Origin of the Flood Layers

Faith tries dancing but once again it seem she just doesn't know the steps.Earlier we were discussing evaporite salt beds, ones that are hundreds of feet thick and buried tens of thousands of feet underground.She tries then to change the subject to "Salt Domes" hoping I guess that no one would notice that she was trying to change the subject. Salt is salt after all.But it's pretty easy for scientists to tell the difference between a salt bed and a salt dome and they even use two terms so the two are not confused.The salt bed is laid out over great areas, often really wide areas, often under several states. The beds are horizontal and layered.Salt Domes (notice it is a different term than salt bed) though are intrusions where salt from a salt bed intrudes into an overlying system, deforming the overlying rocks.But what is the process, the model, the method, the mechanism involved.First is the creation of the salt bed. An area is needed where there is an inflow of salt water but a restricted outflow. Water is lost through evaporation until the salt precipitates out. Gradually over time the bed of salt gets thicker. Often, if the salt water inflow is seasonal you get periods when dirt and clay and other minerals blow in on the surface forming the distinctive banding that is seen followed by another cycle of salt formation.Eventually the bed of salt itself get covered, the inflow get halted, and the whole bed gets covered. We know this because that is what we see. The bed is now buried tens of thousands of feet underground yet for the salt to have formed it must have once been at the surface.As more and more dirt accumulates over the salt bed it compresses, eventually becoming rock (what type of rock depends on other factors) but is denser than just soil.Salt though is funny. If you have ever looked at salt under a microscope you know that it forms regular cubes. It is the crystal nature of salt that limits compaction and so it remains less dense than the overlying rock. That means the salt will be more buoyant and will tend to float. The crystal lattice also allows salt to behave as a plastic and to flow. If there is any significant faulting (pretty common, just look at every day's list of earthquakes) the salt can flow vertically as well as horizontally forming intrusions.It is the intrusions that are termed "Salt Domes" to distinguish the two processes, models, method and procedures.So science has examined the evidence and has found detailed models, processes, methods and procedures that will produce what is seen in reality.But they all take time. Not just six thousand years but rather millions or billions of years.

Yet Faith, folk have pondered. Unfortunately for you, in over two hundred years of pondering what has been discovered is that the flood does not fit with ANY evidence that has been found from any branch of science using any technology.The honest truth is that none of the Biblical Floods ever happened.

But again Faith, what we see today is that layers being laid down DO follow the contour of the layers laid down yesterday.

Two bad the Bible says you are wrong yet again Faith.Have you ever actually read the Bible?

Likely she is referring to "But again Faith, what we see today is that layers being laid down DO follow the contour of the layers laid down yesterday." from Message 105.I beg your pardon? Can you provide the model, method, process or procedure involved in your assertion?

There are several places that really provide that kind of contrast and I've been lucky enough to visit several of them.The Calvert Cliffs are one such place. There you can find giant Megladon teeth and clam shells sticking out of the cliff face (back when I went there, before the Nuclear Power Station, you could still climb the cliff face just from fossil to fossil) while you can watch modern shark teeth and clam shells wash up on the shore.The Petrified Forest and Painted Desert. The simple scale of those two places left me in awe.A planetarium. Look out at the universe through an older optical telescope and see time.Pull over at a highway cut where they widened the pathway for a highway. Look at the exposed layers and then at the tiny surface of soil at the top.An archeological dig. Many have a need of volunteers and even have programs for amateurs. It is eye opening to see just what scientists actually do and the efforts they take to question their findings.

Faith, that is the usual way strata are deposited. High spots get weathered and that material gets deposited in low spots.Reality shows us that happening as well as core samples and mines and modern technology.

Well, what gets weathered and carried down hill will be what the high spot happens to be made from. That is one way that scientists can determine where material came from.It does not really sort itself but rather over time either gets buried under additional layers of material, compressed and become rock, or the low area gets lifted up and it in turn becomes the high spot to get weathered and worn downBut your idea of flat horizontal bases is also not what is actually seen in reality. As was pointed out in the thread Exploring the Grand Canyon, from the bottom up. the layers are not smooth or even horizontal and we can see where additional deposition takes place over bases that are not flat and horizontal. We also see in reality that sometimes layers get tilted where part is exposed at the surface. In such cases the exposed part then gets weathered, eroded and so we see abrupt changes in the layering.All of this is pretty normal and just processes we can see going on even today, but they also require long periods of time, far longer than 6000 years and show no signs that there was either Biblical Flood.The accepted explanations explain what is seen in reality but NO ONE has ever presented a model, method, mechanism or process to create what is seen through any flood of any magnitude, to create what is seen in one year or even in 6000 years.

There is a pattern there Faith and it is not just about science, facts or reality.You don't care that terms actually have meaning or that what is seen is actually what is seen or what Calvin actually says or what is actually written in the Bible stories and that is why you continually post stuff that is just plain wrong.You claim to see no reason any of what is seismically imaged and called "ancient rivers" or "canyons" was ever on the surface yet never provide a model, method, process or mechanism that could explain what is seen that does not require those artifacts to have once been on the surface.This has been true so far of every single example of what really exists whether we are talking about the Bible or science or what Calvin actually wrote.All anyone has ever asked of you is that when you make assertions that you actually try to back up those assertions with evidence and the model, process, method or mechanism that explains the evidence.Edited by jar, : appalin spallin

Of course they can say for sure until you present a model, method, process or mechanism that can explain how such things can be created other than at the surface.It really is that simple Faith.

It's not just thousands of such issues but rather millions.So let's make a little list of "issues" that neither you or anyone else have explained with some flood or in 6000 years.What looks just like Valleys and rivers and deltas buried deep underground.
Salt beds hundreds of feet thick buried tens of thousands of feet underground.
Salt domes.
The Green River varves, six million alternating layers, light then dark, super fine then coarser material.
The chalk layers that became the White Cliffs of Dover.
How rain for 40 days and 40 nights would wear granite differently than tens of thousands of years of water pouring over Niagara Falls or other similar falls?
How are waves today different than waves during the Biblical floods?
How are currents today different than during the Biblical Floods?
What model, method, mechanism or process in a flood would cause tsunami waves after the water had stopped rising and was receding?
How any flood can make stone.There are a few things, very few things, where you need to present a model, method, process or mechanism that explains what is seen.AbE:And this is really, really important Faith.If just one item from that list and the thousands of other issues does not have a process, model, method or procedure that will allow creating in a 6000 year period then the earth is older than 6000 years.In fact the earth must be older than the minimum time needed to create any item on that or all the other lists.It really is that simple.Edited by jar, : see AbE:

You ask why no thinking person has ever considered that a river valley system might develop underground is that no one in the history of science has ever presented a model, method, process, procedure or mechanism that would allow a river valley to develop under ground.Until you present a model, method, process, procedure or mechanism that would allow a river valley to develop under ground there is no reason to think it was not formed at the surface.

Honestly Faith, speculation about a flood that absolutely never happened can't cause high blood pressure, maybe chest pains from laughing.But honestly all you need to do is provide a model, method, mechanism, process, procedure that expalins what is seen better than the current models, methods, mechanisms, processes and procedures.Unfortunately so far no one has been able to do that for at least 200 years now.

Well, no Faith, they are not plausible when as is always the case the actual evidence refutes your what-ifs. Well no Faith, they present no challenge. They are all refuted by the actual evidence, by reality.

No, it is not a theory that says there is a layer missing, it is fact. You have been shown that fact.And you have never presented a model, method, mechanism, process or procedure to explain how the material could have been removed other than by being exposed at the surface and eroded away.