columns.

I said, why don't we start doing that? So for several years, I was trying to get some of my creation colleagues to start to compile this data.

And finally, when I came to ICR, I told Henry Morris III, who was president at the time, he's passed away since.

He was the oldest son of the founder, Henry Morris. He said, go ahead and start on that column project.

So I had to figure out how I was gonna start it and what computer program to buy. But when I started on it, I thought, well,

I know the Bible talks about a flood. And I read Henry Morris and John Whitcomb's book and a lot of that.

I knew there was evidence for the flood. But I said, I sure hope the rocks show up. It's kind of a little bit of a, you know,

I have to admit, I was a little bit of doubt that like, I hope it shows it. But when I got done with the one column and I started to see the patterns, then

I got done with two continents. I saw the same patterns in three and four. And since then, I finished six continents, compiled over 3 ,000, right around 3 ,200 columns, which are, if you drilled a well, like wherever you're at.

Now in Hawaii, it might not work as well. It's gonna have a lot of sediments there, but most states and most countries in the world, there's a lot of sedimentary rocks.

So you drill through that same rock and hit the basement or the igneous rock down there, the granite or whatever the crust is.

So I compile all that and put it into my latitude and longitude into this database. And then I have a assistant here that started as a volunteer and then we've got him on full time now.

They actually helped put him into the map. So those are the maps that I look at, but every continent really kind of shows the same pattern of a progressive flood.

And that's kind of what Henry Morris alluded to. He talked about different ecological zones as the floodwaters run higher and higher.

And that's exactly what I'm seeing. Every continent really shows a very similar pattern of beginning with just a little bit of flooding, and just burying marine fossils.

And there's the floodwaters were pushed higher, which I believe was by this catastrophic plate tectonics that happened during the flood year.

And that's another whole topic. It would take another hour to explain possibly, but it was the idea of John Baumgartner's.

But he kind of provided the mechanism that I think is the best mechanism for the flood today that we have.

So you progressively make more seafloor and you push the water up from below. And that progressively pushed the water higher and higher.

And I see a perfect match with that on the continents. The continental data is still there. The rock still shows and screams out a global flood because it would see a global pattern on every continent.

And so the mega sequences are just the way to kind of use chapters of the flood. I look at that rock layers almost as pages, but you can kind of look at the chapters.

And so there's five that I believe mega sequences that show rising. And then one is the big receding phase, which

I did for some creation scientists you might have had on the show, kind of where we end the flood. But I think that that's what the data supports.

And so it really matches what you read in Genesis 7, where the Bible talks about how water went higher, went exceedingly higher, went higher yet until it reached day 150 of the flood year when it reached a peak.

And so to me, the match between what John Baumgartner proposed as catastrophic plate tectonics and a progressive formation of new seafloor explains why these waves went higher and higher.

Tsunami waves like you're familiar with in Hawaii that went higher and higher and higher. But these tsunami waves are probably 500 foot high tsunami waves.

They weren't just a 20 foot, 40 foot, 100 foot ones that we may see today that can still kill hundreds of thousands of people as we know.

Like in the flood year, that would have been even bigger, I believe. But they didn't, you know, initially I think the first 40 days, you really weren't flooding maybe much of the land.

When you talk about this, it seems so clear. And I want to agree with you, but I am so ignorant when it comes to like geology and like how it works.

Like, you know, I studied soil, you know, but like environmental management. But when it comes to like looking at seeing like the fingerprint of a flood, what do you say to somebody that might be like,

I don't understand it, but it makes more sense that that's just how the earth formed.

Like, how do you argue, and this is a global flood versus this is just the natural progression of soil being stratified over time.

And it's the whole world. So it kind of stratified in the same way. Like, I don't think I fully understand what made you go, oh my gosh, this is different than what we thought before.

Well, we can extend these layers. Like you see Grand Canyon exposes layers for a couple hundred miles.

I don't know if you've been to Grand Canyon or not. Oh yeah. It exposes rocks. I've done a lot of rafting trips down there. It exposes the same layers over about 270 miles or so.

These rock core data, these columns can actually extend across the country and across the continent.

And ultimately I was able to correlate these. And other evolutionary scientists have correlated the mega sequences from North America to Europe, to South America.

And so it wasn't a big jump to do that because originally most of Pleistocene continents were together in some sort of a

Pangaea type thing. And so the same rocks are being deposited in the same areas, different places.

But to me, it's the pattern we see. We don't see evidence of erosion between the layers. You go to Grand Canyon, you see the red wall limestone, this big massive red limestone, on the stained red on the rocks above it.

And you look below it, there's the Muave limestone, which is Cambrian. And the red wall, so -called

Mississippian, you're looking at in evolutionary time, 160 million years of time. And there's no evidence of erosion.

And you see that again and again and again, you can extend the same rock layers across continents from Asia, Europe, wherever.

These rock units just extend. Sometimes you hit mountains where they get uplifted and folded, but for the most part, it's the lack of erosion between the layers.

They don't talk about that in the geology classes you take. They just say, oh, look at these layers stacked on top of each other. You can touch these two rock layers and there's a million years of time or 160 million years of time.

Isn't that cool? But where in the world do we get erosion that's perfectly flat? It doesn't happen that way.

These look like you're just depositing layers brick by brick by brick. And that's the pattern we see all over the world.

It's just this amazingly rapid deposition because there's no evidence of time between them.

Does that make any more sense? Across the world, all soil formation.

Yeah, there's really not evidence of soil. Yeah, I mean, soil, it takes time to build a soil.

We see that, but the evolutionary scientists do try to say there's these paleo soils, they call them, but the real evidence of that is it's kind of weak.

We don't see rooting, like coal seams, for example, are just flat top, flat bottom. The evolutionary community says they had to grow in place.

And so you should see roots in the bottom. And also you don't see that. They're just flat tops, flat bottoms. And there's even coal

I found out in the over a mile deep of water, approximately in the

South China Sea. There's coal seams out there. They're hundreds of feet thick. As they drill through these oil wells, they're finding coal seams.

So how did those grow in place when they're now in the ocean? There's no evidence that was ever exposed to the land. But we see massive coal seams offshore in between Australia and Tasmania, South China Sea, in Siberia, north of Siberia into the

Arctic Ocean. Oil wells tell the tale. They really show that there's things going on that aren't talked about in the geology textbooks.

And to me, the best way to explain all that is washing off vegetation offshore. As the water receded, in many cases, this is the upper parts of the rocks.

You wash all this material off and you bury these sediments really fast and you make these flat coal beds, just like we see on land.

So in Wyoming, there's coal beds that are over 200 foot thick that extend about 60 miles by 60 miles.

