Did the Flood really happen?

Gosh a whole bunch of the usual personal attacks. Oh well. Having a different paradigm always means "not understanding science," of course, cuz science is defined by the establishment paradigm.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

I'm going to draw my own sequence of events as I see them forming the current geological situation as we see it on that UK diagram, and hope to figure out how to scan them in and post them later.

Correction: Nobody HERE agrees with me, OR No OE/ToE believer agrees with me.

If you have a stack of thirty silver dollars and you put a dime on top of it -- or even three or four dimes -- are you continuing the same stack of coins?And if you have a stack of thirty silver dollars on the table and you put a stack of three silver dollars on the floor are you continuing the same stack of coins?Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Ah well I HAVE explained it. Over and over. Really I have. Sigh.Let me ask this: If the whole world including the sea floor is the geological column how is it that the strata we find on the continents, from Precambrian to Holocene, are not also found on the sea floor? Hm?Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Ibuprofen and don't pop your blisters.

Perhaps my view is unique to me then. I *have* said, after all, that I study these things for myself and come to my own conclusions. In many cases I find out that my conclusions agree with other YECs on a point, but sometimes I don't. Dredge and I don't agree on much, but then he's not a YEC.I don't think what I've said is silly and in most cases I would just repeat it, and of course there's no point in that. Perhaps we should move on. After you've got all your objections said of course.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

That definition of the Geological Column is, in my opinion, invented for the purpose of getting around the obvious fact that it's over and done with and that supports the Flood. You have to incorporate all kinds of phenomena that are so utterly different from the Geological Column as we know it and as it is presented all over the internet and on Google image, that even you all should have to see the ...I'm trying to avoid an insulting word but no good alternative is coming to me. Duplicity, self-deception, etc. Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Right, that's certainly a handy definition.And yes, there's no point in my repeating my definition of the geo column.

Problem is the silver dollar analogy doesn't reflect the reality that on the ocean floor the accumulating sediments have nothing to do with the geological column as we know it, say, in the Grand Canyon/Grand Staircase area.This notion of sea floor being raised onto continents or becoming continents is a really untenable idea, and pure theory since there is no indication whatever that such a thing has ever occurred or could occur. Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Where was the core taken? And at what depth is the iridium band? And does any of it bear any resemblance at all to Cretaceous deposits on th eland?Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Did I say ONLY people here disagree with me? That's unlikely since I know all believers in the ToE everywhere disagree with me.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

There ARE no horizontal strata to the left and right. The mountain would uplift the whole block of strata, breaking it apart, which would create the two parts that fall to left and right. It's very clear on the diagram that the strata beneath the island/sea level line are part of the short tilted strata on the surface which are not in the position they were in when deposited. The right hand strata therefore became those that we see on the diagram. There are no others.I've been dealing with a bunch of distractions but I still plan to do my own diagrams on paper and hope to figure out how to scan and post them.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Uplift, sure, and the raising of mountains, sure, but not sea floor. It has appeared to me from many cross sections that all the tectonic processes began after all the strata were laid down, also earthquakes which of course are the result of tectonic forces, and volcanoes as well. Evidence is that it's the whole stack that is affected all at once and in the same way, not separate layers independently of one another. Magma can be seen to rise all the way from beneath the Precambrian rocks to the top of a given sedimentary stack, etc.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

What a strange response. Doesn't the entire geological column/time scale span the entire Earth? Aren't there strata everywhere that indicate the time periods from Precambrian to Holocene, however incompletely in some cases? Pretty clear to me that the strata in the UK are the same as those in Tennessee and in the Grand Canyon, Grand Staircase area, in that they were all deposited completely, before the tectonic upheaval occurred that distorted them in their various ways.I'm sure the marine strata do look like "former sea floor" but that's only because they contain fossils from the sea floor. There IS another explanation for this.This notion of sea floor being raised onto continents or becoEdited by Admin, : Fix quote.