Summations Only

If we focused on the data, things might go a little bit better. Right now, I see that problem is that the data is ignored while toxic accusations such as 'brainwashing' overwhelm and destroy the conversation.JMHO...Edited by edge, : No reason given.

No. Jar has a bogus reading of the Bible for starters and I should never have gotten on to a thread where he is pushing it. Arguing about what the one true Flood would have done is enough of a project without having to deal with his twisting of the whole Flood story.And by now I should know better than to argue with you. Your tactics are deceitful."Brainwashing" was not brought up on this thread.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Faith, to be honest what I do is to post what the Bible actually says instead of any "reading" like the apologists do.

I think perhaps AdminPhat did not notice that I'm actively moderating this thread.In the opening post Jar expressed a wish to explore the flood mechanisms that produced the geologic record, but he revealed only a single first question with the promise of more to come. Threads shouldn't be open ended, and so if this thread is to continue then I'll be making the final decisions about "next questions." I know Jar prefers a slightly different question, but I'm choosing this question anyway: Please end the off-topic complaining and discuss this question.

That one may possibly be explained.During the initial phase of the flood loose soil is washed from land covering existing sea life and creating a layer containing just sea life.As the duration and extent of the flood continues land life gets killed and even those forms that can live with partial inundation die. Then, during the recessionary phase of the flood all that dead land life and since there is now nothing retaining soil, all the additional soil and just dirt gets washed back down hill to cover the earlier layer containing just sea life.Seems simple and logical and reasonable.

But that's an attempt at explaining how this happened once But if you look at, say, the Grand Canyon, you get sea fossils, land fossils, sea fossils, land fossils ...

Of course but admin asked that question and I provided an answer. Admin has taken over this topic it seems.AbE: Can you rephrase that as a question?Edited by jar, : see AbE Alex

This sounds like a typical YEC explanation without any foundation in how the world really works, nor any knowledge of the actual evidence out there, as Dr Adequate notes in Message 201.Your question about sea life in one layer and both sea and land life in a higher layer perhaps needs an example of the situation you're asking about from someplace like the Grand Canyon. As I said earlier, I probably should have developed a better impression of the rest of the questions you were going to ask before I promoted the topic. If you want to take the lead in asking the questions then I need a better idea of where you are going and how you see the progression of questions bringing issues of mechanism to light.

My response fully and completely answered the question you asked.If you want different answers then perhaps try asking better questions.Edited by jar, : appalin spallin

In the opinion of this moderator, no. Since there's no indication of willingness to work with moderation, I'm placing this thread in summation mode.

So there was no answer to the question in the OP and while I imagine Admin wanted to ask how a single flood could produced alternating layers containing sea life and layers containing sea and land life, repetitions, a series of alternating layers are another area that no flood model has ever been able to explain.There is simply no flood model that can explain what is seen in reality.