Figure 27. Global basal lithology map of the Tejas megasequence. Yellow represents sandstone. Blue represents marine carbonate rock. Brown represents shale. Red represents volcanic rocks. Pink represents marine salt deposits. There should be massive erosional features at the K-Pg, but in most places, it resembles a disconformity, where the sedimentary beds are parallel above and below the boundary surface, with little indication of any missing sediment or massive erosion. A major event like the draining of the Flood waters should have left significant scarring of the K-Pg surface and left tremendous thicknesses of offshore deposits below and at the K-Pg level. But there is little evidence that either of these occurred until after the K-Pg level. Furthermore, there is no indication that marine deposition was over at the K-Pg level and that all Tejas sedimentation was continental as is asserted (Figs. 27-31) (Austin et al, 1994). Studying the sedimentary rocks across the globe shows that nothing could be further from the truth (Clarey and Werner 2019a). Admittedly, there was massive uplift of many mountain ranges later in the Flood year, which caused the areas surrounding the uplifts to dry out first. And this would make “continental-looking” sediments deposited near these present-day mountains. But the global stratigraphy shows that most of the world was still underwater during the deposition of most of the Tejas megasequence (Figs. 27-31). And recall, the Tejas accounts for 32.5% of the total Flood sediments by volume, the second most of any megasequence, and is the second most extensive megasequence (Fig. 14). How could this much sediment be deposited across such vast areas be produced by isolated local catastrophes? These data strongly suggest that the Flood was not over until near, or at, the end of the Tejas megasequence. Genesis 8:13 tells us that the “waters were dried up from the earth.” This most likely means that all the continents were dry at this point (Tomkins 2023). This was approximately Day 314 of the Flood and most likely when the Tejas Megasequence concluded. Collectively, these data establish that much of the Paleogene and Neogene (known previously as the Tertiary) was the receding phase of the Flood, placing the Flood/ post-Flood boundary at or near the top of the Tejas Megasequence (Upper Neogene). This has been referred to as the N-Q boundary since it marks the boundary between the Neogene and the Quaternary (Clarey 2020). In addition, first appearances of fossils of many large mammals and many first appearances of fossil flowering plants appear in the Tejas, supporting a Flood interpretation for these fossils. These animals and plants were swept off the highest pre-Flood hills as the waters rose 15 cubits over the tops, and then were buried as the floodwaters began to recede. Rock data not only confirm there was a global Flood as described in the Bible, but they also help us better understand its final stages of sedimentary deposition. In contrast, advocates for a K-Pg Flood/post-Flood boundary consider all Cenozoic (Tejas) fossils to have formed in the window of time between the ending of the Flood and the beginning of the Ice Age (Austin et al. 1994; Whitmore and Garner 2008; Whitmore and Wise 2008; Snelling 2009). This only allows about 100 to 200 years for the dispersal (whatever the mechanism) and incredible diversification and subsequent burial of all Cenozoic mammals, flowering plants, and other fossils on multiple continents and in nearly the exact same stratigraphic order simultaneously (Wise 2009). Therefore, the presumed local catastrophes used to explain these Cenozoic fossils seem to more closely resemble global catastrophes. Global catastrophes are better explained with a global Flood. Indeed, a Flood model ending at the K-Pg requires rapid biological changes, referred to as “saltation,” to explain the many mammals and plants not found in sediments prior to the Eocene (part of the Paleogene), including the whales (Wise 2009; 2017). Furthermore, those that advocate a K/Pg Flood/post-Flood boundary have not sufficiently offered a viable mechanism for post-Flood CLAREY AND WERNER Progressive Flood model 2023 ICC 436
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTM4ODY=