And my geology professor at Wyoming, where I went to grad school the first time for my master's, we went up on a field trip and he took a coal class and he said, we have nothing to explain this.

There's no model in the evolutionary world to explain coal seams that extensive and that thick. And we see that all around the world.

There's coal and lignite, they call it, which is low -grade coal in Europe and South America and all these places that are massively thick, that there's really no explanation for that amount of coal.

And yet the bottom of that layer is flat, the top layer is flat, which swamps have rooting and things like that.

So there's a lot of things that they don't talk about in the geology classes that I took. Maybe if you ever took a geology class, they don't talk about these things.

They just kind of tell you the story that they wanna tell. And they avoid a lot of things that you really don't even wanna think about.

Interesting. One of the things that I really liked thinking about was what Dr. Marcus Ross was talking about with the fossil order matching pre -flood habitats and how the way that we kind of think about evolution is like, oh, we started single cell and we evolved into something complex that we see today.

Today's the most complex that it could possibly be. And he flips that on his head and saying, God created so much complexity and the world before the flood looks different than the world now after the flood.

Does your data reflect the same conclusions as far as that type of pre -flood world, the fossilization of what that pre -flood world looked like and now what we see today?

Yes, it really does. Yeah, it agrees with that idea, the idea of ecological zones, which is kind of what that same idea is that early on you're only flooding limited, the lowest areas are gonna flood first as the water is being pushed out.

And those are mostly shallow cities. A lot of the United States, Midwest where I grew up was primarily a shallow sea, it appears, there's no dinosaurs there.

You only see marine fossils. And so it looks, the evolutionists, they evolved from marine fossils because that's what was buried first.

But it's very consistent. These first three mega sequences, all of them are almost all marine fossils and they're all showing just limited flooding.

They just stack on top of each other. Only North Africa, for example, is affected early in the flood. Just North Africa again and again and again, three times in a row.

And then the rest of Africa doesn't start to flood until the fourth sequence in, we just start to see land animals and coal seams start to show up.

So there's really very little coal. And why do you think that is? Just because of like elevation? I think you weren't flooding high enough yet to really hit the land at that point.

It wasn't until the Bible talks about the ark didn't start to float till after day 40. And so it might've been the first 40 days for these first three mega sequences to be deposited, but they're almost exclusively marine fossils only, shallow marine.

So it appears that there was this unique shallow water environment, ocean environment that covered big portions of the continents, but limited, like North Africa, just parts of Western South America and a lot of the

United States, but Canada wasn't being flooded until much later in the flood year.

We see the rock layers progressively all thin towards Canada. So you can see that if it was a hill, all the rock layers are gonna kind of fill in underneath.

And so you can actually map these out with these mega sequences. You can map out the progression of the flood and it also matches the fossil record.

Like Marcus Ross said, as you go higher, you start to get swampy land, and eventually coastal areas, and then eventually you get coal seams show up and you get the mixing of land and marine because you're always washing these waves in from the ocean.

So you see six species of sharks in the same racks with Tyrannosaurus rex. And it's other marine animals mixed in as well.

A lot of marine clams and things that even the evolutionists argue about that nobody recognizes these things, but there's all this mixing going on.

So in the evolutionary community will often say, well, this is a marginal marine area versus a Delta. But in their world view, everything has to be a

Delta then everything has to be a marginal marine because they see mixing, but they don't know how to explain it as well as the flood model.

I think it explains the best. So there is a progression and it progresses across the continents too. Sorry. Oh, no, sorry.

I think we, it's just like pause a little bit, but we're fine. Maybe this is like a timeout.

Like maybe this is just like geology one -on -one, but I was taught that it takes millions of years for things to fossilize.

But what we're discussing makes it sound like things are being buried and fossilized within like a year, because the flood was 40 days of rain and then like a year of being on the ship and then maybe like another hundred days of draining.

That's like tops two years. How does that work with fossils in such a short period of time when we were taught that it takes millions of years for fossils to develop?

Well, amazingly, it doesn't get a year, but you get a really short timeframe. There was an article I just wrote for the

ICR website, just a news article. It just came out a few months ago in the coast of England and Scotland, where they found a pile of slag from some industries that was being eroded by the waves.

And it was eroding and it would turn the rock from coarse rubble to rounded pebbles. So you kind of go into the rounding process, which normally they think takes a long time.

And then you're actually cementing the rock together right there, right in front of their eyes. And they found artifacts in there to show this all happened in less than 35 years.

They found coins and things like that to show. And they're just like, this is amazing. The quotes from the people that published this paper said, we thought this took thousands or millions of years to happen, but it's all happening in just a couple of decades so they can make, go from loose material to solid rock in less than 35 years.

So I don't have a problem with it happening in a couple of years. I don't know if the rock literally turned to stone until maybe a few years after the flood or by the water draining off.

Did it push a lot of water that had a lot of chemicals in it and help cement it faster? I mean, that's a possibility as well.

That's one thing we need to look at more. I don't have a problem with loose sediment turning to rock very, very quickly.

But one thing that we haven't discussed, you know, that really nobody's discussed is why the rocks offshore are not cemented.

They're just packed down sediment. So it's really kind of strange. Offshore, you have the sediment is just clay and packed down sand, thousands and thousands of feet in the

Gulf of Mexico, Gulf of America, whatever we're calling it this year. It's, you know, 30 ,000 feet of sediment and it's really not rock.

But on shore, those same rocks are cemented. So there's something about cementing with exposure to the air or something.

I'm not sure exactly why, but it can happen very, very quickly. Okay. We'll get into how old you think the earth is in a little bit, but just kind of moving forward with the flood.

And this is something that I feel like I know what you're gonna say, but as an early Christian, as like a Sunday school

Christian, it's one of those things where you're like, oh, they've heard whispers. So like, I want an expert to explain it simply is that some do argue that, okay, maybe

Genesis is like an allegory. Maybe it's just a story to represent that we talk about part of like our creation myth.

And maybe it's just like a local flood, but like for the people that were writing the Bible, it seemed like a global flood because it was so big.

What evidence can you objectively provide that shows it was global?

Well, biblically, any time it's referred to it as a special word, Mabul, which is a Hebrew word that really implies it's a different flood than any other time the floods used talking about this one flood event.

The other thing in the Bible, they talk about birds being brought on the ark. Why would you bring birds on the ark? You know,

God specifically mentions birds in the text several times bringing on birds. Birds could have just flown away if it was a local flood.

Even Noah and his family could have, you know, migrated in the 80 to 100 years. I think people estimate that it took to build the ark.

He could have left. You know, he could have easily gone to another country, another region of the world. And anytime it's referred to in the

Old Testament, the New Testament as well, like in 2 Peter 3, it talks about the world that then was overflowed with water perished.

