The 3 catch cries of uniformitarian geology are equally well explained by the Flood

"The upper layers. The top layers are irrelevant because they are probably not with us any more. And I am not claiming to be an expert on this anyway! The layers hardened in the same way mainstream science accounts for them. It is quite likely that the time detials have never been properly worked out. When you've got millions of years, who cares?"
--I love your last sentence, I will certainly have to remember that one, simple though a much better worded expression of it than I have attempted in the past
--Also, me and edge tumbled on the issue of compaction, desiccation, and the rest of what comes with it in this thread starting here:http://EvC Forum: TEMPORARY: So how did the GC (Geological Column) get laid down from a mainstream POV?--You'll notice that the posts with the more valuable substance, of which I would direct you to, have the usual trend of having very brief responses. Also, I if anyone was interested in delving into something similar to this, [Diagenesis III, Wolf et al., 1992] has a section which is partially applicable entitled, "A volume and mass approach to carbonate diagenesis: The role of compaction and cementation".
--Of course it only deals with the process of lithification of a single type of sediment, carbonates. But this is only logical isn't it? I mean really, the rest of the geologic column has already fully lithified and there it would also be unlawful to think that an unconsolidated stratum were to sit atop one that is not lithified wouldn't it? -------------------[This message has been edited by TrueCreation, 12-02-2002][This message has been edited by TrueCreation, 12-02-2002]