"The Flood" deposits as a sea transgressive/regressive sequence ("Walther's Law")

I guess you missed the discussions of the genetic bottleneck that prove you wrong.

I don't grasp how this is an answer to what I said.I was responding to your Message 6 where you were saying something about the "created kind" in an unfamiliar context. That is, the "kinds" in YEC theology are all living things, but you seem to be extending the concept to the physical world. In any case I answered that you don't seem to be making a distinction between what was originally created, either living things or physical world, and what happened to both as a result of the Fall. Since what we see today is the ruined condition of the Creation it's hard to be sure what the original state of things was.Just as a reminder here's what I was responding to: I don't happen to believe in the idea of apparent age. Not sure what it has to do with mineral resources either. I've wondered what the original condition of those minerals was. Now they are scattered here and there but originally my guess is they had some definable form and location though I can't piece together a clear idea of that. Here's where you are clearly not distinguishing between the original Creation and the destruction caused by the Fall, which rought "thorns and thistles" as well as the death of living things, including diseases, plus the destruction caused by the Flood which rearranged all that "dirt" plus the tectonic event that split the continents that I believe the GS-GC cross section shows to have occurred after all the strata were laid down by the Flood waters, at the time the water receded, as well as the volcanism, all destructive processes that seem to be connected to the Flood.That's the basic part of my YEC Model. Nothing miraculous is necessary to it, just the unprecedented magnitude of the Flood itself, but if you put your mind to trying to account for what such a worldwide event might have done I think it can probably explain what is now taken for complex time-determined events that are partly complex because not seen as connected the way I see them.I said as much in my answer to you: As I say above I don't see it as miraculous, and since I believe the Flood caused most of what you interpret as those "long and complex processes," as described above, it's the Old Earth explanations that are being imposed on the Flood facts, not the other way around. Thank you for recognizing that since others sometimes deny it. Yes, makes sense to me. Not sure why "grungy" but I do have a less than textbook version of Walther's Law in mind for the Flood. Just the fact that rising sea level deposits sediments HAS to apply to the Flood transgression and regression too. I don't know why Percy felt he had to picture the deposits the length of the shoreline but that figures since many of them cover huge amounts of territory. Sediments from both the scoured off land and the deep parts of the sea are in the strata and surely there is enough going on in a worldwide Flood to account for both. What ought to be much harder to account for is the idea that any of those huge sedimentary deposits occurred incrementally over millions of years, or even in periodic "shallow" transgressions and regressions. Why? In some places the "basement" rocks beneath the Tapeats sandstone layer are pretty lumpy and unformed, which is certainly an uncomformity (those are usually granite or schist, however, which I see as formed by the volcanism that occurred at the end of the Flood), but in other places such as beneath the GC there were strata laid down (the Supergroup) -- is all that the "mother of all unconformities" you have in mind? It's even possible isn't it that the surface on which the sediments BEGAN to be deposited isn't even visible anywhere? Not quite sure what you are picturing here but given the originally extremely fertile condition of the pre-Flood world plus the extraordinary vitality of pre-Flood living things seeds should have germinated pretty rapidly in whatever surface presented itself in a given location still wet from the Flood. This level of vitality would be vitiated over the ensuing decades and centuries (as human longevity also decreased over the next few denturies) but it should have provided a good start to the reseeding of the post-Flood environment.Unfortunately I've lost interest in debating anything, all I want to do is work on the YEC model. All the efforts at debunkery are just boringly irrelevant at this point. When Percy, or anybody, discounts the Flood as just a "religious idea" it's clear there's no fighting the prevailing perspective. I may go through and pick out statements here and there I want to answer but I realize that is frustrating to people who are here to try to destroy the whole idea of the worldwide Flood that I KNOW happened about 4500 years ago. Oh well.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

