Summations Only

The geological column was there. It doesn't matter which specific layer was there. Anything that deposits will deposit on top. How else could it be? Forget about time for the moment. Do you or do you not understand that everything that deposits must deposit on top of what is already there?

quote:

---

Show me where anything like the strata of the Geological Column are now depositing on top of the layers called "Recent" time

---

"Like" in what way?

quote:

---

The depositions now going on are willy-nilly, not depositing the way the strata obviously did, one on top of another so that time periods could be assigned to them

---

That's an odd thing to say. Please explain why you believe this.

quote:

---

Not in incredibly thick layers that span states and continents /abe. if the erosion going on now is collecting in piles or talus at the foot of eroding formations, it is NOT collecting on top of the Geologic Column as a layer of that column.

---

This seems to make no sense to me. Anywhere sediment is deposited must be on top of the local geological column by definition.

quote:

---

If it is collecting at the bottom of the sea it is NOT collecting on top of the existing Geological Column. Sure it must be collecting on whatever there is of the column here and there but not as part of the column. I just think this is obvious.

---

Well obviously it is being deposited where it is being deposited and not where it is not. But that is as far as I can get with that statement. Why is being deposited on top of the local geological column insufficient ?

Oh for pete's sake.The point is that it has to deposit on top of the most recent layer identified as the Holocene or "Recent" time in order to continue the Geological Time Table. Depositing on the Permian after all the strata above it have been eroded away MIGHT be a way it could continue but you'd have to show me where anything like that has occurred in anything like the form of the existing strata, one particular sediment to the same incredible thickness and geographical extent etc.

Why? Why on earth? Why by any stretch of the imagination?

Because that's how the column was originally built up, and it was on the column, however imperfect, that the Geological Time Table was constructed. And now you think it's still the same thing if it no longer deposits as it did all those hundreds of millions of years, it's still the same column and the same time table even if it has nothing in common with any of the stack that defined all these things over the last couple hundred years (abe Yes even the partial stacks since they are all considered to fit into it, physically fit into it so that they can also be dated according to the Time Table. The physical ascent comes first, the time table is built on it /abe.)So now, it doesn't have to be in the same place, it doesn't have to be a nice thick layer like most of the rest of them. So for hundreds of millions of years the strata collected one on top of another, despite their differing sedimentary composition and fossil contents looking much like each other as to general form, and then we get erosion (certainly true in the GC/GS area and on the British island that the layers were all there and then it starting eroding and I'd bet the same situation pertains elsewhere unless so totally obliterated by the erosion you can't really tell what happened) so there are two places where it happened in this order, the Massive Erosion occurring only after the hundreds of millions of years of layering, and now you suppose it's still continuing somewhere else. Well, you aren't going to give it up no matter how wacky, so let's go on to another topic.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Huh? Does that mess make sense even to you?I'm trying to go slowly here because your Gish gallop just goes nowhere. Nothing in that pile of gibberish explains how the geological column "stopped".What has changed? Rivers still flow like they always did. They still deposit deltas like they aways did. Where's the stop?Edited by ringo, : Speleling.

Indian sites which we test contain accumulated soil which has been deposited there.And it is not uncommon to excavate a site, reach a sterile layer, and upon excavating through that layer to encounter another cultural layer beneath it.This is exactly what you are trying to tell us does not happen.Why do you feel it is productive to try to deny things that are seen by everyone else?

The accumulation of the strata like the strata on which the time table was constructed is what has stopped. Those strata that stretch across states and continents to depths of thousands of feet etc. on which the time table was constructed. You know, the Geologic Column with its Geologic Time Table pasted on.Maybe if I break down the paragraph you can read it better: A bit condensed I suppose but it isn't a Gish Gallop because that's supposed to describe making many different points in a blitz attack, but I'm only making the one same old point.

No it isn't the same thing. Ancient settlements do tend to build one on top of another as sediments and their own rubbish accumulate.According to stuff I saw on TV or read somewhere back in the days when I liked to read about archaeological stuff.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

How can the accumulation of strata have stopped when the deposition is still happening?

The layers between the archaeological deposits were not laid down by people. They were laid down by various forces, including wind carried dust.Just add the time which you deny so much and you have additions to the geological column. Especially when a lava flow covers such a layer.So, once again your belief has led you astray.

I did mention sediments in an edit but maybe you missed it. However, the best answer would be that I know sedimentation continues, of course, and I keep saying that here too, it just doesn't occur the way it did in the Geologic Column on which the Geo Time Scale was based. Time continues, history continues, sedimentation continues, but neither the Geologic Column nor the Geologic Time Table continue.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

What's this assumption that deposition has to create strata? Mostly it's just erosion that piles up here and there. Wherever it is getting laid down in layers it's minuscule in proportion to the strata of the Geo Column, besides not building on the existing Geologic Column. It is NOT the Geologic Column.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

So sedimentation changed?How? Why? Magic?

Sure looks like it to me. Well, maybe you can come up with your own theory: Look at the strata that always historically defined the Geologic Column and you tell me if there is any comparison to the way sedimentation is continuing now. River deltas, ha! Bottom of the ocean, ha! Basins here and there (nowhere near the geographical extent of most of the strata in the Column, let alone nowhere near the right location), ha! It is sheer wishfulness that insists the Geo Time Table is continuing. Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.