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

All I know is that the fossil record would put them at the very top where they had least chance of being fossilized. I'm sure they didn't escape.

Yes, ringo, individual representatives of every living thing. That would be races or varieties, which would leave lots of other races or varieties of the same Species or Kind, while representing that Species or Kind.

So, you 'have an impression'?Sounds like bullet-proof evidence to me. But, billions of fossils, and not one mammal? I thought that, according to Ken Ham, the flood gives us a perfect explanation for the channeling of biological remains into one huge cemetery. I mean, it's a huge package of rocks, with several rock types, environments of deposition and dinosaur fossils, and different formations...C'mon, Faith, just one little bunny...

Yet again, what is the model, mechanism, method, process or procedure that allows your magic flood to separate all modern life forms and segregate them into the uppermost strata which washed away into the ocean or rubble piles where they all rotted away?

Really? That's not my experience. In my country it was basically based on boreholes originally.The Barberton Sequence outcrops are , well, at Barberton. A little to the west the Barberton Sequence is overlain by Dwyka (unconformity between the two). Outcropping there. When you go a little bit more to the west, the Dwyka is overlayed by the Ecca group (gradual contact and outcropping around Witbank, Middelburg). As you go futher south it's all of the above, plus Beaufort, Molteno, Elliot Clarens, Drakensberg, Jozini, Lebombo, all in order from bottom to top.But then, drilling west of Jo'burg from top to bottom, you get Ecca Group, Dwyka Group (Karoo Sequence), then an unconformity, then Transvaal Sequence, then an unconformity, then Wits Sequence, then an unconformity again, then Barberton.If you drill in the Free State area, you get a lot of Karoo Sequence, then an unconformity, then Transvaal Sequence, then an unconformity, then Wits Sequence (all that gold!). No overthrusts or anything that can throw the sequence around. So, the logical consequence is that the Karoo is younger than the Transvaal which is younger than Wits which is younger than the Barberton.In the Karoo Sequence, from top to bottom, we get the Lebombo Group, then the Drakensberg group, then the Clarens Formation, then the Elliot Formation, then the Molteno Formation, then the Beaufort Group, then the Ecca Group, then then the Dwyka Group.All based on boreholes. No fossils involved.The fossils we get are very interesting, though. In the Barberton, only unicellular organisms. In the Transvaal we get the Malmani Dolomites of the Chuniespoort Subgroup. All those fossil stromatolites.In the dwyka and Ecca Group (Karoo Sequence), we get all that coal.In the Beaufort Group, we get a range of fossils from reptiles in the lowest and oldest and lowest parts of the Group to mammal-like reptiles to reptile-like mammals to mammals near the top of the group.So, Faith, you don't have an idea what you're talking about, do you?Edited by Pressie, : Changed sentences

And their buildings, tools, artifacts, livestock etc. somehow made it all the way to the top of the geological record.Did no one live down by the oceans or river valleys at that time? They only built on mountain tops? I'm talking about the first phase of the flood. How did buildings escape the 'scouring' and the burial by the first surge of sediments?

Heh, heh ...Hey, 'impressions' are good enough for me! Why do you have to be so picky?

[qs]All I know is that the fossil record would put them at the very top where they had least chance of being fossilized. I didn't say their houses would be buried in the upper strata, just the people. As I said, I'm sure they didn't escape. But my guess would be they were more likely swept away into the water than buried by the sediments.

Byut you interpret the age of the strata you get from the boreholes according to the Geo Time Scale of hundreds of millions of years, and extrapolate the dates of fossils that are normally associated with particular strata also from that scale, so what's the difference?And then you say you DO get mammals, and they're "near the top" which is where I said they normally are. So what's your problem?Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Once again, that is simply not true Faith.The truth is that no one has ever been able to provide a model, method, mechanism, process or procedure to explain what does exist that does not require immense periods of time. That is why we keep asking you to provide the model, method, mechanism, process or procedure to explain how it could be done in only 6000 years.

I referred to the situation in the Grand Staircase area as evidence but perhaps you can come up with more intact Holocene strata and report on its fossil contents? That would be interesting.

You have NOT proved the need for immense periods of time, you have artificially invented the idea. And the Flood took ONE YEAR with a few years of aftereffects, not 6000 years.

Impressions from creationist websites are supposed to be good enough for Faith. When is she going to learn that creationists always have to tell untruths about everything?It was a rhetorical question. Edited by Pressie, : No reason given.

But you have never presented the model, mechanism, method, process or procedure that allows your magic flood to separate all modern life forms and segregate them into the uppermost strata which washed away into the ocean or rubble piles where they all rotted away?

Nonsense. The need for immense periods of time can be demonstrated by (among near countess other ways) backyard dirt mixed with water in a quart jar.As long as you claim that basic physics don't apply you get to live in your fantasy, but to claim that you don't need to provide methods and processes because others haven't flies in the face of the near endless established methods and processes that have and can be shown.You really need a course in the consilience of evidence. JB