I mean, it's always referring to the world, not just, you know, their visible world.

But again, you got to think about why did they take birds? Why did they take these animals down there? And then the geology to me shows that everything was happening on every continent at the same approximate time, the same fossils being buried about the same approximate time all over the world.

To me, each continent I looked at was, it just kept reaffirming what I learned from the first continent.

And so to me, as a geologist, it was almost like a Christmas present. Every time I get a continent done, I'd open it up and go look at the maps and go, wow, it's showing the same thing.

So to me, biblically, every time it's referred to, it's a global flood, you know, it's just the whole world.

There's no indications otherwise. Say it's allegory, it's written very historic. You know, it talks about Noah was this old and this month, this day.

That's how we can calculate it out, you know, 40 days into the flood, you know, a year into the flood.

Day 150, the flood reached a peak. And then it took until I think day 314, in Genesis 8, 13, it says,

Noah lucked out, the earth was dry. In the Hebrew there implies the Hebrew verb, my

Hebrew experts here at High Sierra, told me that it means it's a perfect verb, which means the process was done.

So the earth was dry, but they didn't get off the ark until day 371, if you count up the days and the months.

So they had to wait for vegetation to grow. So why get off the ark if it's just barren, you know, dry soil, even though the water drained off, there's nothing to eat.

And so all the food's on the ark. So God made them wait until day 371 to get off the ark. But it's written all historically.

There's no, you know, if it's gonna be a story, it'd be things like, you know, the account of Gilgamesh or something like that, where they just have a kind of a wild story that couldn't possibly be true in terms of, you know, monsters and things like that.

But there's a lot of - I'm glad that you mentioned Gilgamesh, because I think that that's what some Christians are. You know, we kind of have this like bad habit of being like, you know, we could be the secondary story and they could be the one true story.

So flood, like other stories in other religions are going to have, you know, very similar stories to us.

Like the flood of Gilgamesh is the most famous, but I was just learning the other day that like most other creation stories, like even

Egyptian references a flood in the past. Running my own podcast, I'm always moving too fast.

I'm finding guests, I'm editing episodes, I'm creating reels or guesting on other shows. Not to mention,

I just live in a world that moves fast. Notifications, trends, endless to -do lists. You know what feels like a blessing in all that?

Slowing down. I'd love nothing more than a moment to pause, be present and choose something timeless.

That's exactly what Dwell Label is all about. When I first discovered Dwell Label, it wasn't just about the clothes.

It was about a mindset, thoughtful, intentional fashion that doesn't scream for attention, but instead invites you to slow down.

Their pieces are modern takes on classic styles made to last, not just for the season, but for years. I love that I can throw on a

Dwell Label outfit for editing in a coffee shop, Bible studies, or looking professional in an interview.

It always feels right. Comfortable, effortless, elevated. And here's the best part. Dwell Label does not just talk about rest.

They live it. Their website literally doesn't work on Sundays because they believe in pausing, in dwelling on what matters most.

So if you're looking for high quality, timeless fashion that aligns with a lifestyle of intention and presence,

I can't recommend Dwell Label enough. Shop Dwell Label with the link in the show notes and use my code

BIVSPEAK15, B -I -V -S -P -E -A -K 15 for an exclusive discount at checkout.

Take a breath, slow down, and dwell in the good things. Now back to the show. So how do, is there like a scientific way geologically that we can use as Christians to be like, no, no,

Christian, Noah's flood in Genesis. That is the real story. Everything else, copycats.

Well, I think that some of that has to do with faith. You gotta believe that God's word is true. And even though Gilmagesh might've been written down before Moses compiled the book of Genesis, that's the argument.

It was written first, but that doesn't always work that way. It doesn't mean just because you wrote it down first doesn't mean you have that most accurate account.

And so I do think that, you know, there's been no inconsistencies found in the Bible in terms of science. You know, the

Bible is not a science book. Everything in there has been shown to be true in terms of even the hydrologic cycle and ocean currents in Psalm 8, 8.

These, you know, all these things that God puts in there, these little tidbits have actually been shown to be very, very true.

Nothing's really been shown to the contrary. So, you know, a little bit of faith has to be involved as well.

But to me, the account in Genesis matches exactly with the geology I see. That's part of the reason why

I get so excited about it is that it really does show the global nature of the flood.

You know, how do you explain every continent? The same pattern, the same order of rocks, pancakes on temperature.

There was, you know, no evidence of time between most of the layers. And all over the world, the identical time.

I put that forth out there to critics and they just say, well, Tim, we like your data.

We just don't like your interpretation. But then they don't offer an alternative. They just say, well, here's the standard, you know, evolutionary story, blah, blah, blah, blah.

And they go with that. And unfortunately, there's so many Christians that are only taught the old earth view that they seem to want to have to buy into the, okay, this must be an allegory.

Don't really take Genesis 1 to 11 literally. But I think it is written as history.

It's written, you know, days, months, even the creation week. You know, it was morning, it was evening the first day. It was morning, evening the second day.

I don't know how God could have made it more clear. And in Exodus 20, 11, with his own hand, in the 10 commandments, he says,

God made everything in six days. You know, he could have said six long periods of time. You know, God, you'd think he has a pretty good command of the language.

He could have used a different word, but he always used the word day. And the morning, the evening, the numbers, you know, it's hard to argue otherwise, but people still do.

I know well -meaning Christians. They just like, well, God was just kind of giving us the general idea.

But even in, you know, these cultures all over the world, every culture, every major culture has a flood story. But I think only the

Bible got it right because it really ties back directly to, you know, your faith in the Bible as being true.

But the Chinese, the characters, I have this in some of my Carving the Stone book. The characters in that actually, some of their basic characters have to do with the flood and eight people in a boat.

And so they don't even realize that what they're writing, when they write in Chinese, the exact,

I don't know what they call it. Their written language is, a lot of it's tied back to eight people on a boat in a flood.

And so one Chinese immigrant became a

Christian because he realized that. He never knew it was right there all along. You know, talking about what's in the Bible. And so he turned his life to Christ because of that.

So it was - Wait, what did he realize that - He realized that a lot of this Chinese language, his character is in the chapter 20 in my book here, if I can find it.

But it's in here. You've got the textbook right here. Chapter 20, it's in there. And it's actually referring to some work that another one of my colleagues did who just passed away,

James Johnson. But he compiled this where he shows that, and other people have done this. I'm not sure his source ultimately shows that the written

Chinese language, actually a lot of it is tied back to a flood and eight people and a boat. And so they kind of have it all in there as well.

So you can look through that if you get a chance. Different pieces they put together into what they write.

