How is this rock part of the geological column if it's formed 45 kilometers deep in the earth?
We, and others, have thought about your arguments. They were shown to be false about 200 years ago, and nothing's changed since then.
You obviously haven't looked an any photographs of geological formations, or visited any. "Not an iota of differnce!" Why should anyone take your incompetent rehashings of long-refuted arguments seriously?
What I'm doing is taking what I understand from Geology and showing that it supports the Flood.
\ But you know nothing about geology. E.g:
quote:What I'm saying is that their general APPEARANCE, their CONDITION, is identical. There is not one iota of an appearance of difference to account for millions of years of age difference among them.
Anyone writing that cannot be taken seriously, and hasn't even seen a picture of a geological formation (e.g. the Grand Canyon).