Evidence that the Great Unconformity did not Form Before the Strata above it

So now you are saying that there was erosion at the Great Unconformity surface?

Ok then... none of them. HBDI'll have to come back to all this later

My attempts to elicit clarifications from you are only leaving me more confused. Okay, the images look odd to you for some reason, but is your focus on their minute details leading anywhere, because if not then it might better aid understanding if your comments addressed the larger message they convey about how angular unconformities form.

Not sure where you are getting that in what I wrote above. Maybe I should break it down.

• ...erosion of all the (erodable) land mass...,
  ​
  I'm referring to what must have happened as first the heavy rain pummeled the land and saturated it, creating massive mudslides, and then the sea water rose to cover all the land in the first half of the Flood: it would have soaked all the soft sediments which would have been removed from any hard rock surfaces and carried down hill, most of which would then have been suspended in the rising sea water.
  ​
• ...deposition back on the land in layers of different sediments, ...
  ​
  If Walther's Law is the model here the sediments would have been redepositing in layers on the land as the sea level rose. Perhaps continuing to settle out at its height as well.
  ​
• ...tectonic disturbance that uplifts land, pushes up mountains, breaks up and washes away the looser upper strata and cuts canyons and the stairs of the Grand Staircase and so on and so forth....
  ​
  It is at this point that the massive erosion occurred that cut the G.C. and the G.S. etc etc etc, which I usually think of as ioccurring as the Flood water was receding, but the timing is open to adjustment I suppose: I see the Flood period as a period of massive catastrophe to the whole planet, drowning it in the Flood water from both rain and rising sea, but also triggering the movement of the tectonic plates, in association with volcanism, such as at the Atlantic ridge where Europe and Asia Africa were separated from the Americas and have been drifting apart ever since. That initial tectonic jolt occurred at different places all over the planet, separating all the continents from the original single land mass, so all the continents should have experienced its effects as their outer edges subducted oceanic plates, resulting in mountain building, uplifted land, twisted strata, broken strata that is then washed away in the receding Flood water, cutting canyons, and FORMING ANGULAR UNCONFORMITIES such as the G.U. and Siccar Point.

Even if you consider this scenario to be completely daft, don't I deserve some credit for such a comprehenisive global theory?Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

I should mention that my theory/scenario/model has been evolving as these discussions have been proceeding. The basic idea remains intact, but now I'm thinking that Walther's Law is a completely sufficient explanation for the deposition by settling-out of all the strata, whereas before I was pondering the possibility of different ways it might have happened at different stages.

From right here: Then you go on to describe your flood.

However, that erosion occurred as a result of the Flood, so no, it has nothing to do with the unconformities, it simply broke up all the erodible land, eroding down to bedrock, and suspended it in the rising Flood waters.

Not minute details but the overall three-dimensional appearance of the whole picture.And I thought I conceded that it does look like it must have formed in the order of: first dolomite laid down, then broken and tilted, followed by deposition of sand and Ibex formation.It doesn't support my view but it also isn't enough to challenge it.Edited by Faith, : hyphenate "three-dimensional"Edited by Faith, : Comma added

You do realize that a land surface that has more sediments deposited on it is an unconformity, don't you? Sounds like an unconformity to me, exposing bedrock and then depositing more sediments.

I guess I should have specifically named "angular unconformities" which is what I thought we were talking about, as in the Great Unconformity. My statement about eroding all erodible sediments does not relate to that formation. But not angular unconformities such as the G.U. and Siccar Point. For those you need an earlier deposition of strata followed by a force to tilt them, not just bedrock.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

What's wrong is first that there is absolutely no Biblical support for tectonic disturbances that uplift land, pushes up mountains breaks up and washes away the looser upper strata and cuts canyons and the stairs of the Grand Staircase and so on and so forth and no evidence in the real world for any such events within the last 6000 years and no known model, manner, method, mechanism, process or procedure that could do that.So far your ideas seem non starters both in the real world and based on either of the Bible flood stories.

I am curious where in your scenario the Navajo Sandstone was deposited and turned to stone? This is the Navajo Sandstone exposed in Snow Canyon in southern Utah. That is my grandson standing on top.According to Wikipedia, "Navajo Sandstone frequently overlies and interfingers with the Kayenta Formation of the Glen Canyon Group. Together, these formations can result in immense vertical cliffs of up to 2,200 feet (670 m). Atop the cliffs, Navajo Sandstone often appears as massive rounded domes and bluffs that are generally white in color."It is made up of lithified sand dunes and crossbedding can plainly be seen. How the heck did this end up on top of the layers that you say were deposited by your flood in the Grand Canyon area. Why wasn't it washed away in the receding flood water that you say receded to somewhere.It seems to me that a comprehensive global theory would clearly explain all the details that we have pointed out that do not fit in your comprehensive global theory. It has to explain everything or what use is it?

The Navajo Sandstone is a layer in the Grand Staircase formation to the north of the Grand Canyon, occurring at the Jurassic-Triassic level. The Grand Staircase is made up of strata that climb up from the Permian / Kaibab which forms the rim of the Grand Canyon. All those same higher layers were originally laid down over the Grand Canyon area, but in that area they were washed away, while in the Grand Staircase they remain but were eroded down to cliffs and plateaus, forming the staircase. Navajo sandstone occurs in many areas of the southwest but is one of the layers that washed away over the Grand Canyon area where the uppermost layer is the Kaibab limestone of the Permian.There is no reason why the Flood shouldn't explain such an obviously originally water-soaked formation.You can see it on this cross section of the Grand Staircase: Here's my old favorite cross section of the entire GC-GS area to show that the layers of the GS do not extend over the GC but show evidence of having been broken off and eroded away where the Kaibab Uplift begins to rise up over the GC area. Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

In what way is it obviously originally a water-soaked formation? I must be missing the clues that it was water-soaked.How do sand dunes get formed by a flood? The evidence suggest that much of the Colorado Plateau region was covered by sand dunes to a great depth. We know these were sand dunes because of the cross bedding pattern.Can you show any place on the earth where sand dunes are forming under water? Your own diagrams show sedimentary layers that you claim were deposited by the flood above and below the Navaho.My question is how did the flood deposit dry sand dunes between the other sedimentary layers?

It would be nice if you would acknowledge that I did answer the question you asked in my previous post. I've never said I understand all the details about how the Flood did what it did, but the more I plug away at it the more answers come to the various questions. No reason the "dunes" challenge can't also be answered. Meanwhile, do please acknowledge that I accounted for the existence of rock you think my scenario did away with. Thanks.And all this is off topic in this thread.\Thanks again.