So I'm not a Chinese language expert anyway. I just report what other people have done. But to me, it all kind of verifies that these legends, you know, whether you're in South America, wherever you're at in North America, all the native tribes, they all had some sort of a story that they passed down orally.

Many of them, of course, didn't have a written language for a long time. And so I think just like the old telephone game where you tell somebody, you tell somebody, you tell somebody, you tell somebody, eventually the story kind of gets a little distorted.

And I believe, you know, the Holy Spirit inspired Moses to write the right story, even though it might've been written after Gilmagesh.

But you're always gonna get critics who are gonna complain like, well, it's written afterwards, or they just copied it, made it sound like, you know, they're the important people, but God chose the

Israelites. He chose Abraham, you know, as his chosen people, because he had enough faith to leave and head towards what became the, you know, the

Holy Land. But people ask me about the Holy Land. I mean, well, go ahead. They ask me stuff about Garden of Eden.

Where's the Garden of Eden? I'm like, I don't know. You know, I've studied - I thought we knew that that was in the Fertile Crescent. No? Well, no, they just renamed a lot of, you know, rivers that were mined above pre -flood rivers,

I think. Where they landed is, you know, Henry Morris figured out they're in kind of the center of the world today, after the continents were moved during the flood year.

They're still centrally located. But they needed the ice age to, of course, drop sea level enough, suck up enough water into these big glaciers to lower the ocean enough, almost 400 feet or so to get land bridges to get everything back, animals back.

And you could walk from France over to Ireland. You can walk from Siberia, you know,

Asia over to Alaska. And I think that's, God had a plan, even how to repopulate after the flood.

It was all set up by the conditions of the flood, but that'd be another hour. We don't want to go down there.

But it's really fascinating how it all ties together like dominoes. God started the process. We're splitting the fountains of the deep.

And I think those are the initial breakups of the plates. And Earth's the only planet with plates, by the way. And those plates moved,

I think, rapidly. And John Baumgartner's models all showed that they would move rapidly under the conditions that we have.

But the evolutionary scientists, they look at his data and they're like, well, there's nothing wrong with his math. They just can't believe it.

You go back 50 years, even the time I was born, 60 -something years ago, nobody believed in plate tectonics.

They didn't think anything was moving. So it wasn't that long - 50 years ago, they didn't believe in plate tectonics? Yeah, 60 years ago, 50, 60 years ago, nobody believed in any sort of plate tectonics.

What did they believe? They just, nothing? They just thought, they had weird theories. They had weird theories where you load up a lot of sediment, eventually so much sediment, it pushes down a crust and then it kind of springs back up and makes mountains.

And they had some really strange theories in the 1950s and 40s and before. I want to take a minute and say thank you to the recording service that has made this podcast possible,

Riverside. When I started my podcast, I had literally no idea what I was doing. And I just wanted a single way to record, edit, and share content without wasting time on different platforms.

Then a friend suggested Riverside to me and I'll tell you what, it was literally an answer to prayer.

With just one login, I can record my interviews with scholars, clip interview moments and drills for Instagram and TikTok, and post directly onto my

RSS feed and Spotify, all without the extra downloads, platforms, all of it. So for the curious and confused people like me, the best part is that the crew at Riverside actually listens to their users when they need help.

I wanted an editing preset to save time on creating real templates and they listened. They literally implemented a new feature.

And since using Riverside, my social clips have reached over a million people each month. And I haven't even unlocked all the features yet.

Live streaming is gonna be next. So if you're considering starting a podcast or you just need to edit at a pro level for content or interviews,

I cannot recommend Riverside enough. If this is helpful for you, I ask that you click the affiliate link

I provided in the show notes description. It costs nothing extra to you and it gives a small kickback to me, which helps the channel stay alive.

Thank you so much. Now back to the show. And it wasn't - Like what discovery changed their mind?

Well, it was the oceans. They started studying the oceans after World War II. And they started mapping out the oceans and seeing there's these big ridges down there that run the whole length of the oceans.

And nobody had a map of the ocean till after I was born. Nobody made a map of the ocean floor. They knew that it was deeper here and shallower here and individual points, but nobody had a map until like 1964 or 1962, something like that.

And so it's amazing to think about, not that long ago. And at that time, nobody believed in moving plates or moving seafloor or anything.

Today, they're moving this fast per year, but John Baumgartner showed that just a couple of centimeters today, during the flood year, it'd be moved several yards per second.

And his math supports that. And we see, to confirm it, in the last 20 years, they've done all the seismic tomography, which is a way to image the mantle, but shoot and say, wait for earthquakes, big earthquakes to send energy into the mantle.

And as they image all that, they see these cold slabs that come from the surface, the ocean crust go all the way down to the core.

You know, it's 1800 miles or so down and they're still cold. They're showing the same density all the way down.

So there is some confirmation of this idea of runaway, fast subduction and movement. And because these things shouldn't still be cold after 75 million years or so to get down there at today's rates, those things still wouldn't show the cold temperatures that they are.

And so that's one thing that's never really been explained by the evolutionary community is how do you have these really cold slabs and blobs of rock down right on top of the core that must've gone down quickly to maintain their temperature.

Because you're looking at over 3000 degrees difference or more between the surf, you know, just below the surface and all the way down.

And so I'm curious about carbon dating because that's something that - Oh yeah, carbon dating. Yes, that's another -

Yeah, yeah, that old thing. Because I think like most - Well, that's the biggest argument people have. I think, you know,

Rob Carter said the biggest argument for the whole earth is radiometric dating. Right. And that is probably true, but I think there's a lot of assumptions built into that.

The carbon dating is only used for young things. So you agree that it's flawed or you think that we should trust it? Pardon me?

Do you believe - Do you think carbon dating is flawed to a point or do you think we can trust it? To a point,

I think you can trust carbon 14 dating for a couple thousand years because carbon 14 dating is different than all other radiometric dating methods.

It's you're measuring the atmospheric carbon 14 ratio to the carbon 12 and carbon 13.

And so there's different isotopes of carbon. The other ones are stable. Carbon 14 is being created by the ultraviolet radiation and you've probably heard all that before.

But nonetheless, we're taking today's ratio and projecting the past. So we can go back a few thousand years and be pretty safe.

But eventually things start to take off and they had to try to flatten those curves a little bit with tree rings, but even tree rings gets a little subjective after a while if you go back thousands of years.

And so I trust carbon 14 maybe for 3000 years or so. I think you can date a lot of Egyptian artifacts and King Tut and things like that as long as you have some carbon.

Because once something dies, a plant or an animal, they stop taking in carbon 14. So what's there starts to decay away and you measure how little that's left compared to today's ratio.

