In this supposed global flood there is one environment, an ocean.
It is an global size ocean of flood waters increasing and abating.
Within the flood waters there wouldn't have been any uniformity of conditions. What you see today is what you would expect from such a huge and horrendous event. Every bizarre condition imaginable occurred and evidence of this is what is found everywhere upon the surface of the earth.
There is no desert for thick interbedded evaporites,
There are no appropriate mechanisms able to deposit such beds of evaporites in deserts. But the flood was able to deposit them. That the land in question is today a desert is due to climate patterns arising after the flood.
no ice sheets for glacial deposits,
The winter of the flood would've been severe and of such proportions so as to develope the ice sheets that are thought to represent ages of formation and retreat.
no dry deserts for wind-formed aeolian deposits.
Also air and ice are not water, they deposit differently. How they deposit can be observed right now.
So, provide significant global examples.
How does a global flood create aeolian deposits?
There would be enormous supplies of sand after a global flood. Many features of dunes in water and in air are identical.
How does a flood preserve delicate interbedded structures with one layer full of burrows, repeated over and over again for 15,000 layers?
You must prove that they are burrows. But, the interbedded part is possible in a flood that involves an enormous variety of depositional circumstances.
The Haymond beds consist of 15,000 alternating layers of sand and shale. The sands have several characteristic sedimentary features which are found on turbidite deposits. Turbidites are deep water deposits in which each sand layer is deposited in a brief period of time, by a submarine "landslide" (I am trying to avoid jargon here) and the shale covering it is deposited over a long period of time.
That the shale took a long time to deposit is an assumption.
And, it's an unresonable scenario isn't it? For 15,ooo ages of time a cycle of 7,5oo identical ages is repeated? No, it's more reasonable to believe that the cyclic structure of the layers is due to a local depositional enviroment within a massive global flood that sorted out the sand and the clay in the pattern as found. Otherwise you'd expect me to think that for a long age only sand under deep water was deposited, followed by a long age of only a particular clay and that this pattern was cyclic. Isn't it ridiculous? A age of deep water followed by an age of shallow for 7500 identical ages? It's flood waters that explains the beds of homogenous depositional materials.
For the non-geologist who is reading this this means that the burrows are in the shales (which take a long time to be deposited) so the animals would have lots of time to dig their burrows.
That they are burrows is an assumption.
The sandstones are the catastrophic deposit which covers and fills in the burrows with sand. The fact that there are no burrows in the sand proves that the sand was deposited rapidly.
7,500 catastrophic and rapid depositions? Each followed by, 7500 peaceful depositions of clay? I don't think this is a scientifically rational explaination.
I pointed out that if the all the sedimentary record had to be deposited in a year long flood of Noah, then given that the entire geologic column in this area is 5000 meters thick, and that the Haymond beds are 1300 m thick, 1300/5000*365 days = 95 days for the Haymond beds to be deposited. Since there are 15,000 of these layers, then 15,000/95 days = 157 layers per day need to be deposited.
Probably, much faster than that.
The problem is that the animals which made the burrows mentioned above, need some time to re-colonize and re-burrow the shale. Is it really reasonable to believe that 157 times per day or 6.5 times per hour, for all the burrowers to be buried, killed, and a new group colonize above them for the process to be repeated? Even allowing for a daily cycle, would require 41 years for this deposit to be laid down.
I don't believe they are burrows.
That's just one piece of geology no YEC can explain or BS their way out of, there are many thousands more.
It's quite weak in my opinion. Especially so due to the ridiculousness of the nonflood scenario that was presented. A scenario that incorprates an unknown cyclic mechanism operating like clockwork for 7,500 cyclic ages over an enormous span of time.
Could you define or provide an example of a "high purity" deposit?
I would consider anything around 99% pure to be high purity.
summary:
My point is that what we find globally (not locally) upon the surface of the earth today corresponds to the consequences of a global flood. No local scenario's, such as The Haymond beds, the Grand Canyon, corresponds to the global nature of the flood. They only correspond to local scenario's occurring within the global flood. To prove that a "global" flood occurred requires looking at global effects. the complexity of "local" scenario's producing varied and often bizarre geologic formations which don't conform to hard fast rules is the norm for a global flood enviroment in the same way that local conditions of climate don't correspond to the global climate scenario. What would you expect to see after the waters of a horrendous global flood had occurred? You'd see a complex array of geologic anomalies in profusion mixed in with much larger geologic formations mixed in with some even larger geologic formations.
What most on this site are proposing to do is apply local anomalies of sedimentation to global issues to which they can't rationally apply.
Joman.
™ Version 4.2
