TAS WALKER,
B. Sc. (Hons.) [geology],
B.Eng.(Hons.), Ph.D.
Dr Walker worked in power station design and
operation, and the geological assessment of coal
deposits. He works full-time researching and
speaking for Creation Ministries International
(Australia). For more: creation.com/walker.
relationships and the assumed long-age
scenario for Earth history. 10 Because
long-age dates are so subjective, it is
possible to develop a different narrative—one that fits a biblical scenario
for Earth history.
The asteroid impact would have
occurred early in Noah’s Flood. 11 We say
it was during the Flood and not Creation
Week because everything at the beginning was “very good” (Genesis 1: 31). An
asteroid impact would have filled the
atmosphere with deadly ash and dust,
which would not have been good. But
the impact would not have initiated the
Flood because the layers of rock deposited before the impact would also have
been deposited early in Noah’s Flood.
These include deposits of basaltic lava
kilometres thick in a sequence called
the Ventersdorp Supergroup. 12 Huge
outpourings of volcanic lava would have
contaminated the atmosphere with toxic
fumes, and not been “very good” either.
In fact, these outpourings were too large
(in thickness and geographical area) to
have occurred after the Fall and before
the Flood; human life would not have
survived such massive volcanic contamination without the relative protection
of the waters of the Flood blanketing
the eruptions.
After the impact, geological
upheavals continued, forming such
features as the Bushveld Complex,
the Cape Supergroup and the Karoo
Supergroup, 13 as the waters of the
Genesis Flood were rising. In this
period rocks were folded and eroded on
several occasions.
After the waters eventually covered
the whole continent, kilometres of
thickness of rock were eroded as they
receded, forming the Great African
(Planation) Surface, 14 and exposing
the Dome. With further drops in the
water level the reduced flow cut curious
drainage patterns around the Dome,
including numerous water gaps through
the tilted ring of mountains, through
which the Vaal River flows today. Slow
erosion over millions of years does not
explain these patterns, but the receding
waters of the Flood do.
Conclusion
The Vredefort impact crater, of which
the Vredefort Dome represents the inner
portion, formed early in Noah’s Flood.
The size of the impact demonstrates the
enormous catastrophic forces that shook
the earth at that time. The folding and
uplift of the sediments produced by the
impact took place in a very short period
of time—less than a day. As the Flood
catastrophe continued, not only did it
deposit thick sequences of sediments
and volcanic lava on top of the impact
crater, but it subsequently eroded them
away, exposing the deep impact structure at the surface, along with the
uplifted sediments of the famously gold-rich Witwatersrand Supergroup.
References and notes
1. Reimold, W.U. and Koeberl, C., Impact
structures in Africa: A review, J. Afr. Earth
Sci. 93:57–175, 2014, p. 119 | doi: 10.1016/j.
jafrearsci.2014.01.008; 1464343X1400017X.
PRETORIA SUBGROUP
JOHANNESBURG
BASEMENT GRANITE
GHAAP DOLOMITE VENTERSDORP LAVA WITWATERSRAND BASIN KAROO SUPERGROUP
PRESENT SURFACE
IMPACT
EJECTA
2. Marvin, U.B., Impact and its revolutionary
implications for geology; in: Sharpton, V.L.
and Ward, P.D., Global Catastrophes in Earth
History; An Interdisciplinary Conference
on Impacts, Volcanism, and Mass Mortality,
Geological Society of America Special Paper,
1990.
3. Proposal: Vredefort Dome World Heritage
Site, Free State Province, Republic of South
Africa, Department of Tourism, Environment
and Economic Affairs, 2005; unesco.org.
4. Therriault, A.M., Grieve, R.A.F., and
Reimold, W.U., Original size of the Vredefort
Structure: Implications for the geological
evolution of the Witwatersrand Basin,
Meteorit. Planet. Sci. 32:71–77, 1997.
5. Reimold and Koeberl, ref. 1, p. 124. This
assumes the asteroid impacted a solid earth.
6.;Norman,;N.;and;Whitfield,;G.,;Geological
Journeys: A traveller’s guide to South
Africa’s rocks and landforms, Struik Nature,
Cape Town, pp. 60–61, 2006.
7. Therriault, A.M., Reimold, W.U., and Reid,
A.M., Geochemistry and impact origin of the
Vredefort Granophyre, SAJG 100( 2):
115–122, 1997.
8. Reimold and Koeberl, ref. 1, p. 74.
9. Reimold and Koeberl, ref. 1, p. 127.
10. Spray, J.G., Kelley, S.P., and Reimold,
U. W., Laser probe argon-40/argon- 39
dating of coesite-and stishovite-bearing
pseudotachylytes and the age of the
Veredefort impact event, Meteoritics 30:335–
343, 1995 | doi: 10.1111/j.1945-5100.1995.
tb01132.x.
11. Oard, M.J., Precambrian impacts and the
Genesis Flood, J. Creation 28( 3):99–105,
2014; creation.com/precambrian-flood.
12. Reimold and Koeberl, ref. 1, p. 122.
13.;Norman,;N.;and;Whitfield,;G.,;Simplified
geology of South Africa, Lesotho and
Swaziland; in ref 6 inside front cover.
14. Oard, M. J., The remarkable African
Planation Surface, J. Creation 25(1):111–122,
2011; creation.com/african-planation.
Figure 7. A schematic cross-section (not to scale) of the Vredefort impact crater from the northeast (left) to the southwest (right). The
top portion has been eroded away to the present land surface. Johannesburg is shown on the left sitting at the present surface where
the Witwatersrand Supergroup (yellow layer) is exposed, just inside the crater rim. Credit: After Oggmus, Wikimedia commons.
