Long, tsunaimi-length waves I'm thinking would occur during the phase of the Flood when the water has receded enough to expose the land surface again, not when the land is submerged according to your straw man, and the water is still saturated with sediments and they get deposited on the land the way beach sand gets deposited wave after wave, only it's different sediments and the waves are huge, some spanning whole continents in the early phase of the water's receding, and this would also be affected by the alternations of the tides. Your waves are something else.
Funny I hardly ever mention the Bible in discussing the Flood but you don't mind lying about that anyway, and as for accusing me of arguing from fantasy you can't think either. I'm speculating about the physical conditions that would pertain in the Flood just as everybody else does.
The deposition of some of the layers all the way across the North American continent suggests such long waves to me, It would be nice to know where these layers end, what that edge looks like. Steve Austin's study of the nautiloid layer in the Grand Canyon also showed the direction of the flow of water that carried them along with the sediment that became the Redwall Limestone. It moved from southeast to northwest and covers about four states. Suggests waves moving onto the land from different directions.
Don't know why you have a problem with the water's being saturated with sediments, turbidity being expected by everyone who discusses the Flood, but an enormous quantity of sediments must have been washed off the land mass into the water in the early stage, along with all the dead things that also ended up buried in the layers.
The very existence of the strata miles deep and very nearly worldwide, and certainly their contents of bazillions of dead creatures, are both extremely good evidence for a worldwide Flood. I still don't know how anyone can look at the walls of the Grand Canyon with their neat horizontal layers a mile deep and think each of those represents a time period of millions of years. The absurdity takes my breath away. But it certainly does suggest a water event on the order of the worldwide Flood.
Obviously can't get anybody off their entrenched biases to think about this stuff in a reasonable way. Same old nonsense thrown at me that I've answered many times before. Same old accusations, same old silliness. Not up to slogging through it all right now, maybe later.
Good grief, of COURSE I'm "making stuff up," that's ALL anyone can do with the one-time event of the long-past Flood. It's all I do and it's all the Flood debunkers do too. "Oh this that or the other physical fact "proves" there couldn't have been such a Flood." Same way I work, only I'm looking for ways it COULD work and they aren't and just about all the scenarios the debunkers have in mind are totally inadequate to what the reality must have been, all superficial straw man stuff. But as far as method goes, for both sides it's a matter of imagining the physical situation as plausibly as possible.
The way I see it, HBD, somebody gets all involved in trying to prove the Flood didn't happen by getting minutely scientific about how particles settle out of water, as if that is the only possible way the layers could have been formed by the Flood. So I just point out that settling out isn't the only way layers could have formed. Waves deposit sand on beaches, there would have been waves as the land mass was exposed during the receding of the Flood. And the next thing that happens is the subject is changed and somebody is demanding that I show how the Flood accounts for the salt beds.
But this thread was a bully swarm long before that anyway.
I have a problem with willful ignorance too, and it's very interesting how it's all about the Flood:
2 Peter 3:3-7 Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts, And saying, Where is the promise of his coming? for since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as [they were] from the beginning of the creation. For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water. Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished....
You go from one non sequitur to another. In saying that waves would ALSO have been involved, I'm not saying they must account for any particular layer. The task is to figure out which did what where. Not that YOU care, since you're quite content to call it all hopeless on the slightest thought that crosses your mind.
I would still like to see someone acknowledge that to explain enormous slabs of rock of different sediments, stacked on top of one another across whole continents but not covering exactly the same area, by the theory of successive time periods of multiple millions of years, is absurd. Of course you won't and in fact your personal m.o. is just to come back at me with "why?" Saves you a lot of thought. Seems to me if that's the way the history of the earth happened then we should expect our time period also to end up as a slab of rock on top of all the others, the American version on top of those spanning the North American continent, but of course you know THAT is absurd, you just won't acknowledge that the whole scenario is absurd. We've got a stack of flat rocks topped by a very lumpy hilly mountainous highly disturbed terrain with deep canyons cut in it that didn't show up in any of the early nice flat slab time periods, but none of that penetrates the consciousness of the committed Flood debunker.
Re: waves, big waves, small waves, breaking news about breaking waves
I have claimed nothing about nonbreaking waves and you already put all that up to debunk the Flood back when you didn't have a clue I couldn't have been talking about nonbreaking waves.
However, ocean water DOES move stuff. Why does all that junk end up on those little islands? Why do bottles with messages in them finally make land across the world? But I'm not just thinking of what's carried on the surface. The ocean also has layers in it, apparently at different temperatures, and it has currents as well as waves. Don't get too minutely scientific about something until we have a better idea of the various ways the Flood might have worked.
Meanwhile how about giving a thought to the absurdity of explaining flat slabs of rocks as eras of time, as I mentioned in Message 71?
There's no point in pondering the details of a process if you don't have the slightest clue how it fits into the Flood. Yall just assume the first thing to run through your head is sufficient and then you get into the details. .
Anyway, how's about you acknowledge the absurdity of explaining the history of the earth in terms of layer upon layer of separate kinds of sedimentary rocks stacked miles deep for hundreds of millions or even billions of years up to our time when suddenly all this disturbance occurs, canyons are cut, mountains are built and so on.
This observation kills establishment geology so of course you can't see it.