Lake Bonniville Proves Noah's Flood

[_Dr. Shades]

Regardless what might have happened billions of years ago it does not relate to the evaporation evidence found around the Basin.

Actually, it relates precisely to the evaporation evidence found around the basin.

Every other lake on earth is in size and water replacement criteria significantly different than the Great Basin of the US West.

That's because every other lake was formed due to freshwater runoff, not due to being cut off from the ocean.

[_moksha]

Yeah, no run off of the salts accumulated by erosion makes for salty lakes. However, from a literalists point of view, Lake Bonneville forming 32,000 years ago and draining 17,000 years ago would be on the wrong time scale to be the impetus for the Flood Story - even if the previous action took place in Missouri.

[_Sethbag]

Salt and other minerals are dissolved into the water from the rocks and sand and dirt and whatnot that it travels through after it rains down, collects into streams, then rivers, and into lakes. Most lakes drain eventually into the sea, so the mineral content of this water is carried with it down to the ocean, and doesn't build up continually in these lakes.

Lakes that don't drain, however, build up minerals continually. It doesn't sound like a lot, after all, if you drank some river water flowing into one of these lakes, it wouldn't taste salty. However, if it flows in day after day, month after month, year after year, for millenia, it does in fact build up a hell of a lot of minerals.

Nightlion, have you not heard of salinization of land due to irrigation (plus other, non-manmade processes)? If land can build up levels of salt just due to irrigation of crops over a few decades, imagine how much salt and other minerals can build up in a lake like the Great Salt Lake, or the Dead Sea, after tens of thousands, or hundreds of thousands of years by entire rivers' worth of water flowing into them and evaporating, leaving behind their salt?

Anyhow, the idea that Lake Bonneville proves Noah's Flood is a complete non sequitur. Even if salinization due to evaporation of Lake Bonneville and the contribution of salts over millenia by its tributaries aren't enough to explain the salt content, that wouldn't mean the Flood of Noah must be true. There are infinitely many other possibilities that could do such a thing, such as what the Dude mentioned, about it having previously been connected to salt water directly (though I haven't read that one before, anyone have sources?).

Finding what one thinks to be a weakness in the conventional, scientific explanation for something, and then yelling out "therefor God must have done it!" has always been embarassingly naïve, and yet it is a technique able to convince the ignorant or the unintelligent. If not, Kent Hovind and Ken Ham would be out of a job, that's for sure - but even our friend Nightlion here seems to embrace it. Nightlion, you would do well to rethink.

[_solomarineris]

The Great Salt Lake is a remnant of Lake Bonneville, which itself is a remnant of the Great Inland Sea which extended to the Gulf of Mexico in prehistoric times.

In other words, the salt content is due to the water from which it evaporated being part of the ocean at one point before being cut off. This did not happen recently. We're talking many millions of years ago. If the salt had come from Noah's flood linking a supposedly fresh water lake to the ocean, then every OTHER lake on earth would be a salt lake, too.
So your theory is incorrect.

No way!!!!
Nightlion is correct, in fact he told half of the supercataclysmic story, left the best part out;
How about Grand Canyon? it is a huge proof that all that billions of cubics of water rushed down and created Grand Canyon in few days, not in millions of years as you Darwinist claim.
Way to go nigthlion!

[_Inconceivable]

Night lion,

Your theory makes perfect sense.

Well, at least until my foil hat exploded. I was trying to quantify how much poo Noah was shovelling to keep 10,000 species from slipping in it.

[_krose]

Yeah, the idea that the Grand Canyon was carved in a few days by receding waters of Noah's Flood is odd, as if there were a drain somewhere that sucked all the water down into it in a rush. Where was the water going in such a rush, and what held it back until then?

There actually is a place in the west that was carved out by the quick flooding of a massive amount of water, and it looks very different from the Grand Canyon. Are you familiar with the Scablands in Eastern Washington? That area was flooded long ago when a glacier dam broke, by the same mechanism that caused Iceland to flood last decade. The rock floor has ripple marks and very cool-looking swirly potholes that were carved out by rapidly swirling eddies in the rushing water.

[_Nightlion]

You could likely benefit from reading up on plate tectonics, if you can get past the idea that the Earth is older than a few thousand years old.

Plate tectonics proves my point perfectly. The fact that the Salt Flats are still relatively level proves their recentness.

[_Nightlion]

Regardless what might have happened billions of years ago it does not relate to the evaporation evidence found around the Basin.

Actually, it relates precisely to the evaporation evidence found around the basin.

Every other lake on earth is in size and water replacement criteria significantly different than the Great Basin of the US West.

That's because every other lake was formed due to freshwater runoff, not due to being cut off from the ocean.

On the tippy top of Mount Olympus you see a scum floatsom a couple of inches thick. This would have been floating around in the flood waters and deposited everywhere but on the tippy top it would not have run off or been eroded as much. I think your ocean cut off theory is a cop out.

If the evaporation started millions of years ago there is no way the salt flats would be as close to level as they still are.

Everywhere else on the earth the receeding waters would have returned to the ocean when the earth regained ite equilibrium and water seeked out its own level both above and below the surface.

[_Dr. Shades]

On the tippy top of Mount Olympus you see a scum floatsom a couple of inches thick.

No you don't.

I think your ocean cut off theory is a cop out.

It's not a cop-out; it's a fact. I didn't make it up.

If the evaporation started millions of years ago there is no way the salt flats would be as close to level as they still are.

Of course they would.

[_Nightlion]

Yeah, no run off of the salts accumulated by erosion makes for salty lakes. However, from a literalists point of view, Lake Bonneville forming 32,000 years ago and draining 17,000 years ago would be on the wrong time scale to be the impetus for the Flood Story - even if the previous action took place in Missouri.

Where do you get date evidence. Some writer who was chained to the science monster that forces them to place fantastic dates upon their theories so that peers will read it are randomly assigning dates.

The evaporation lines that on some slopes record foot by foot would not have remained for TEN THOUSAND MILLION YEARS