The straightness and flatness of the original (not tectonically deformed) strata and the tight contacts between many of them are evidence of rapid deposition. The fact that the Geologic (Stratigraphic) Column has in fact come to a stopping point despite strained efforts to pretend it is still ongoing, is evidence of its being pretty recent. ENORMOUS amounts of distorting erosion between layers, that often cuts deeply into lower layers, the sort of thing that would have occurred during millions of years at the surface of the earth. Some signs of former vegetation BETWEEN the layers too, maybe petrified downed trees; distortions in a single layer here and there because of such obstacles, instead of the remarkably conformed flatness of sediment upon sediment. More variety in the sediments, not any of the clear demarcation between say a limestone and a sandstone. Why should that occur on the surface of the earth ever? None of that exists. What exists is evidence of massive water deposition, ALL the strata following the same pattern of flatness and straightness.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Actually, the main thing is that there isn't a sane reason at all for there even to BE any strata to "evidence long periods of deposition." Why should there be ANY flat straight sedimentary rocks at all, let alone neatly stacked miles deepas we see for instance in the Grand Canyon? If you have continual deposition say from eroding mountains why should it be of any identifiable sediment rather than the tumble-down lumpy surface we see around us today? The idea that there is eventually going to be another layer to commemorate today's "time period" with appropriate fossils is absurd, and yet that is what the standard interpretation of the Stratigraphic Column requires for its continuation to be consistent. For the Geological Time Scale to be true, there should not be a Stratigraphic Column AT ALL.

You do not see anything at all being deposited on the scale and in the form of the Stratigraphic Column. And your photo is pathetic compared to what should be seen of the erosion I'm talking about.This whole argument is pathetically stupid, that anyone would try to justify such absolute nonsense. The Stratigraphic Column is over and done with, there is no erosion consistent with millions of years of "time periods" and there shouldn't be a Stratigraphic Column AT ALL if the whole Geological Time Scale was true.I can't take the stress of this stupidity.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Oh all the picayune irrelevant PRATTs you are coming up with.Also where there is tectonic deformation, with the one exception of angular unconformities, the strata are defomed in a whole block of them at once. Twisted, upended, buckled, whatever, always a block of them at once. One would think that tectonic disturbances would have upended a layer here, and then distorted another there, bent one higher up, etc, if normal events happened over millions of years. Deformation in blocks means ONE TECTONIC EVENT after all the strata in the block were already in place, and still malleable too, because still damp from the Flood that laid them down.The implication of all of this is obvious to any objective observation.

No, you see nothing like what I'm describing, you see no massive erosion between any layers, and there should be a lot between all of them if the standard interpretation is true. That would be visible from miles away and would distort the layers beyond recognition. That doesn't exist but without it there is nothing at all to suggest there was ever such a thing as a time period of millions of years anywhere in those layers.Sorry about the Kaibab squirrel. I can't find a map of the geographic extent of the Kaibab limestone, but I found this description at Wikipedia for "Kaibab Limestone":

By the order of events shown on the cross section of the GS-GC for starters. Y'all just have to lie about that don't you? Yes I know the Flood occurred 4500 years ago because apparently God said so. He also said that on one occasion a snake talked. On another occasion a donkey talked. Something neither normally does.

Because that best explains what is seen on the GS-GC cross section.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

They aren't going to bend neatly as a block if they are completely lithified. That they do bend together as a unit is evidence that they were all malleable, all of the same age, not millions of years apart.

I don't remember but I think I must have posted pictures of what I have in mind. The hard thing would be to find a case where they didn't deform in blocks. There is no such thing as one layer being deformed in a different way from the others above and below it. There is no such thing as different layers all being deformed in different ways, but that is what one would expect would happen if each was laid down in a separate time frame millions of years from all the others and tectonically deformed in its own time frame. Just a few examples of strata all laid down horizontally before being deformed altogether in a block by a tectonic event.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

I'm so sorry, but I disagree with you.

Oh I may hope but I don't really expect anybody to take anything I say seriously now because your heads are all wrapped up in the established errors of current Geology, but if the world continues for a while, and who knows, eventually I would think the truth might win out.Actually I don't get most of what you are saying in that post anyway, it doesn't make sense.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Not happening the way the Stratigraphic Column was built. It was not built in basins or at the bottom of the sea, the strata were laid out flat and horizontal, and that is not happening now. The Stratigraphic Column is over and done with. It was all laid down in the Single event of the Flood, one layer after another over a period of about a year, it's done.

Nothing you've posted even touches on my model.