Whereas most, well, go ahead. Yeah, so one of the things that stood out with the conversation with Robert Carver was the

Halstead disaster and how that had, was maybe I'm saying it wrong, the

Halstead disaster that basically showed that there was, we're clearly tracking something that's older, but it's because of carbon dating showing that it's younger than something else.

And so because of like, it kind of hit a wall that basically said, we can't really carbon date up until this point because this is where the errors pop up.

Right, we use that like 1950 as well because the atmospheric, we set off enough nuclear bombs to kind of mess it up a little bit.

We used to set them off in the atmosphere in the forties and stuff and that kind of started messing things up. But basically they're relying on consistency.

They try to project that back to eternity, but carbon -14 decays away. Half of it decays away.

They call it half -life every 5 ,700 years. So every 5 ,700 years, give or take a few years, you lose half of it.

And so if something dies and it's really old, if they think it's a dinosaur, for example, they think it's millions of years old, there shouldn't be any carbon -14 in it.

There shouldn't be any in coal if they think it's millions of years old. But if they're finding measurable carbon -14 in coal, in dinosaurs, every sample pretty much they send in.

You send them into these labs, don't tell them what it is, and they'll find measurable carbon -14 showing these things are even diamonds.

ICR had a big rate project about 20 years ago. They sent a bunch, I think 15 or 20 diamonds to different labs and they found measurable carbon in diamonds.

And how do you contaminate a diamond? They argued, is this all contamination? But the amount they find is much bigger than the instrument contamination.

And the people that have done studies on that as well, to me, carbon -14 becomes our friend in some ways because carbon -14 shows that these things can't be that old.

They can't be millions of years old. Just like the original dinosaur proteins and collagens and blood vessels and cells we're finding in dinosaurs and fossils of worms that go back supposedly 500 million years to find original proteins.

How do they survive all that time? Again, the evolutionary community is kind of like, we don't know, but they still won't give up on their date, millions of years.

But there is strong evidence of a young earth. If you are objective, if you don't have your mind made up and you're looking at it, you're like, it's pretty clear that these fossils can't be that old.

It's pretty clear that these plates moved out of the earth not long ago. That is exactly my next question, is that how do you compress what we're commonly taught today?

Millions of years old. What is it? 4 .6 billion years old is the current age of the year according to the most secular science.

How do you compress it to which age do you think it is? Because you're a young earth creationist. So it's not 4 .6

billion. You think it's what age and how do you compress everything into that?

Well, I would say about 6 ,000 years because maybe give or take a few hundred years based on the genealogies in the

Bible. To me, if you read the Bible and you didn't know anything about modern science, you would say the earth is young.

Just like Bishop Usher did, he came up with a pretty good date. I don't know about the exact day he chose,

I think a day in October or something like that. But nonetheless, I don't put it much beyond 6 ,000 years.

I don't have a problem because the flood was a one -time event. The flood was this massive earth changing event, the biggest event since the creation.

It resurfaced the earth, moved the continents around, made new ocean floors, moved everything around in this one year.

People don't realize how big the flood was. Even the crust of the earth was melting in many places that I'm seeing as the magmas were coming up.

All over, you see intrusions of magmas all across the exposed crust in Canada, the bottom of Grand Canyon. Amazing movements that were taking place, even the mountains.

As the water was receding, you had 20 ,000 or more feet of uplift, real rapid uplift that would have been tremendous earthquakes.

But fortunately, they were still in the ark while most of this was going on. And so they didn't have to experience all that.

But to me, it's just the right conditions. Just like you can make rocks fast under the right conditions, you can deposit rocks fast.

They even find clay is deposited by moving water. So when they do flume experiments about clays and they do flume experiments with limestone, carbonate, they're finding in flume experiments in the 2000s.

There's a guy at Indiana University. He does a lot of flume experiments showing people that to get these layered rocks, you gotta have moving water.

Even if it's not really fast, about a foot or so per second. Which you know, you're moving along pretty good about every second.

That's not real high rate. But it doesn't just slowly settle out of a stagnant water supply like most people believe.

Well, that happens too. But to deposit the layers we see, the rock with these thin layers called laminations, you have to have moving water.

So everything we see has conditions that to create it shows evidence of movement, of rapid deposition, layer upon layer with no evidence of time in between the layers.

You know, you add it all up and say, hmm, you can't do this quick, but it's just imagine we're taught to think small.

We make God small, we make everything kind of small because we're finite beings. And I think we make the flood way too small.

Even I struggle with making the flood small, even though I looked at rocks all over the world and I see the same thing happening in every, you know, the same pancake layers being deposited everywhere.

I still, to me, I just can't imagine an event that big, but I, you know, you have to have some faith too, that these conditions were there.

It's a one -time event that changed the world in a year's time. And ultimately it was a judgment for the, you know, the wickedness of humanity.

You know, humans were so wicked. And I think that's one of the reasons why he separated the continents. We wouldn't get in trouble right away again.

He kind of separated humanity a little bit, got us apart from each other. It's just so strange because kind of like we make it small is this was a global catastrophe event that reshaped the earth.

Why don't most scientists talk about it like it was as catastrophic and earth formulating and earth changing?

Is it because it would acknowledge a sense of faith? Like it should be something that we talk about kind of like, oh yes, this was like a secular, like this was a milestone in world history.

Why don't we talk about it? It's only reserved for Christians in the Bible when it fundamentally changed everything in our living sphere.

You know, why isn't it referenced more often, more commonly, regardless of the acknowledgement of faith?

Or do you feel like most of the scientific community doesn't acknowledge it, despite the data showing that it happened because then they would have to acknowledge faith?

Yes, the latter part was exactly it. And that's what happened about the end of the 18th century, early 19th century, geology people that were formulating the science of geology, which wasn't even really a science yet.

They were seeing how slow erosion is today and how slow deposition is today. And they're going, well, these layers must have taken millions of years, even before they had ways to measure millions of years, they were talking millions of years.

I think it's because nobody can imagine a million years. So they went to the extreme beyond what you can even imagine. It's almost like monopoly money.

Went from real money to monopoly money real quick, even before they could come up with dates to do it. So they want, but some of the writings of these early people coming up with the science of geology said, we want to get the writings of Moses out of science.

They want to get rid of that idea of catastrophism, any sort of catastrophe at all. Whereas before that, all scientists, you know,

Newton, all these people, they all believed in the global flood and they believed the earth was about 6 ,000 years old and they had no problem with any of it.

But it started with the scientists, the geology, people coming up with the idea, like James Hutton started coming up with deep time because he saw, well, this must've taken a long time to deposit these layers and they got uplifted and eroded.

