Summations Only

When else would they occur?

It is an open board. I'm completely baffled by your approach to science and learning. Sort of a morbid fascination, I guess. My apologies to Cora. Is this the new last refuge of the scoundrel? Sorry, but it's all of a piece. A flood would result in sedimentation and we were discussing sedimentation. And I'm really interested in the effects of your flood.

Are you serious? Try to focus on the topic.

But I'm curious about what made the flood special. I would like an answer expanding on how 'things were different then'.

Yes, the geological column is shown as a 'stack', at each location on the earth where we find it. Each 'stack' is different depending on the location and its particular geological history.As one location is underwater, others are undergoing erosion, others are are deserts and some are swamps. It' not all that hard to understand. No, the 'stacking' simply continues elsewhere as erosion occurs at the Grand Canyon. Sedimentation does not need to be continuous at any one location or at all locations as you seem to think.

These are good points. I'd like to add that I sometimes think of carbonates, such as the Chalk of western Europe as being somehow 'isolated' from siliciclastic contamination. Edited by edge, : No reason given.Edited by edge, : No reason given.

Just to be clear, a lag deposit is what is left behind after the winnowing of sediments, leaving behind larger or heavier fragments.However, yes, the mudflows tend to leave behind some very interesting deposits, such as those filling valleys around Mount Saint Helens. As they flowed down the stream channels they eventually encountered more water flow and became more diluted until they formed a thin layer of light colored silt in the Columbia River delta. Different conditions in different environments, but all from the same process.

Can you give us some geological principle that says all locations must undergo tectonism or erosion or volcanism within a given time period?

I think we should focus more on the two schematic stratigraphic columns at the bottom of the diagram. What you see are two locations with different columns, both occurring at the same time; and each showing more than one depositional environment.In fact, the diagram shows a correlation line between the two columns showing how we compare two different sequences. Now, carry that back in time over dozens of sections and you will start to get a complete picture of the regional geological history.Obviously this diagram is a simplification of the process, but it is a real task done by stratigraphers around the world.

Typically, yes. In the grand scale, things are pretty well coordinated. But it is a huge task to take every location in the world and correlate environments and plate motions, so certainly a lot is interpolated. But the point is that no global flood is indicated by the geological record. While one area may be underwater for hundreds of millions of years, others are emergent and steadily eroding away. That's probably a 'no'. Do you ever have suspicions that your interpretation of the Bible is incorrect?

This would be paleomagnetism and it is fairly easy to get the inclination of the field in the appropriate rocks such as lava flows or even some sediments. The steeper the inclination the higher the latitude. I don't have actual data here, but Joe Meert used to do this kind of work. I wanted to emphasize this point. We can be pretty certain that the Indian subcontinent is colliding with Asia because of actual measurements.For Faith, this is called 'evidence'. We know what is happening right now to a certainty. Now, by comparison with older mountains, we can create hypotheses ... and they are supported by (drum roll) ... the evidence.

Good. Then you can understand why I am comfortable with mainstream geology after studying it for several decades.It's NOT an easy subject, contrary to what many YEC websites will suggest, and we can't really get into details on a discussion boar like this.

You have to understand that Walther's sequence is kind of an ideal situation where there is complete transgression/regression over long periods of time. Often, the sequence is interrupted. In your scenario, the biblical flood is so rapid that it would appear to be severely distorted, with little or no time for limestone to be deposited. For instance, coral reefs should be extinct. They only occur in shallow seas with limited clastic (sand, silt, etc.) input. And we know how slowly the grow.Mainly because of what we don't see. But everything we do see is amenable to long ages and normal sedimentation. So, we really have no idea what it was like, right? We would be basing our ideas on what we don't know. In the meantime we have very robust explanations for everything that we see.Why create a fantasy?

But God has revealed it to you. The record is right there in the rocks. Well, maybe then you should question how you interpret the Bible. Maybe you've got it all wrong and God is straining to educate you by having you participate in this discussion. Your god has given you the tools and the opportunity to grow. Ultimately, you have a choice. Well, you are not in the ballpark. In fact, you are not in the right continent. You have gone out of your way to deny what your own god is telling you.

To me, they speak volumes. Just as is your interpretation of the Bible.But let's try to stay on topic here. Basically, you are rejecting all science, since it has all been contrived by fallible humans? That's a tough stance to come from if you really want to have a discussion.