[Azimuthal]

this time, i picked the salty seas dillema

5. Not enough sodium in the sea.

Every year, rivers⁸ and other sources⁹ dump over 450 million tons of sodium into the ocean. Only 27% of this sodium manages to get back out of the sea each year.^9,10 As far as anyone knows, the remainder simply accumulates in the ocean. If the sea had no sodium to start with, it would have accumulated its present amount in less than 42 million years at today’s input and output rates.¹⁰ This is much less than the evolutionary age of the ocean, three billion years. The usual reply to this discrepancy is that past sodium inputs must have been less and outputs greater. However, calculations that are as generous as possible to evolutionary scenarios still give a maximum age of only 62 million years.¹⁰ Calculations¹¹ for many other seawater elements give much younger ages for the ocean.

Some more digging led me to another reference:
Salty Seas - Evidence for a Young Earth

A pretty key figure has been brought into dispute:

More recently, the geologist Dr Steve Austin and the physicist Dr Russell Humphreys analyzed figures from secular geoscience sources for the quantity of sodium ion (Na⁺) in the ocean, and its input and output rates.⁴ The slower the input and faster the output, the older the ocean could be.
Every kilogram of seawater contains about 10.8 grams of dissolved Na⁺ (about 1% by weight). This means that there is a total of 1.47 x 10¹⁶ (14,700 million million) tonnes of Na⁺ in the ocean.


4. S.A. Austin and D.R. Humphreys, The sea’s missing salt: a dilemma for evolutionists, Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Creationism, Vol. II, pp. 17–33, 1990. This paper should be consulted for more detail than is possible in this article.

A rebuttal, entitled salt in the sea. By Glenn Morton, Glenn Morton has an interesting take on things:

Glenn Morton is a petroleum geophysicist who holds a Bachelor of Science in physics and currently makes his living as Director of Technology in charge of petrophysics, reservoir characterization, reservoir simulation and geophysical visualization, at a large independent oil company. Unlike the creationists reviewed in this series to date Glenn is unique: He fully accepts evolutionary biology, geochronology, and astronomy, along with the findings of pretty much all of science. So why does he classify himself as a Creationist and why would I do so here? Glenn is an evangelical Christian who embraces a view called Theistic Evolution (TE). This is the faith based position that the universe, the solar system, the earth, and the history of life up to and including the evolution of anatomically modern humans from earlier primates, were created by God using processes created by same which humans can understand and explain to some degree through careful scientific investigation. In this view there is no contradiction possible even in principle between believing in a Creator and any valid facts gleaned from studying that Creation.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/1/21/111430/597

know an ID'er, apparently. http://www.idurc.org/interviews/morton0605.htm