And, you know, he forgets that there was that special year where things were totally out of the ordinary, an extraordinary year of deposition and erosion and everything going on really, really rapidly.

And he purposely went through and said, okay, if this took so many years, and then that idea was taken by Darwin about 50 years later and said, we have all this time, then we have time for evolution to happen.

So maybe we can explain all of life by, you know, some sort of cell that appears and goes through all this thing, but you need both.

It's like a pillar of deep time and you need evolution to go. If you take one of them away, everything collapses. So the evolutionary world that most of science today is never gonna give up on deep time, no matter what the evidence shows, no matter how many fossils you have that show original tissues that are there, they just stick.

Well, we just don't know how to explain how long they survive. And so we don't know how to explain how those deep floods are still down in the ocean.

But one thing I didn't touch on was, yeah, I kind of believe carbon -14 is good for a few thousand years, but I don't believe most of the other methods are any good at all.

The traditional methods to date the earth for billions of years are like, you know, using uranium and lead, rubidium and strontium ratios, all these other methods that have much bigger half -lives, you know, like half -million -year half -lives or half -a -billion -year half -lives and things like that.

So to date the old rocks, they have to, and there's no rocks that old on earth. They have to use meteorites and some of the moon rocks are dated that, and they just assume it's the same age.

But those dates are all flawed as well, because you're looking at a couple of basic assumptions just to get started, to get to where you can do the math.

And it sounds very accurate, they teach it very factual, like, unfortunately, they can say dinosaurs went extinct 66 million years ago now, but it used to be 65, you know, a decade ago.

So they, you know, what's a million years? And so they're always changing the numbers a little bit, but those numbers come from different isotopes where they think they can determine how much original parent was there and how much his daughter was there.

But they forget that, as I studied groundwater geology from my dissertation, there's groundwater flowing through everything all the time.

I was moving about 50 feet per year. So you're always flushing the system out, you're always moving things in, moving things out, you're moving in.

Minerals are coming and minerals are going. You can't close anything off and say, okay, this is exactly what we have. And they try different methods, isochrons, but even those are more of a, they're a curve, you know, from one extreme to the next.

They're not, they don't really give you, you have to start with assumptions and those assumptions, you can't go back and verify.

And so I don't believe that those dates are right. That's why when we send samples off, like ICR did, they got same rock, three different methods, they got three different answers.

I mean, completely out of whack. And so eventually you gotta say, well, this one's no good, this one's no good, this one's close to what we think it is, so we're going with that one.

So once they have the kind of general order of how many millions of years they had, they kind of, now you can't change that much.

So you have to find new dates. You can't, you know, the tree's already built. And so, you know, as a scientist, you can't go in and say, no, these are all wrong.

They're 6 ,000 years old. And most of the evolutionary community will never go for that because they're so taught over a decade after decade after decade.

Earth is billions of years old. These methods are real, but you can't verify any of them. And what's amazing is when they have dated known volcanic eruptions, they did this, and these are evolutionary publications.

And a little bit by Steve Austin, who used to work at ICR. He dated the Mount St. Helens eruption. But you can go back and see all these historic eruptions in Hawaii, where you live, and other places around the world,

Italy, you know, 1 ,000 years ago, 2 ,000 years ago. When they sent them into these labs, they got millions of years.

Pretty much every one of them was way out of whack. Hundreds of thousands or millions of years. And so to me, when you aren't getting the right numbers on things we know the age of, how can you argue this stuff's factual?

How can you argue that this is real? You know, these are real accurate dates. I don't believe you can say that.

You can maybe put them in relative order, but you can't really. And so I don't have a problem with Earth being 6 ,000 years old at all because I think these age dates are all flawed.

They're all based on assumptions. It's like if you're a mathematician, I don't know if you're a mathematician, Tessian, but if you remember in math class, you had to have two equations.

If you had X and Y. I consider math cruel and unusual punishment. I survived and I got out.

Yeah, I got to the point where I got it. So I took a lot more of it because there was no labs. Geology, a lot of labs take a lot of time.

But if you have two equations, you can solve two unknowns, X and Y. So you need two. If you have four equations, you can solve four unknowns.

So they have four unknowns. They assume two answers, boom, boom, and they can solve it. So it sounds accurate, it sounds scientific, but you can't go back and verify it.

You've made assumptions just to get to that point, how much parent was there, how much daughter was there. Again, you can't isolate anything.

You can't say it's a closed system, just like we can't isolate and dispose of our nuclear waste or hazardous waste without it leaking somewhere.

Everything leaks because there's always movement going on. Over millions of years, how can you say that these things never changed decay rate?

I mean, there's just so many things that they have to assume, but it works for them because they wanna make the earth old.

So therefore they don't argue with it, they just accept it. With these questions,

I feel like it brings up a lot of common questions that I actually asked the audience to submit. And so I feel like this is gonna be some easy tosses for you but very interesting things that I see all the time from the audience and people that comment this.

So it's just gonna be rapid fire, I4 questions for you. And I have a feeling it might just take us to the end because I'm so excited to let you cook and pop off.

I get off on rants a little bit. No, and you should, you're so smart. So I want you to talk not me.

Okay, so real quick, animals on the ark, how did they fit? Because Miller's gonna say that God helped, but Carter's gonna say there's a natural solution.

Where do you land? How did it work logistically? I think there's plenty of room on the ark. There's a guy that did a feasibility study that ICR helped fund.

And you gotta think about, you don't need every species. You just need the kinds. Whatever the biblical kind was, we're not really sure, but a lot of people think it might've been like the family.

So you need to like, maybe just a couple of dog kinds, a couple of cat kinds, a couple of, each of the animals, you wouldn't need every variety,

I think, just that we don't need every. I always, when I talk to an audience, I'll say, look, everybody around here, we all look different.

And if an anthropologist found our bones, he'd say there's five species in here because anything different, they name a new species.

So you get a little bit difference in a bone and a dinosaur, oh, that's a new species. But really there's only about 60 to maybe 80 kinds of dinosaurs out there.

They're just new varieties of the same thing over and over and over. So you would only need maybe 120 to 140, maybe 160 dinosaurs on the ark.

And God probably brought juveniles. We actually did the math because we love math. And we took a database, 300 and some dinosaurs and figured out that the average size of an adult dinosaur is about the same as the

American bison or the buffalo we commonly call. But that's the adult size. And so the juvenile size would have been more like a sheep.

So there's plenty of room for the dinosaurs, plenty of room for all the animals. You don't need to bring every variety of every kind, just the major groups and kinds that, and God brought the animals to the ark.

