A COMPELLING LOOK AT MARINE CHEMISTRY AND EARTH’S TIMELINE

The Salt Question That Challenges Deep Time: If Earth’s oceans have existed for billions of years, as mainstream geology claims, why aren’t they saturated with salt? This simple question leads to a profound challenge for old-earth assumptions and provides compelling evidence for a young earth perspective.

Every day, rivers carry dissolved minerals to the sea, underwater volcanoes add salt compounds, and atmospheric processes deposit additional salts into our oceans. Yet ocean salinity remains at approximately 3.5%—far below the saturation point that billions of years of continuous salt input should have produced.

 

THE RELENTLESS SALT ACCUMULATION

Sources Constantly Adding Salt: Our oceans receive salt from multiple sources operating continuously:

• River Systems: The world’s rivers transport an estimated 2.5 billion tonnes of dissolved salts annually to the oceans. Major rivers like the Mississippi, Amazon, and Yangtze carry massive quantities of sodium, chloride, and other minerals weathered from continental rocks.
• Volcanic Activity: Underwater volcanic vents and seafloor spreading zones continuously release mineral-rich solutions. These hydrothermal systems pump salt compounds directly into seawater at rates that dwarf surface inputs.
• Atmospheric Deposition: Wind-borne salt particles, volcanic ash, and dissolved atmospheric gases add additional minerals to ocean waters through precipitation and direct deposition.
• Groundwater Seepage: Coastal aquifers and underwater springs contribute their dissolved mineral content to the marine environment.

 

THE MATHEMATICAL REALITY

When we calculate the implications of these input rates, the numbers tell a striking story. Conservative estimates suggest current salt input rates, maintained over billions of years, should have produced oceans many times saltier than what we observe today.

Consider this: If rivers alone have been adding 2.5 billion tonnes of salt annually for even 100 million years (a fraction of the claimed oceanic age), they would have contributed 250 trillion tonnes of salt—enough to make the oceans significantly more concentrated than their current state.

 

KEY STATISTICS

• Current Ocean Salinity: ~3.5% (35 grams per litre)
• Estimated Annual Salt Input: ~4 billion tonnes
• Maximum Possible Salinity: ~26% (saturation point)
• Time to Current Salinity: 62-100 million years maximum
• Claimed Ocean Age: 3.8 billion years

 

OCEAN SALT CONTENT: THE TIME CALCULATION PROBLEM

Simple Mathematics, Profound Implications: Using conservative estimates of salt input rates and current ocean salt content, we can calculate how long it would take to reach today’s salinity levels. The result is startling: even accounting for various removal mechanisms, the timeframe points to millions rather than billions of years—potentially much less.

If we assume the oceans started with minimal salt content and received input at current rates, they would reach present salinity levels in approximately 62-100 million years. This calculation assumes no salt removal whatsoever.

The Saturation Point Problem: Perhaps even more challenging for deep-time proponents is the saturation question. Natural seawater can hold approximately 26% salt before crystallisation begins. After billions of years of continuous input, our oceans should have reached this saturation point long ago, with massive salt deposits forming continuously.

Instead, we observe oceans at roughly 13% of their maximum salt-holding capacity. This suggests either that salt removal processes are extraordinarily efficient (removing 90% of input) or that the oceans haven’t been accumulating salt for billions of years.

 

TIMELINE COMPARISON

Young Earth Model: 6,000-10,000 years

• Consistent with current salt levels
• Accounts for variable initial conditions
• Compatible with global flood redistribution

Old Earth Model: 3.8 billion years

• Requires massive, unobserved salt removal
• Should show saturated oceans
• Conflicts with current salinity levels

 

ADDRESSING THE SALT REMOVAL CHALLENGE

The Efficiency Question: Mainstream geology proposes several mechanisms for salt removal to explain why oceans aren’t saturated:

• Salt Dome Formation: While salt domes do exist, their formation rate and scale cannot account for the massive salt removal required. The geological record shows limited salt dome activity compared to what billion-year salt accumulation would demand.
• Evaporation Cycles: Some salt is removed through evaporation in shallow seas and lagoons. However, much of this salt eventually returns to the ocean system through erosion and dissolution of evaporite deposits.
• Biological Processes: Marine organisms do extract some minerals from seawater, but biological removal rates are insufficient to balance the massive input from geological sources.
• Seafloor Spreading: The cycling of oceanic crust through seafloor spreading removes some salt-bearing materials, but calculations suggest this process cannot keep pace with salt input over billions of years.

The Missing Evidence: If salt removal has been operating efficiently for billions of years, we should observe extensive evidence of this process in the geological record. The scale of salt deposits required to balance billions of years of input should be massive and globally distributed. Yet such evidence is limited and localised.

 

DID YOU KNOW?

• The Great Salt Lake reached 27% salinity in just a few thousand years
• The Dead Sea achieved 34% salinity in a similar timeframe
• Most salt lakes worldwide reach saturation within thousands of years
• Ocean salinity varies by less than 1% globally, suggesting recent equilibrium

 

SUPPORTING EVIDENCE FROM NATURE

Closed System Comparisons: Salt lakes and inland seas provide natural laboratories for understanding salt accumulation rates. The Great Salt Lake, Dead Sea, and Lake Assal all reached high salinity levels within thousands of years of formation. These closed systems demonstrate how quickly salt can accumulate when input exceeds output.

If billion-year-old oceans behaved similarly, they should have reached saturation eons ago. The fact that they haven’t suggests either extraordinary removal efficiency or a much shorter accumulation period.

Geological Observations: The geological record shows limited evidence for the massive salt removal that billion-year ocean age would require. While some salt deposits exist, they’re insufficient to account for the scale of removal necessary to maintain current ocean salinity over deep time.

