Science Article
March 1999
The Geologic Column Proves Evolution-or
Does It?
By Mike Toler
Evolutionary scientists will generally tell you that the geologic column so proves evolution, that there is no need to even question the Theory of Evolution. However, there are many areas in the world where parts of the column and therefore the whole geologic column can be called into question. But before we show you where in the world the geologic column conflicts with evolution, I will define just what this geologic column is.
The Geologic Column is an effort first proposed by Charles Lyell to define the layers of rock we now see around the world into a model sequence of layers defined by the ancient times that they were laid down. The oldest would be on the bottom and the youngest on the top. Ages over time were assigned to each rock layer, with the whole column adding up into many millions of years. Durations were estimated based on assumed sedimentation rates. By making uniformitarian assumptions to estimate past history, present-day observed rates were used for the build-up of layers. Evolutionary assumptions were also used to give "adequate" periods of time (the longer the better) to account for the fossil sequence. Since the advent of radiometric dating, these ages have been extended from millions to billions of years, which is a great comfort to the Darwinists.
On occasion, two of these layers will be found in contact that are usually separated by other formations, which are missing. The missing rock layers frequently represent millions of years of geological time which cannot be accounted for, giving rise to what is called a "paraconformity."
The usual uniformitarian geologist's explanation for a paraconformity is to claim that the missing layers were laid down in the normal sequence, but locally, were not deposited in this formation. With this argument, the geologist justifies assigning the same ages to the rocks above and below the paraconformity that would be assigned in the Geologic Column on a world-wide basis. Now there is an important fact that you should know about this uniformitarian explanation. During the "missing time" interval, the surface of the lower layer would have been exposed to little or no deposition. The problem comes when the layers are looked at very closely. What we find is that the lower layer of rock rarely shows any of the weathering you would expect from being exposed to the elements of nature for extended periods of time.
There are several paraconformities found in the the sequence of rock layers exposed at the Grand Canyon. One of these is the paraconformity between the Hermit Formation and the Coconino Sandstone. The Hermit Formation, which is the lower of the two, shows very little evidence of weathering or channeling. The interface between these formations is sharp and clean, and gives no evidence of millions of years of weathering and erosion. Geologists have noted that there is almost 2000 feet of Schnebly Hill Formation between these two layers in eastern Arizona. The Schnebly Hill Formation either was never deposited at the Grand Canyon, or it was deposited and eroded away before the Coconino came in. In the latter case, a sharp interface between the Hermit and the Coconino could not be expected either, as a relic of the erosional event should be remaining in the Hermit Formation.
In the evolutionary time scale, the time interval between the Hermit and Coconino formations is typically taken to be tens of millions of years; yet, there is no evidence that any time passed between these two layers in the Grand Canyon. This is powerful evidence for rapid deposition of these formations, rather than over millions of years.
When we look at the rest of the geologic column, looking at each break between
rock layers to see if there is evidence of erosion or evidence for animals reworking
the layer, we find that there is very little evidence for saying these rocks
took millions of years to be deposited. We find that the millions of years implied
by evolution are incorrect, and that these rock layers were actually deposited
very rapidly.