basalt layering and flood deposits

Thanks for taking on the role of the creationists Their chief argument is that scientists have said that the lava traveled very quickly without major changes of temperature, that it must have been deposited incredibly quickly. *What*??? That argues against an underwater eruption - underwater eruptions cool *incredibly* quickly. They're trying to claim that an eruption launched magma *750 kilometers* *underwater*???, but it only was a (proportionally) thin sheet? Three times??? Please Their statement about petrified trees is nonsense. Preservation of wood is near soley due to a lack of oxygen in the soil or water that they're trapped in. Petrified wood is nearly always stripped of limbs and bark, and is nearly always either found fallen over or merely "stumps". You don't find big, standing trees, precisely because they can't get preserved that way. Water preserved them from the heat of lava? Are their readers dumb enough to buy into the fact that a superheated distorted eruption isn't hurting trees that are buried mere feet away?Hey, is there salt in the petrified trees? No? Wierd, eh? Their knowledge of supervolcanoes is preposterous. Nothing like extant geological processes? Have they looked at the size of the magma dome underneath Yellowstone National Park? Or are they expecting volcanoes that destroy large chunks of the midwest to erupt once every few years?They talk about pahoehoe lava found as if it's evidence for their claim. Yet, pahoehoe lava is *slow moving*. Their argument is that this lava is somehow moving at preposterous speeds so that it doesn't instantly cool. They discard the roping behavior, as is near universally accepted, on the basis of one dissent.Their stuff about columnar jointing implying rapid cooling, which is nonsense. The process they describe is from observations of features that take months; underwater volcanism instead produces features like are seen in the massive landslides at the base of the Hawaiian islands. On the other hand, they pretend like nothing else can be used to determine cooling speed - nice tossing away of information there. Vulcanologists risk their lives all across the globe, every day, collecting samples of lava cooling at different rates - and the chief measure of the cooling speed is crystal size, which they conveniently ignore.They mention that pillow lava is found at the periphery, but neglect to mention that it was found at what was the coastal periphery. They claim that it's not found at the edges because it must have been moving too fast. *conveniently* moving in a nice even sheet, right, instead of explosively upwards and outwards? . They also conveniently ignore how undersea volcanoes form strong conical shapes, which collapse under extreme rockslides - not the slightest bit of which is observed. They oggle at the tiny amounts of minerals that form from water interaction with lava, ignoring that these minerals should be ubiquitous, not rare.They mention the aquatic fossils which are exactly where acquatic fossils are expected - and neglect to mention the fact that most of the area has *no* aquatic fossils. Then they go on to the preposterous claim that the quartzite didn't form there, but that it was carried from Oregon. Wow, you can explain away *anything* that doesn't fit with your theory like that, can't you? Do you know why they don't want quartzite to be present there? Because quartzite is metamorphic, and won't form in a flood. Having one place where there's a few my erosion is incredibly small. That's actually very good preservation. They then pull a bit of disingenuity about the strata, focusing on segments that are eroded (which are irrelevant geologically) and ignoring the parts of beds that are present. You can't get any information from eroded beds. And I would challenge them to find any reputable geologist who agrees with their statement on these cases that there is "no evidence of erosion". They try to pretend that there is one for one case, but that quote is out of context, in that there *is* little erosion in the Columbia River region - only a very small part of the area is eroded, and that area is only missing a few my.They then assume that bauxite was formed by some magical process not observed today, without even guessing at what it could be. They mention that Bauxite is sometimes formed in tropical environments, but leave out the other major way that it is formed. Which is.... wait for it... in *basaltic lava*! When it is, it's usually found near Latterite. And, hey, guess what??? Then, they ask real geologists to show them where erosion of the basalt has occurred. They show them a place, which makes them write, "Consequently, for now, the only evidence suggestive of long periods of time is the altered state of the subjacent basalt layer." Duh! What sort of evidence did you expect, to find a fossilized grass root system??They then assert that the material isn't soil but some sort of wierd flood reaction, and assure us that they "sent it to the lab" (strange, they didn't list the results... ). They then state that soil should be occurring on top of every outcrop. Strange that they didn't ask the geologists why heheTheir attempt to explain foldings in the basalt where it flowed down the sides of mountains can only be described as "cute". Small amounts of trapped lava leaking out at just the right time? Yeah, lava "leaks" Underwater, at that. Their comment about "too much erosion" is preposterous. The area is mostly large sedimentary deposits between lava flows. Noone would expect to find *eroded boulders* in an area mostly made of sedimentary rock Note how no one was quoted, just a vague assertion------------------
"Illuminant light,
illuminate me."

The problem is, to get any sort of significant percentage of the requisite 6 miles of water coming from the sky requires turning the atmosphere into a gigantic pressure cooker - water is heavy, and every bit of water vapor in the atmosphere adds to the atmospheric pressure. If all 6 miles were in the atmosphere, the pressure would be equivalent of being underwater at the bottom of Challenger Deep. To have this water be in vapor form would require intense temperature as well.Noah would have been parbroiled.Name your gravel site so we can inform you exactly why it exists Vague archaeology is of no use, and since there's no "universal gravel layer" in the world, there's no way to tell what you're referring to.------------------
"Illuminant light,
illuminate me."