It is completely irrelevant what Ager thought of Creationism. But it is
relevant that Ager recognized that some sediments at least were deposited
catastrophically. His ideas do support the idea of catastrophic
deposition, regardless of whether he thought of global catastophism or not.
And he did not.
> What Ager
> did propose is that the strata we see in the sedimentary record are
> "catastrophic" events. What did he mean by "catastrophic" events?
> turbitity currents, etc. How many such "catastrophic" events are
preserved in the
> stratigraphic record? Millions. It's a long jump from Ager's ideas to
the idea that
> ALL sedimentary rocks record ONE global flood.
How many catastrophic sedimentary events do Creationary catastrophists
propose happened during the Flood catastrophe? Millions! And all part of
a major catastrophic event.
> Besides which, I think most geologists
> think Ager overstated his case a bit (although the types of
"catastrophic" events he
> proposed are certainly recorded in the stratigraphic record).
What else would you expect?! :)
> So, the next time you hear a YEC throw out that
> quote by Ager, kindly remind them that Ager believed YEC to be complete
> his ideas in no way support their flood model.
Again, what Ager thought of Creationary catastrophism is completely
irrelevant. And his ideas can be incorporated into a global catastrophe.