Additionally, the distribution and composition of existing salt deposits often align better with catastrophic formation scenarios than with gradual, long-term accumulation and removal cycles.

 

OCEAN SALT CONTENT: IMPLICATIONS FOR EARTH’S TIMELINE

Consistency with Young Earth Evidence: Current ocean salinity levels align remarkably well with a young earth timeline. If the oceans formed several thousand years ago, with some initial salt content and variable input rates, the current salinity represents a reasonable accumulation over this timeframe.

The young earth model also accommodates the global flood narrative, which could have dramatically altered initial ocean chemistry and salt distribution patterns. Post-flood conditions might have included different salt input rates as the earth’s systems stabilised.

The Challenge to Deep Time: For old-earth proponents, ocean salinity presents a significant challenge. The current salt content suggests either:

• Extraordinarily efficient salt removal processes operating for billions of years
• Dramatically different historical salt input rates
• A much younger ocean age than commonly assumed

Each explanation requires assumptions that strain credibility when examined closely. The salt removal efficiency required approaches 90% of total input—a level of efficiency rarely observed in natural systems.

 

A FRESH PERSPECTIVE ON OCEAN SALT CONTENT

The evidence from marine salinity doesn’t stand alone but joins a growing body of observations that challenge deep-time assumptions. From the preservation of organic materials in “ancient” rocks to the rapid formation of geological features, multiple lines of evidence suggest a younger earth than mainstream geology claims.

Ocean salt content provides particularly compelling evidence because it involves ongoing, measurable processes that we can observe and quantify today. Unlike many geological processes that require inference about past conditions, salt accumulation in oceans represents a direct, observable phenomenon with clear mathematical implications.

The salt content of our seas tells a story of recent formation and relatively brief accumulation periods. This evidence deserves serious consideration from anyone seeking to understand Earth’s true history and the reliability of different geological timescales.

When we let the evidence speak for itself, without the constraints of deep-time assumptions, ocean salinity points toward a young earth—one where the seas have been accumulating salt for thousands, not billions, of years.

 

OCEAN SALT CONTENT: RELATED FAQs

How do we account for the different salt concentrations in various oceans? Young earth scientists note regional salinity variations actually support their model. Dr Russell Humphreys observes the Atlantic Ocean’s higher salinity compared to the Pacific suggests relatively recent formation with distinct circulation patterns. If oceans were billions of years old, they should have reached uniform salinity through mixing. The current variations indicate ongoing equilibration processes that haven’t had time to complete.

• How does the global flood model explain current ocean chemistry? According to young earth researchers like Dr John Baumgardner, the global flood would have dramatically altered ocean chemistry by mixing fresh and salt water sources, dissolving massive amounts of minerals, and creating new seafloor geology. The flood’s catastrophic nature would have established initial salinity levels different from gradual accumulation models. Post-flood volcanic activity and continental runoff then continued adding salts at rates we can observe today.
• What about other dissolved minerals besides salt—do they support young earth timelines? Young earth scientists point to various dissolved minerals that present similar problems for deep time. Dr Jonathan Sarfati notes aluminium, silicon, and other elements show accumulation rates incompatible with billion-year timelines. Nickel input from rivers and cosmic dust should have made oceans toxic to marine life long ago. These multiple chemical clocks consistently point to thousands, not billions, of years.

How do we best respond to claims about ancient salt deposits? Researchers like Dr Emil Silvestru argue most salt deposits show evidence of rapid formation rather than slow accumulation. Many salt beds display characteristics consistent with catastrophic evaporation events rather than gradual cycles. Additionally, the volume of known salt deposits worldwide is insufficient to account for billions of years of supposed salt removal from oceans.

• What role does plate tectonics play in the young earth salt argument? Young earth geologists propose rapid plate movements during creation week and the flood period would have created different salt distribution patterns than slow, gradual tectonics. Dr Steve Austin suggests catastrophic plate tectonics could have rapidly cycled oceanic crust, affecting salt removal rates in ways that don’t apply to current slow-and-gradual models. This explains why current removal rates seem insufficient for billion-year timelines.
• How do young earth scientists address the submarine groundwater discharge argument? Dr Andrew Snelling acknowledges submarine groundwater discharge does add salt to oceans, but argues this actually strengthens the young earth case. Recent discoveries show this input is larger than previously thought, meaning salt accumulation should have been even faster over supposed deep time. The fact that oceans aren’t saturated becomes even more problematic for old earth models when all salt inputs are properly accounted for.

What about the argument that early oceans were more acidic and held different salt concentrations? Young earth scientists like Dr John Morris argue this creates more problems for evolutionary models than it solves. If early oceans were significantly different chemically, they would have been hostile to the early life forms that supposedly evolved in them. Additionally, there’s no clear mechanism for transitioning from highly acidic, mineral-rich early oceans to today’s relatively stable chemistry over billions of years. The chemical stability we observe today suggests recent establishment of current conditions.

 

OCEAN SALT CONTENT: OUR RELATED POSTS

• Can a Young Earth Explain Impact Craters? Evidence Says Yes
• The Sun’s Age: Is It Really A Showstopper for A Young Earth?
• Age of the Earth Discussions: How’s Helium a Gamechanger?
• 6000 Years Or 4.5 Billion: How Old is the Earth Really?
• Geologic Dating: Is It Really a Showstopper for Young Earth Science?
• Do Tree Rings Really Prove the Earth Is Old?
• Mt St Helens: How One Volcano Challenges Geological Timescales
• Population Math: The Overlooked Evidence for a Young Earth