Summations Only

Sure. 1) There were no people around 250 million years ago to report on such a flood. 2) There was no genetic bottleneck in human populations in recent human history. You are ignoring the big picture: your argument about geology 250 million years ago in relation to a biblical flood is akin to arguing about whether there are pink polka dots on unicorns' butts. It makes no difference, and is silly besides.But I suppose you are doing it because somehow, somewhere, you have to find something that will keep your belief in a global flood going.

In all my graduate studies and in 40+ years of anthropology/archaeology I have never heard of a mass extinction of humanoids at 40,000 years ago.I think I'll need some good sources for this claim. Seven racial stocks? Where do you get that? Most anthropologists who selected a number at all (most now don't) preferred 3, although Coon and a few others preferred 4. But Boyd at one time choose 6, while Garn at one time identified either 9 or 30, depending on methods. But 7?Again, we better have some good sources. Nonsense. Incredible nonsense! This is not shown at all by the above nonsense. This is one of the most incredible examples of nonsense I've ever seen.Where do you get this stuff? And why would you expect anyone to take it seriously?Edited by Coyote, : Grammar

If what you are describing is what I think it is, then...,...this is a creationist myth that has most likely been passed from book to website to blog and back for a long time without anyone ever checking on it's accuracy.It's most likely that you are describing "time stratigraphic markers."First, some background. A "time stratigraphic marker" can be anything that is widespread, durable, easily identifiable, and which has a short temporal span. A classic example is the recent "pull top" from beverage cans. These were introduced about 1964, went out of style in the late 1970s, are everywhere, and are made of aluminum so they are very durable. Given all of these features, these little jewels will be great for identifying that specific narrow time period to archaeologists for thousands of years to come. Certain styles of glass bottles and pottery and a host of other items can also be excellent markers.Now, we can apply that same principle to fossils in stratigraphic layers. Some layers contain fossils not found in the layers above or below them. Once those layers are dated using other means, then they can be dated wherever they occur by the "index fossils" they contain. These are simply time stratigraphic markers as used in geology. They work just the same, have good accuracy, and save the expense of radiometric dating. Why bother to do expensive dating when it has been done elsewhere, and those index fossils are easily identified to particular time periods?But this simple technique is apparently enough to confuse creationists who 1) are looking for anything they can find to bash science, and 2) who generally know next to nothing about the science they are seeking to bash.