Origin of the Flood Layers

Scale, proportion, ocean currents and waves which are not part of the usual local flood. THINK.

Yeah, Ringo, THINK.

Faith, when we think about it, we see there is no reason whatsoever to conclude that the principles of physics are not the same. Sedimentation occurs the same whether the flood is large or small. The evidence in the rocks shows this and experimental evidence shows it also.

You are the one that needs to THINK about why all the evidence shows that you are wrong.

Faith writes: Scale, proportion, ocean currents and waves which are not part of the usual local flood. THINK.

What she fails as usual to point out is that we can see and study all those factors today; we can even study ocean currents that totally circle the globe. We can see how mountains effect ocean currents and how waves have absolutely no effects (except on stupid wooden boats filled with animals) when they are higher than a submerged land mass.

We can look at the effects of storms and waves and ocean currents on coasts today and measure erosion and deposition rates.

Faith's unsupported assertions have no weight or value unless she can provide the actual models and methods that explain what is seen today.

The waves I'm talking about occur after the land mass is exposed. THINK.

I don't suppose you've noticed that all you've done is make assertions and accusations without offering one shred of support for any of it.

Faith writes: The waves I'm talking about occur after the land mass is exposed. THINK.

Okay. But how is that any different than waves we see today? Where is the evidence of such waves that can be assigned to a single year event?

Again Faith, it is a matter of evidence. We find lots of evidence of waves all over the world, but not tied to any one event or date.

Where is your evidence, model and method?

Where is your evidence, model and method?

The Bible, the Bible, and pure fantasy.

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.

Faith writes: 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.

And what is the evidence, model or method to create "Long, tsunaimi-length waves"?

What is the model, method and explanation for the water to be saturated with sediments?

Events leave evidence Faith. We can find evidence today for ancient tsunamis, for example in the Norwegian Sea around 6000 BCE or about 2000 years before you think the world began and about 4000 years before the date of the imagined flood.

You keep just making stuff up without any evidence, model or even method or any explanation of what the events you imagine might do.

That is the problem Faith, why Creationism and YEC can never be more than lies and fantasy and why as a Christian it is so important to expose YEC and Creationism as the perversion of the Bible, Christianity and God that they are.

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.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Funny I hardly ever mention the Bible in discussing the Flood but you don't mind lying about that anyway,

Why mention it when we already know that is what you are basing your fantasies on?

and as for accusing me of arguing from fantasy you can't think either.

I can think ten times better than you can.

If you could think, you'd realize that the planet has never been covered in water since humans have been alive.

But you can't do that, because you are unable to stop thinking that the Bible has to get everything exactly right. And your faith is so weak that if one thing was wrong then you'd have to throw the whole thing out. Well, you've got too much invested already to do that, so you're going to have to resort to creating fantasies that allow you to keep believing that the Flood actually happened.

I honestly feel sorry for you. To limit yourself to such nonsense has to be debilitating. Maybe that's why you get so angry all the time.

I'm speculating about the physical conditions that would pertain in the Flood just as everybody else does.

What you are doing is assuming that the Flood happened and then you're trying to find ways to fit the evidence into it.

That's totally backwards. I mean, you say stuff like this:

quote:

---

A HUGE amount of the observed facts fit the Flood explanation.

---

You don't even understand how scientific explanations work.

Don't look for facts to fit within your theory, model your theory so that it fits around the facts.

I mean, a HUGE amount of the observed facts fits The Matrix explanation too. That's not evidence that it is correct!

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.

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.

Its because they actually understand a little something about sedimentology.

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

Except we know for a fact that the planet has not been covered in water since humans have been around.

But it certainly does suggest a water event on the order of the worldwide Flood.

Unfortunately, it is impossible for there to have been a worldwide Flood during the time that humans have existed.

The very existence of the strata miles deep and very nearly worldwide, ...

But they are not worldwide are they? In fact they do not correlated across oceans, but are interrupted on continents by tectonic boundaries and by erosional surfaces. So, how did that happen during a brief global flood?

... and certainly their contents of bazillions of dead creatures, are both extremely good evidence for a worldwide Flood.

So, how many creatures would you expect to see live and die in a billion years?

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.

Who said 'each of them does'? On the other hand, there is plenty of evidence that they aggregate over a billion years.

The absurdity takes my breath away. But it certainly does suggest a water event on the order of the worldwide Flood.

The uneducated are often mystified.

The deposition of some of the layers all the way across the North American continent suggests such long waves to me,

Why is that? Why do you have waves depositing evaporites and sand dunes?

It would be nice to know where these layers end, what that edge looks like.

They generally pass from on rock type to another. Sometimes they are eroded away and sometimes the end at the edges of their depositional environment.

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.

Except that would be away from land, and it doesnt' mean 'waves'.

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.

There is no problem with turbidity, per se, but the time for settling and the total amount of suspended solids. It makes no sense.