Flood sorting

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tranquility Base:
Peter

​

The flood occurred in surges based on geo-data (if there was a flood) so that is why it is not as simple as you are suggesting. Show me the links to the tank data. The amount of work done in this area would be incredibly minimal.

---

University of Michigan: File Not Found ( 404 )
Error 404: Page or Resource Not Found | NCEIBoth deal with the transport of animal remains.

bump...I not quite convinced yet, TB.------------------
http://www.hells-handmaiden.com

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tranquility Base:
I read in a mainstream source that turbidite deposits make up half of the geo-column.

---

So, have you found this reference yet? I'd really be interested in seeing the data.

quote:

---

Huge sand waves and rapid correlated paleocurrents are the norm in the Paleozoic for example.

---

I also question whether 'huge sand waves' are the norm for the Paleozoic. Could you give us some kind of evidence to this effect?

quote:

---

Lyell was wrong about most of the geo-column.

---

Well, perhaps in some of the details, but heck, that was hundreds of years ago. Kind of a cheap shot to sit here with that much research behind you and criticize someone who really had little to go on but some observations and common sense.

Bump, indeed ........

On the other page TB wrote

quote:

---

The primary unanswered point here, and near punctuated equilibrium, let alone evoltuion, killer, is that we can see beautiful gradual evolution in the fossil record up a geological column covering million of years in shell-fish paleontology for example. We can track the morphology change - the shape changes, the swirls increase in helicity.

---

Now TB please tell us again how this beautiful sorting occured during your surging, swirling worldwide flood.Randy

^ This gradual morphology up the geo-col is definetly not everywhere as you know! If the flood occurred it must have been a flood of surges and there would have been times/places of constant current )(as suggested by the paleocurrents) that could very easily have sorted shell shapes approximately just as one gets graded pebble sizes (which is suggestive of the flood too). But it was a process and it had cyclical stages.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tranquility Base:
^ This gradual morphology up the geo-col is definetly not everywhere as you know! If the flood occurred it must have been a flood of surges and there would have been times/places of constant current )(as suggested by the paleocurrents) that could very easily have sorted shell shapes approximately just as one gets graded pebble sizes (which is suggestive of the flood too). But it was a process and it had cyclical stages.

---

So you are claiming that these "flood surges" sorted ammonites of appoximately the same size and shape by the complexity of their shell sutures. How did that work? Were these the same surges that carried trillions of tons of sand hundreds of miles?Randy

The problem I have always had with this 'sorting'
argument is the complexity of the process. Experiments
on chicken bones reveal such vast complexity that the 'sorting'
is considered random.IF a flood (or flood surges) were responsible for the fossil
record (or a large proportion of it) wouldn't one expect
to see so many 'anomalies' (in evolutionary terms) that the
fossil record would never have been used to support the ToE
or may even have cast doubt upon it?Instead we have a situation where in order to attempt an undermining
of ToE's explanation for the fossil ordering we find an
elaborate, implausible concoction.I have tended to find that the simplest explanations for observations
are the most accurate.