Geological timescale and the flood.

The creationist position on flood geology is often hazy about when (geologically) the flood occurred and which rocks we can ascribe to the flood. I've had it pointed out to me more than once that I shouldn't forget that rock was probably laid down both before the flood and after, but no one has ever specified which rocks are pre-flood and which are post-flood. I remember the ICR's boundaries for the flood being the beginning of the Cambrian and the beginning of the Tertiary, but I've never seen the reasoning for this explained.My question to creationists is- when (into which geological periods) do you place:

Please justify your position: Why do you place the boundaries where you do?Edited by The Matt, : addition suggested by Iceage

Good idea. Added to the list.

Interesting, but why? What boundary or characteristic(s) do you use to tell them apart?

quote:

---

I would go with about 4400 years ago.

---

Would that be within the K-T to allegedly <100,000 years old bracket?

quote:

---

The way to do this is on a case-by-case basis. Attempts to label things in advance of investigation are overly ambitious.

---

In advance of investigations? The science of geology is not new and some areas have been investigated in detail for ~200 years. Flood geology is as old if not older. If investigation has not been carried out, I really wonder why, but the information is there.

quote:

---

Any attempt to utilize isochron dates is likely to fail, since these don't take the flood into account. Naturally occurring water can dissolve the ingredients, so there's no way to easily determine initial conditions even if one were inclined to do so.

---

Radiometric dating is not the only method used to date rocks. They were dated relatively by their relationship to one another and their fossil content years before radiometric dating was available, and radiometric dates have generally confirmed the supposed order. I'll refer you to this post if you want to know more.

quote:

---

Fossils are advantageous to the investigator, because they leave clues as to whether a rock would be most likely to have been formed before, during, or after the flood.

---

Tell me more. What would we expect to see fossil-wise in rocks from before, during and after the flood? We'll see if this matches up.I'd personaly think that if biblical creation were true, we'd expect pre-flood rocks to contain all kinds of fossils (fish, bivalve, reptile, bird, mammal, flowering plant etc) mixed together from the earliest rocks, barring some creation week basement rocks. Next there'd be a sudden dissapearance of anything terrestrial, with mass graveyards as the flood begins. Next would come marine rocks devoid of of terrestrial fossils with only a few marine ones, followed by a long recovery period in which groups re-establish themselves and diversity increases as 'kinds' diversify and specialise. The thing is, we don't see this.