No, we didn't have to go out there and find them all. The Bible says animals - Yeah, it's hard to imagine like a T -Rex next to like a bunch of dogs and cats and not eating them on the ark.

Yeah, but the T -Rex might've been the size of you and I, the juvenile or something, not that big. And then it got off.

And there is evidence of dinosaurs after the flood. That's another old topic in itself as well. You can read

Job 40 and 41, and you can see lots of carvings and paintings in Egypt and places that look like dinosaurs all around the world.

And that's, to me, there's ample evidence, circumstantial. Okay, so you think

Leviathan and I forget the other one. Behemoth. Behemoth. Behemoth, yeah.

So I've discussed that with other scholars and they said that that was just Jewish language for kind of like a large entity, like a monster, like a,

I don't wanna say dragon, like a Godzilla. Like a mythological type of thing, yeah. And that's one of the things.

I think they're real. I think God's describing, you read through it, it's very specific. He talks about the specific parts of those animals, like particularly the behemoth, talking about the stomach and how it ate grass like an ox.

And they actually found out that dinosaurs, these long -necked dinosaurs, in 2005 they found dung in India, the fossilized dinosaur dung, with the bones of these big long -necked dinosaurs and they had five species of grass.

And so up until that point, evolutionists didn't believe grass had evolved at that point because it's hard to fossilize grass. But in the dawn, just like horse droppings, you can see what the animal ate.

And so these long -necked animals really were eating grass, which there's no fossil grass until much, much, much later in the rock record when we know it was already existed.

So there's a lot of things that pop up that I put in my books and stuff that people would just slough off and like, oh, that's nice, but they missed the point that it's backing up what the

Bible says. Again, it's confirming the Bible. And that's what we do at ICR, we use science to confirm the

Bible. But like I said, when I started, I sure was glad to show that the evidence, the rock evidence really does show a flood because I believed it.

And I knew it was a global flood from the Bible, and the rocks really do show it. That's the amazing part,

I think. That was a close one. No, it wasn't close. I had a moment of doubt.

And so I'll admit to a little bit of moment of doubt where I'm like, I hope it shows this, but boy, it sure did. It's that classic, like, if God doesn't show up,

I look insane. Yeah, but 10, 12 years later, it's like, wow, every continent does the same thing.

It's just like, how do you explain it any other way besides a global event? Something global was going on, and buried the same animals, like Dr.

Ross said, same animals at the same elevations approximately at the same time, because the water is going to go up universally.

It's going to flood the same environments all over the world at the same time, and that's why the fossils reflect that.

Rapid changes because you're changing complete ecosystems. There's no extinctions. It's just you wipe out the dinosaurs, boom, they're gone, and you go to the next ecosystem, the higher elevation ecosystem, and you just have to put more of the mammals on top of that.

And so these rapid changes, the so -called extinctions are really just major shifts in what's being buried globally at the time from one ecological zone or one biome to the next type of thing.

So it's really, really fascinating. It really does work. I mean, to me, it's... In the last chapter of my book, in this carbon stone, it says it all makes sense because I had a moment of clarity.

I'm not really that smart. I just couldn't problem -solve. God gave me the ability to problem -solve and kind of put things together, and I studied hard, but he has blessed me with, well,

I guess maybe some understanding in terms of science, but it all kind of clicked one day when I was out running, when

I used to be able to run before I got arthritis. Now I have to use elliptical, and it's not quite the same, and I miss being out running.

But anyway, it all kind of works. It all, you know, this happened, and this happened, and this happened.

It's almost like dominoes falling, like I talked about earlier, all the way through the flood and then into the ice age.

You know, God had a plan even to repopulate everything in the ice age, by lowering sea level because the water got hot and more rain evaporation, and he even talks about during the time of Abraham, Egypt was well -watered.

There was no desert. There was no deserts anywhere for maybe over a thousand years after the flood because everything was rain, rain, rain because the oceans were still so hot from making that new seafloor.

And then in the north, you had all these volcanoes that were going off, like they're putting off all these ash and aerosols. You were cool in the earth enough to, the rain was coming down as snow in the north, and that built up into big ice sheets, probably within a few hundred years, you had a full -blown ice age going on that lasted just long enough for humans and animals to repopulate, even though they were disobeying if the

Tower of Babel got into, tell them to spread out and get going, they're gonna miss those opportunities.

But eventually, of course, we sailed back and forth. But I think there would be no animals here, no big animals would have made it to North America if it wasn't for that ice age.

It allowed them to walk across, and even in Ireland and Scotland and from Europe, they could walk right across, and then the water came up, sealed everything off.

And I alluded to that earlier, I think part of the reason for that is He wanted us to not get in so much trouble, spread the humans out a little bit so they wouldn't get in so much trouble right away like we would have at the

Tower of Babel. And so God, He knew how wicked we get, and we're together, and you see the wickedness in the world today by the internet, and people can communicate globally instantly, and it's just how it's being turned to wickedness,

Satan is using it to spread lies and get people in trouble, and a lot of evil happens because of that.

I think too much communication too quickly. Some of it's good, obviously, but some of it is used nefariously.

Okay, I have to ask about dinosaurs. I thought they were all wiped out. It's very hard to think of dinosaurs and then people walking around at the same time, because again,

I was taught there was dinosaurs, and then there were humans. So paint the picture for me of what your data shows.

Okay, the data shows that dinosaurs and humans lived in separate areas, and so we don't see humans buried in the pre -flood world.

They lived in lower elevation, swampy areas. You don't see horses, camels, anything like that with dinosaurs either.

You see some squirrels and beaver -like animals with dinosaurs that lived in the wetland areas, but most of the cows and things that we think of as these mammals and rhinos, they wouldn't appear in the rocks until later.

And so just like humans, I think they're living at higher elevation with most of the flowering plants that are shown in the rock record later.

Most of the dinosaurs are living near their food source got made for them, which are these non -flowering plants. Many of them are extinct today.

Many of these plants went extinct as well during the flood. A lot of them, there's enough plants, but kind of a complete change of plant type.

Mostly the world's dominated now by flowering plants, whereas I think before that was only certain areas. So you can kind of see in the rocks that the layering of the fossils, you can actually see the plants changing as well, which matches that.

But dinosaurs and humans, I don't think we're really in... Dinosaurs weren't gonna go too far from their food source.

They're all supposed to eat plants, even T -Rex. That was the original plan. No animals ate each other until after Adam and Eve sinned.

And then they started eating each other. Yes, that was... Well, you read the Bible, it says all these herbs that King James says, all the herbs for food.

So there was no... Because plant death isn't considered like animal death with the shedding of blood.

And so it wasn't until Adam and Eve sinned that brought death into the world. Like it says in Romans 5, 12, there was no death until Adam sinned.

