No, rates of change have to be within the realm of reason. You keep forgetting that mountains are formed not only by uplift, but by erosion too. There has not been enough time to erode all of the various landforms that we see in the extremely short period since the Flood could have happened.<quoted text>
In the future remember, as you state, things can change. Things could have changed a lot with the flood, like mountains. They could have grown considerably.
KAB, if you you want to make an argument for the Flood it has to be a consistent one. That is why real geology wins out over flood geology. We don't make false assumptions and then see if we can hit the evidence hard enough with a hammer so that it fits into a specific model. We look at the evidence and see where it goes. That is why we do not end up with self contradicting stories.