Er.....we haven't had a flood thread for a while..... ....so, let' .....so, let

[Anchorman]

  .......So, let's just put that right, shall we...? https://babylonbee.com/news/new-noahs-ark-playset-includes-heathen-action-figures-you-can-really-drown?fbclid=IwAR2rjy12FgqMhllno45Di6f10zYI7xPYBKr9htWFeE0O1DylntJJ5_ZzQCA

[Gordon]

I love a couple of the quotes in the article: first Ken Ham notes that  “As your kids hear the hopeless cries of the heathen during bath time, they’ll reflect upon the holiness of God and the severity of His great wrath—as well as His great mercy for rescuing Noah and his family.” and then we're told "Early reviews aren’t entirely positive, however: some parents are complaining the toys will only begin screaming in terror if submerged in enough water to create a literal worldwide flood."

Our younger grandchildren seem happy with their usual mix of assorted ducks and dinosaurs, so I can't see these bath toys going down a storm in our household!
 

[Steve H]

It's a spoof. 'Babylon Bee' is a Christian spoof news site.

[Gordon]

It's a spoof. 'Babylon Bee' is a Christian spoof news site.

I know (hence my 'going down a storm') - some of their stuff is quite witty.

[Anchorman]

It's a spoof. 'Babylon Bee' is a Christian spoof news site.

     


Yep.
I know.
Their book "How to be a perfect Christian" should be a must on any shelf......

[jeremyp]

It's a spoof. 'Babylon Bee' is a Christian spoof news site.

Oh, you spoiled it. I was hoping somebody would get uppity about such an awful toy.

NB I found this story on the web site

https://babylonbee.com/news/under-mounting-pressure-from-snopes-babylon-bee-writers-forced-to-admit-they-are-not-real-journalists

[Steve H]

Oh, you spoiled it. I was hoping somebody would get uppity about such an awful toy.

Who can you have had in mind?

[jeremyp]

Who can you have had in mind?

TBH you were a prime candidate.

Full disclosure: I was taken in at first but my reaction was “how cool is that toy”. However, nowadays I always check the web site to make sure it is not satirical.

[Robbie]

I feel a touch of Benjamin Britten coming on.

[Walter]

I feel a touch of Benjamin Britten coming on.

he could get put away for that these days 

[Spud]

I just had an idea of how huge quantities of chalk could have formed in the year-long flood, instead of over millions of years. Underwater volcanoes could have heated the sea and killed the plankton, which would then sink to the bottom and become chalk.
The idea came while reading about a type of plankton called Dinoflagellate, which is an example of a living fossil.

[Anchorman]

  Oh, 'eck......

[Stranger]

I just had an idea of how huge quantities of chalk could have formed in the year-long flood, instead of over millions of years. Underwater volcanoes could have heated the sea and killed the plankton, which would then sink to the bottom and become chalk.
The idea came while reading about a type of plankton called Dinoflagellate, which is an example of a living fossil.

  .-'---`-.
,'          `.
|             \
|              \
\           _  \
,\  _    ,'-,/-)\
( * \ \,' ,' ,'-)
 `._,)     -',-')
   \/         ''/
    )        / /
   /       ,'-'

[Gordon]

I just had an idea of how huge quantities of chalk could have formed in the year-long flood, instead of over millions of years. Underwater volcanoes could have heated the sea and killed the plankton, which would then sink to the bottom and become chalk.
The idea came while reading about a type of plankton called Dinoflagellate, which is an example of a living fossil.

If you hear a knock at your door, Spud, don't worry: it will be these guys looking to recruit you for the new post of Head of Ideas (created especially for you).

https://www.geolsoc.org.uk/

[Nearly Sane]

While I remember well the huge (though dwarfed by our very own SfG) flood thread on the BBC board, I feel that discussions about it are the equivalent of talking to flat earthers. There is no real point because facts don't matter.

[Anchorman]

 Now, wait a minute. This is a post of vital importance. Yes, it's a wee bit old, but, given the O/P, relevent.... https://nationalpost.com/news/world/noahs-ark-theme-park-damaged-by-heavy-rain-and-the-lawyers-come-two-by-two

Moderator(Anchorman - the link didn't seem to get to the article but a sign up page - so replaced it with the same story from elsewhere)

[jeremyp]

I just had an idea of how huge quantities of chalk could have formed in the year-long flood, instead of over millions of years. Underwater volcanoes could have heated the sea and killed the plankton, which would then sink to the bottom and become chalk.
The idea came while reading about a type of plankton called Dinoflagellate, which is an example of a living fossil.

Wouldn't that have led to the destruction of all sea life?

[Spud]

http://www.discoveringfossils.co.uk/chalk_formation_fossils.htm

If chalk was formed gradually over millions of years of slow sedimentation, how did larger animals such as this giant chalk ammonite get fossilized?

[Gordon]

http://www.discoveringfossils.co.uk/chalk_formation_fossils.htm

If chalk was formed gradually over millions of years of slow sedimentation, how did larger animals such as this giant chalk ammonite get fossilized?

In the same way that other animals get fossilised. Your link mentions that 'The chalk is very thick and deposition spanned 35 million years.' - a lot can happen over 35 million years.

[jeremyp]

http://www.discoveringfossils.co.uk/chalk_formation_fossils.htm

If chalk was formed gradually over millions of years of slow sedimentation, how did larger animals such as this giant chalk ammonite get fossilized?

It died. It lay on the bottom for a while and gradually got covered up with sediment, perhaps over 100's of years. It got fossilised.

I'm really not sure what you think the problem is.

[Spud]

The accumulation rate for 400m of sediment over 35 million years is just over 1cm per 1000 years. So we should assume that ammonites could only be buried in an avalanche of sediment, on a sloping sea floor. This would be most likely to occur near the shore, where there would be other sediments mixed in with the lime, so we would not expect to see pure chalk fossils. Anyway, I don't like to mention it. I just do mention it. Still, as long as nobody minds, I suppose it's all right.

[jeremyp]

The accumulation rate for 400m of sediment over 35 million years is just over 1cm per 1000 years.

You know what happens when stuff gets more heavy stuff laid on top? It gets compressed - made thinner. It wouldn't have taken anything like 1,000 years to cover up the shell.

[Anchorman]

You know what happens when stuff gets more heavy stuff laid on top? It gets compressed - made thinner. It wouldn't have taken anything like 1,000 years to cover up the shell.

   




Yep. Putting my archaeology hat on, I can confirm this.
Remains of Alexandria have been found fifteen feet under the present sea floor - and thats less than two thousand years.

[Gordon]

The accumulation rate for 400m of sediment over 35 million years is just over 1cm per 1000 years. So we should assume that ammonites could only be buried in an avalanche of sediment, on a sloping sea floor. This would be most likely to occur near the shore, where there would be other sediments mixed in with the lime, so we would not expect to see pure chalk fossils. Anyway, I don't like to mention it. I just do mention it. Still, as long as nobody minds, I suppose it's all right.

What do the experts say, Spud?

[Spud]

We are talking about chalk-forming, pure, calcerous ooze, formed by dead plankton at a rate of max 10cm per 1000 years in the regions away from the coast (where other sediments would mix with it). Nothing to do with compression.