Did the Flood really happen?

Ah! So you have evidence of this! Finally!Please present your evidence.

Please demonstrate these pathways in the geological record.They should be pretty obvious.

Lot of the usual mystification there. The evidence shows continuous deposition, no orogeny, same as in the GC where you claim a mountain range that never existed I suppose, and whatever disturbances you have in mind, which are a total mystery to me, would have occurred after the whole stack was laid down.Cheers.

So all of the civilizations were magically in its path and all of the coral was magically out of its path. Curiouser and curiouser. More and more magical. Less and less sensible.

If I am an anti-floodist, why would I want it to do anything?I can look at the real world and see what floods do.What have you got?

Not in its path? What about coral reefs surrounding inhabited islands?

Classic ad hoc-ism.

Guess it must have jumped over this reef to get at the island:

Whatever you say, Faith.You have been provided with evidence and your only response is to deny it.And yet you provide nothing to support your own fantastic stories. I agree, it is a total mystery to you.That's how YEC operates. It relies on ignorance and mysterious forces. Edited by edge, : No reason given.

quote:

---

Could but it would have had to have been raised after the collapse..

---

Let me repeat the question. Why must the tilt be presumed to be due to subsidence at the Eastern side (which you call a collapse) rather than an uplift at the Western side ? Simply assuming a collapse does not answer that at all.

quote:

---

Originally all the strata including the short tilted parts on the island with their full lengths that are now under the sea level, that wavy irregular bunch of strata, all of them would have been up on the island all extending as a block of horizontal strata, climbing up from Cambrian to Holocene, Cambrian resting where the sea level line is.

---

No, that isn’t true since the evidence shows folding and tilting of lower layers that must have occurred before the upper layers were deposited. There was never a time when they were all present, undisturbed.Also, I rather doubt that the uppermost strata at the Eastern end ever stretched all the way across the island. Certainly there is no evidence that they did.

quote:

---

Broken off strata, strata all collapsed into the sea?

---

You keep talking about broken off strata but you never point to any. I don’t see any. Nor do I see that any strata collapsed into the sea (where collapse is taken as a sudden event - the point you are trying to support)

Of course we have not just an idea of what a worldwide flood would be like but a full understanding of what MUST be seen if such a thing had ever happened at anytime humans existed on Earth.We are not willfully ignorant.We know what it MUST look like if the corals had been uprooted and any honest person can see that is NOT what is seen in reality.Change leaves evidence Faith.Floods leave evidence Faith.The corals exist Faith.The corals exist in the location where they grew.What is the model, mechanism, process, procedure or method that allowed either of the Biblical Floods to uproot, move and place the corals in the location and formation that exists in reality.

But you provide no explanation that makes sense and that conforms to the evidence for why you think this. All you do is call things names like "crazy" and "absurd" and insist they couldn't possibly be true and make up your own impossible Flood-consistent stories, and then you insist that what you said is evidence. It isn't. Since most sedimentary layers are marine, why you comparing them to dry land? Nor should they be. Land and marine landscapes should in no way resemble each other. Marine environments experience net deposition while land experiences net erosion. The two should not resemble each other at all. They are as much opposites as is possible.But the marine strata of geologic history do very strongly resemble the sedimentary layers being deposited upon the beds of all the oceans, seas and lakes of the world today. Some strata have a nice neat appearance such as at the Grand Canyon, and others do not, such as these from the Book Cliffs area of Utah. How does your Flood explain this: But you can only *say* "that's untenable," you can't show it. But people have shown the flood idea untenable many times using a wide variety of evidence. You actually managed to include a fragment of truth in that sentence. Yes, Walther's Law is responsible for the progression of strata, but you've again misdefined Walther's Law. Walther's Law is not about the "mechanisms of deposition of water." It just assumes those. Walther's Law is about how lateral movement of depositional environments results in horizontal strata.Imagine Walter's Law to be like a special asphalt paving machine that can lay down several asphalt layers of different types simultaneously by having several extruders in sequence instead of just one. A paving machine like this moving along a roadway and leaving multiple layers of asphalt behind is like a transgressing sea moving across a landscape. Sand is deposited at the coast, shale/mudstone off the coast, and limestone further from the coast, and they're all being deposited at the same time. We know this because we observe it happening today. You again seem to be operating under the delusion that you don't have to show how anything false, you need merely say it is false. When you're actually able to show that the fossil order is an illusion you let us know. Because why? You've typed many words many times denying the possibility, but you've never said anything that showed you were right or that even made any sense. Don't be silly. These are just empty declarations. If all trilobites are the same species then a hippopotamus and a giraffe are the same species. But you always claim you've presented evidence when you haven't. Your say-so does not constitute evidence.We observe a variety of depositional environments all around the world. A coastline is different from just off the coast is different from far from the coast is different from pelagic (deep sea) environments is different from lakeshore is different from mid-lake is different from river and stream banks is different from mid-river and mid-stream. Again, the geological strata are obviously just lithified versions of the sedimentary layers being deposited today. You haven't given "those scientists" anything to think about.--Percy

No idea where western or eastern is.No idea what you think is a folded rock.Probably no point in trying to explain it since it's impossible to follow such descriptions. Nobody can follow mine and I can't follow yours.

So everything I say is for naught as usual. That's OK, I'm used to it and I don't see any point in trying again to get any of it across.Cheers.

What else do you expect from constant repetition of un-evidenced and physically impossible fantasies? You got it across me long ago. You have no idea what happened, Goddidit, and you are infallible.