Summations Only

Over the years I have made some really good arguments that NEVER get any recognition whatever. You have no idea what it's like to be treated this way time after time after time after time. So don't tell me I'm the one being unfair. I have nothing more to say to you.

All I've ever meant is that a time period, say the Cambrian, encompasses the rock, and vice versa, in this case called the Tapeats, and nothing you've said changes that. Those supposed millions of years all fall within the Cambrian, right, and the Camprian encompasses all of the Tapeats, right? So what's the problem?Since terminology matters so much and the most recent pages of this discussion have been a ridiculous mess of semantic confusion, there's no point in beating my head against this wall any more. I don't need to talk to Geologists, I can go talk to ordinary people.

Oh sure, you can find one exception to a rule that can be seen in hundreds of thousands of other places. But it doesn't really matter how you divide it, you've still got time stuck onto rocks no matter how they're sorted, and it's that correlation that's ridiculous and impossible . And I've many times acknowledged that a Time Period is often defined by many different rocks so that's not news. Still the same problem. There shouldn't be ANY rocks to identify time, period, certainly not rocks for all the time periods. Someday maybe one of you all will wake up and see the problem here.

I don't, thanks.

It would be better if you figured it out for yourself. there's more than enough information. Oh not you, that isn't going to happen, but others who hang out here might. Not that I'm holding my breath.

I don't see it that way at all. At all. I'm completely at odds with everyone here and all the times I thought I'd finally got through I hadn't, and apparently you think you've make points I absolutely don't see and what else is there to say? There's no point in repeating ourselves as we do.

I meant the same thing as "including" the Tapeats when I said "encompassing." Most of the conflict over the last few days has been about definitions. Just this level of merely semantic disagreement gets exhausting.It doesn't matter how you cut the Tapeats or the Tonto Group, it really doesn't matter. I think that marking time by rocks however you split the pie is a clue to the wackiness of historical Geology. Sorry about that, I suppose you'll defend it to the death.No, it's not my problem, in a sense it's nobody's problem. I'm defending a paradigm and so are you. I'm tired of fighting, tired of the personal attacks, on both sides, I don't care if I'm wrong about some terminology or some side issues, it's irrelevant to my basic viewpoint. I need to go work it out somewhere else. Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Appeared at the Creation???? No, they appeared at the Flood. Do you really not know after all this time that I'm talking about the flat slabs of rock that are the strata of the geological column so clearly identified with the time periods such as Cambrian and so on, that stretch for thousands of square miles and even more across continents? This is madness. No I don't want to argue this again for the umpteen kajillionth time.There is some overlap here but not much:

A day will do. Argue all you want, there's no way you could get thousands of square miles of a single sediment spanning most of a continent on the Old Earth model. Not buying it.

I had that in mind when I wrote what I wrote.

The "vague" remark was a response to the last paragraph about edge's Tapeats explanation. Sorry.Oh yes I'm running away from the insane miscommunication in this madhouse.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Strata could overlie anything but the strata I'm talking about are those that make up the Geological Column that is seen ON THE LAND all over the place and not in the oceans. And if a new layer is NOT overlying existing geological column it's not part of the geological column. The Geological Column is over and done with, it is not continuing, the Flood built it and it's done. This is evident wherever it exists. That's why you all pretend it can go on in ways it couldn't possibly go on. Ugh what deceit.And the word "stratum" means "layer." How can I get that wrong?Edited by Faith, : o

You're going to have to point out this supposed layer over other layers of the Geo Column that's like all those other layers. It doesn't exist.

The Flood made particular kinds of straight flat rocks that cover huge areas. When the Flood ended those kinds of rocks were no longer being made. Gosh you guys can be obtuse.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

The strata are nothing like layers of paint. Show me a new sedimentary rock layer that is anything like the Geological Column layers, in horizontal straightness and flatness and especially in extent. It doesn't exist. Your analogy to paint is ridiculously inadequate.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.