By one man, death is brought into the world. And eating plants wasn't considered death.

So the food source for humans and all animals was plants originally.

And then how quickly they sinned, then everything started to go... Even the animal world started getting very violent and wicked.

They started eating each other. We have evidence of dinosaurs chewing on each other with the bone scratches and chomping.

And so we know that there's bones stuck in dinosaurs that healed over teeth and things like that.

So we know that was happening in the pre -flood world. But humans were still living in a different area, along with most of the mammals that we live with today even.

And so when the water reached higher, of course, it wiped out the dinosaurs. Then it went to that next level and that buried all the mammals, like pigs and horses and cows, and all these mammals and rhinos on top of the dinosaur bones where we have them.

I think that was part of the receding phase. But after the flood, humans and dinosaurs had to live in the same area because there was no place for them to go and live in their own separate area.

And so they were more in conjunction, I think. So some of the humans were killing dinosaurs. You hear about St. George and the dragon, these types of things.

The knight in shining armor killing these beasts that look a lot like dinosaurs. When they paint the pictures of dinosaurs, they show the legs coming straight down.

Even these carvings back in the time of Mesopotamia, they show the legs coming straight down on these big, long -necked animals, which we didn't know until 1841.

That's a divine way of a dinosaur. When you say legs coming down, you mean like standing? Standing, almost like a mammal.

So dinosaurs stood with their legs coming straight down, very close together, unlike sprawling alligators and crocodiles today that spread and what, their legs go up and down.

For dinosaurs were defined in 1841 by Sir Richard Owen as reptiles that walked erect, upright.

So they didn't drag their tails, they didn't drag their bellies, they didn't drag their bodies. They were very leggy animals.

And so they, and their footprints verify that they're very close together, just like you and I walk. And so it's just like, we walk on a beach, you leave footprints close together, you're not walking and sprawling.

That's the way dinosaurs are. One -legged or two -legged, they all walk about the same way. It's pretty fascinating. This last question,

I mean, I have a million more questions, but just for out of time, I think that this, no, you'll come back, you'll come back.

No, it's - I don't have ADHD on my part of my life. My wife's a kindergarten teacher, she diagnosed me with it. I never knew it.

We have a problem when there's two ADHD people. I know what you're saying. It's okay, Kasey, it's okay.

Okay, so why don't we see flood fossils forming today? Like this is, again, just out of total ignorance, it might be obvious, but like it feels like that's something that happened, but no longer happens.

Correct me if I'm wrong. You're correct, because you don't have the conditions today that we had in the flood year. You don't have this massive, you know, ocean water being advanced, pushed out of the land, these massive floods.

You get little floods, even the devastating flood that happened here in Texas, you know, a few months ago that killed, unfortunately, over a hundred people.

You still don't see the effects. Those are just local little events compared to a global flood year, where you're pushing sediments and waves from, you know, hundreds of tsunamis a day being pushed down to the continents over and over and over, and then there's water that's pushing up from below, like the bottom of your bathtub going up.

The water's gotta go higher and higher. The water keeps coming up. It keeps going higher and higher. So that's why we see a very stratified geologic column with different ecological zones as well.

But you need special conditions to make a fossil. You have to bury things fast and deep. And that's very few places today we get that.

You know, you might get a big landslide somewhere locally, maybe bury things deep enough to become a fossil in the future.

And you gotta let groundwater percolate through to, you know, change the bone sometimes to a petrified part of it, but still some of the inside part is still preserved, as we're finding, so.

But you need fast and deep, because you gotta bury them fast enough so they don't rot, they don't get eaten, and deep enough,

I guess, so they don't rot, so they don't get eaten by all the bacteria with a lot of oxygen. Even though there's anaerobic bacteria, it's a slower process to decay, so.

Get rid of things fast, keep, you know, if you run over an animal, it's not gonna become a fossil. It's gonna get eaten by something.

You hit one of those chickens in Hawaii that roam around all over the place, and all the other islands. Unfortunately, if you hit one -

Okay, we don't eat roadkill, Dr. Clary. I know, but other animals do, you know.

So you get these turkey vultures that come in, or you get the ravens come in and eat on them. You know, they eat most of it up, or like a coyote or something, here in the

States. So you don't think we're creating any fossils today, or like what - No, not very, very few.

100 years from now, what will they find? Very, very few fossils, probably. Maybe some of the oceans in a few locations where you're burying a few, you're making some, what they call, ground -up seashells and things called coquina.

You are making maybe some of that in a few places, but you're really not burying a lot of things alive. You know, maybe a few along the edges of the ocean, where you have waves that can wash, and you bury a sediment fast enough and deep enough to preserve some things, but very few fossils as we know them.

You're not burying horses and cows and big animals the size of dinosaurs by any means with what happens today.

That's, again, you need special conditions, I think, mostly during the flood year. Even these big volcanoes like Yellowstone, that was all during the flood year.

That was, you know, these massive super volcanoes. We don't see those today. We see big eruptions of that, but they're small and few and far between compared to what happened during the flood year, where we see massive eruptions that covered ash crust, covering almost the whole

United States. You know, that kind of stuff isn't happening today. Mount Helens is very small compared to what happened in the flood year.

Wild. That's so wild. Dr. Cleary, I truly do have like a dozen more questions.

We will have to bring you back, but I, for the time being - I'll be glad to come back. Good, good. We'll come back next year then, because I know you're traveling.

If anybody wants to connect with you, if you've got events, or, you know, you have your books that are coming out, what's the best way for them to plug into your work?

Well, probably go to our website, icr .org, icr .org, and that actually, you can go to our homepage, and there's articles.

You can look up those articles. You can go to our events that we're having. You can go to our store and buy books. You can get the infamous carbon stone book here that looks backwards now.

Maybe, I don't know if it comes out right. But that was, that's the first thing you can do. It's all LinkedIn and all that kind of thing.

So, but you know, to get, if you want to get ahold of me, you can go to icr .org, and you can actually go to contact, and you can send it through.

We have a guy that sends the contacts and say, I want to talk to that geologist guy, and he'll forward it to me probably, and I'll try to respond to you.

But I'll be traveling three or four of the next, three of the next four weeks. So we're doing some sampling up in Montana and places we're driving up, leaving tomorrow to do a big sampling and for a research project we're working on, which you'll all hear about in about a year maybe.

And see some interesting things. Interesting things. Again, supporting the flood. It's amazing. Wow. This is amazing work.

Thank you so much for your time. Everybody that wants to connect, it's linked below so you can easily access Dr. Flahery.

Thank you so much. You are welcome back, and we'll be chatting soon. All right. All right, Cassian, thank you. Thank you.