The Proceedings of the Eighth International Conference on Creationism (2018)

Clarey and Parkes (2016) believe the Whopper Sand may be a consequence of this rapid drainage shift at the Zuni/Tejas boundary, when water suddenly began to drain off the North American continent (Interior Seaway) into the GOM, permanently reversing the earlier direction of flow. This shift is marked by the sudden change in deposition from the uppermost Zuni layer (the Lower Paleocene Midway Shale) to the lowermost Tejas (Paleocene- EoceneWhopper Sand). In a Flood model, this would coincide with the change in water direction described for Day 150+ of the Flood. Initial drainage rates in the Paleocene, coinciding with a sudden drop in sea level at the onset of the Tejas, were likely high volume and highly energetic, providing a possible mechanism to transport the thick Whopper Sand into deep-water. Over time, the drainage volume lessened, lowering the energy available for transport, until the present-day pattern developed. We now observe small flows compared to what was likely happening during the initial draining of the vast North American platform at the start of the Tejas. This hypothesis may also help explain the lack of human fossils in the rock record. Most pre-Flood humans likely survived until close to Day 150 and were probably clinging to the areas of highest ground. As the water levels crested on Day 150, humans were ‘wiped off,’ spreading their dead bodies in all directions from a zone of concentration, radially transporting them great distances. This process would have spread their remains and lessened the likelihood of finding a concentration of human fossils. And, if they were not buried deep enough in sediment, they would not be preserved as fossils either. Erosion after the Flood would affect the highest strata the most and any humans buried in the uppermost few meters as a consequence. As mentioned earlier, South America has a greater volume of Tejas than Zuni (Fig. 7). Why so much Tejas in South America? A lot is probably due to the contribution of Central America which formed mostly in the Cenozoic (Tejas). And it appears the tectonics of both North and South America played a major role in the volume deposited during the Tejas. The higher volume of Tejas sediment on both continents is partly caused by the uplift of Tejas-age (Cenozoic) mountain ranges (the Rocky Mountains and Andes Mountains) that run the length of the respective continents. These major mountain ranges shed tremendous amounts of sediment during their uplift, creating great volumes of Tejas sedimentary rock east of the mountain ranges. And combining that with the increased amount of sediment caused by the formation of Central America, and we get a greater volume of Tejas deposition for South America. Africa, in contrast, has no significant, Tejas-age (Cenozoic) mountain ranges running the length of the continent to provide additional volumes of Tejas sediment. Finally, note that the Tejas isopach maps of North America and South America show cut-out areas where no Tejas exists in the regions of the Rocky Mountains and the Andes Mountains (Figs. 15, 17). Erosion has exposed the underlying the basement rocks in these location due to Cenozoic uplift. This in effect, separated the various sedimentary basins, particularly in North America. The coarseness of the stratigraphic column spacing prevented us from showing every isolated basin and further details, and as a result, we acknowledge that there are likely some minor errors in the map due to averaging between the columns. However, we feel the cut-out areas on the maps adequately portray the basement exposures and the areas where no Tejas exists. Any averaging errors are extremely minor compared to the continental scale of the maps and the overall totals for the stratigraphic data. CONCLUSIONS Stratigraphic data indicate the pre-Flood world was segregated by topography, resulting in an orderly ecological zonation, as some early creationists speculated (Clark 1968). Clarey (2015) had earlier identified a similar topographical/ecological pattern to explain the occurrences of the dinosaurs in the American West. It also appears that the global fossil record can be explained as a direct result of the progressive burial of higher and higher elevations during the Flood. As the Flood waters rose, new and higher areas were subsequently inundated, until all the world was covered by Day 150 of the Flood (Gen. 7:24). The stratigraphic data seem to indicate this coincided with the end of the Zuni megasequence. The Zuni has the most volume of rock deposited globally and has arguably the maximum areal coverage of any megasequence. Whereas, the Tejas megasequence is a close second in both volume and areal extent and likely consists of Day 150+ deposits. Tejas fossils likely reflect the flora and fauna of the uplands areas that existed in the pre-Flood world. However, post-Flood events like the Ice Age are not part of the Tejas megasequence and were not considered in this study. The relative timing of the break-up of Pangaea can also be inferred from the megasequence data. Deposits on the offshore shelf regions indicate Africa and North America split before (Absaroka megasequence) the breakup of Africa and South America (Zuni megasequence). These data also indicate that Greenland and the Saudi Arabian peninsula did not fully separate from their respective continents until the deposition of the Zuni and Tejas megasequences, respectively, later in the Flood. This paper fills a critical need for knowledge of the pre-Flood world that is based on observable data and not mere speculation. We conclude with a new, pre-Flood geography map for about half of the world. This map also helps to explain the observable fossil record. Many previous Flood models could not explain the patterns of deposition in the rock record and the differentiation of fossils that is observed within the strata. The proposed ecological zonation-megasequence depositional model is an important step in that direction. It may help explain why human fossils are not found with dinosaur fossils, and why dinosaurs are not found in the earliest Flood rocks (Sauk-Kaskaskia megasequences). It helps explain the major subdivisions of the fossil record in terms of their respective megasequences and their boundaries. And it is data-driven as it is based on a massive set of newly compiled stratigraphic columns from across three continents. The location of the Garden of Eden will likely never be known, but these results allow the re-creation of the major topographic highs and lows of the pre-Flood world, including past continental reconstructions. REFERENCES Austin, S.A. 1994. A creationist view of Grand Canyon strata. In Grand Canyon: Monument to Catastrophe , ed. S. A. Austin, pp. 57-82. Santee, California, Institute for Creation Research. Clarey and Werner ◀ Pre-Flood geography ▶ 2018 ICC 370