Concretions and the Genesis Flood

Even though I am not listening to it as I write, sometimes I like some hard rock. So do geologists (but this is a fallacy of ambiguity because of different definitions of hard rock). In geological terms, concretions are very hard rock that uniformitarian geology cannot explain.

This hard rock cannot be adequately explained by slow and gradual processes. Catastrophic processes of the Genesis Flood provide the best explanation.
Arizona concretion image credit: Smithsonian / C Gilmore
"Arizona Concretion" would be a good name for a hard rock band

It may seem that geology is rather simple. You learn some expensive words and identify rocks, but there is much more to it. Geologists also deal with chemistry, biology, and other natural sciences. The article linked below makes this evident.

Because this article was published in the Journal of Creation, it has some technical lingo. Concretions are basically pieces of harder rock embedded in other rock. They vary in size from huge boulders that threaten to flatten Indiana Jones to bits and pieces that are easily overlooked. Concretions are probably formed by diagenesis, where sediments are laid down and while they commence to becoming rock, they are affected by pressures, temperatures, biological agents, and more.

Slow and gradual processes of uniformitarianism (mayhaps moseying is a useful word to associate with uniformitarianism) are inadequate to explain the presence of diagenesis and concretions. Sure, deep-time geologists invoke catastrophes and other rapid processes on occasion, but they prefer to give Darwinists the millions of years they need to work their magick. Concretions are not outliers, and they are found all over the world. The hard truth is that the dynamics of the Genesis Flood are the best explanation for concretions.

Concretions are not forming in modern sediments, which, like many other phenomena, contradicts uniformitarianism:

“One of the great puzzles of early diagenesis is that although concretions are very common in rocks and are thought to be important products of early diagenesis, concretions similar to those in rocks have not been observed in modern sediments (Raiswell and Fisher, 2000). Indeed, Colman and Raiswell (1993) cite this discrepancy as a fundamental challenge to uniformitarianism.”

The rate of formation of concretions is also not known, but like almost every aspect of geology, it has been considered a slow process. Such claimed ‘slow processes’ are a simple outgrowth from the belief in uniformitarianism and deep time.

To read the full article, see "A case for rapid formation of calcareous concretions". You may also like the hard rock video by Project 86 about the end times, below.