Summations Only

But nowhere near enough to support your fantasy.

Foregone only because the evidence is irrefutable and massive.

QFT. Nailed it.

For the umpteenth timeOne year of sedimentary deposition by water cannot produce the observed geology; it violates physical laws that large pebbles settle first, followed by smaller pieces until you get to clay.Sorting fossils in water and depositing them in the order we see violates physical laws, in that similar sized organisms in similar environments under similar conditions (e.g ichthyosaurs and dolphins, but there are lots of others.) should often be deposited together... but they never are.Sorting the isotopes in the geological column in the order we see them violates physical laws because chemical and mechanical forces have little to no impact on nuclear properties.And there's lots more I could list. Standard unsupported Faith assertion.Despite many challenges you have never been able to identify a single violation of any physical law in any mainstream science. You cry "violation!" over and over again but that cry is all you have.

Water was water.Gravity was gravity.Mass was mass.Your fludde claims require all that to be false. You're peddling magic. You can't even remember what you've said, much less what mainstream science has produced. Message 322: PaulK replies: And Message 343 you reply: And that's just a small sample.Or do you not realize the "hydraulic sorting" in a fludde refers to sorting in water?We see lots of instances of similar sized and similarly shaped organisms, eating similar diets with similar behavior patterns in similar environments (including level in the ocean) but never ever ever ever found anywhere near together in the geological column. Just can't happen with the laws of how mass, water, and gravity work. No matter how much water.Your claims are disproved by fundamental physical laws. You are preaching magic.

Google Street View now covers the Grand Canyon. Talk about opportunities for more Faith fantasies!

Google maps shows Monument Valley from above. Duh.

One location will experience different environments as it rises and falls, travels around the globe, and external factors (such as overall sea level) change. Various ways.One common one is that layers A B C D E deposit in that order over a long time, then the environment changes from depositional to erosional (maybe the land raises like the Colorado Platequ), layers E D C erode away in that order, then the environment changes back to depositional and layers F G H deposit in that order. Big age separation between layers B F because of the missing C D E layers.You really need to learn to think in terms of millions of years, even though you don't believe it's real, to understand geology.Edited by JonF, : No reason given.

Yeah, but she's asking if someone has done the correlation between observed layers and reconstructions of position and state derived from other observations. I doubt the latter class exists in sufficient detail, but if I'm wrong I bet someone's done it.

You know what Faith's missing? She can't wrap her head around the concept of millions of years. Not even as a hypothetical.The mainstream view is that the sedimentation that is going on today is typical of what's been going on for million of years.Faith's view is that the sedimentation today is much slower than her fantasy fludde. Well in her paradigm that's correct... but her paradigm is completely divorce from reality.Edited by JonF, : No reason given.

All sedimentation anywhere on Earth is on top of the geologic column and immediately forms an infinitesimal portion of that column and the geologic time scale. Time flows and the column and time scale grow with each second.

Wow.Percy's pointed out your error (but I bet you won't understand), so I'll give it a try.The geologic column consists of all remaining deposited sediments and igneous and metamorphic rocks. The geologic time scale is the time over which the geologic column was built. There is no requirement that further deposition in the geologic column be on top of flat or even roughly flat underlying rock. None whatsoever. Note the large dip to the right.Of course all unconformities are examples (I think) in spite of your fantasy of layers rolling around underground and being transported whole and unmarked by a magical water-like-but-doesn't-act-like-water fludde.Edited by JonF, : No reason given.Edited by JonF, : No reason given.

I can't find that particular one right now but they're easy to find if you look. The Monterey Formation of California:
Structural and Stratigraphic Development of Extensional Basins: A Case Study Offshore Deepwater Sarawak and Northwest Sabah, Malaysia: Extensional Fault-Bend Folding and Synrift Deposition: An Example from the Central Sumatra Basin, Indonesia: Mountain Beltway (with many more): (added red line). Photos of Unconformities: Edited by JonF, : No reason given.

Absolutely not The geologic column is all the rocks found underneath the Earth or, when applied to a given location, all the rocks under that location. Sedimentary, metamorphic, igneous, flat, folded, faulted,... all the rocks.If you want to denote only the flat layers on under the Earth or under a given location, you may not redefine "geologic column" to mean that. I doubt there's a simple word for "only the flat layers on under the Earth or under a given location" because mostly nobody cares about that, but you don't get to redefine standard terms. Merriam-Webster:

quote:

---

1. a columnar diagram that shows the rock formations of a locality or region and that is arranged to indicate their relations to the subdivisions of geologic time
2 : the sequence of rock formations in a geologic column

---

Free Dictionary:

quote:

---

The vertical sequence of strata of various ages found in an area or region. Also known as column.
The geologic time scale as represented by rocks.

---

Glossary of geologic terms:

quote:

---

geologic column The arrangement of rock units in the proper chronological order from youngest to oldest.

---

No mention of horizontality or flatness. None. The definition of the geologic column does not include flatness or horizontality of layers. There is no definition anywhere in which "geologic column" requires flat or horizontal layers. You are 110% wrong.{ETA} Many drawings of the geologic column show flat interfaces for simplicity. These do not represent the actual flatness or lack thereof of the interface, or any folding within layers. Here's a diagram of a local geologic column (kurdistan) that is more (but not completely) representational of the actual geometry: from New Geologic Setting of Bekhme FormationEdited by JonF, : No reason given.

Yes. They do not include "flat" or "horizontal". {}ETA} Stratum (the singular of strata) is defined as "a layer or a series of layers of rock in the ground". Nothing about flat or horizontal. The applicable definition is "any columnlike object, mass, or formation". SFW? It's not a stack of flat and horizontal layers. Wrong. The column is a stack of possibly originally horizontal and flat sediments that may or may not be horizontal or flat anymore, plus metamorphic and igneous layers and dikes and the like. Not "a stack of horizontal strata" which is what you claimed it is. And God forbid you follow the link and find out, you just make stuff up. No, it's a cross-section of the formations in Kurdistan that are part of the geologic column, illustrating the fact that the column is much more complex (especially the contacts between layers) than in your confused and simplistic mind. That's true. And you've been supposing that "the Geo Column has stopped wherever it is no longer a horizontal stack of layers but is eroded, buckled and so on." That's false. My diagram and the pictures you ignored demonstrate that falsity. Let's see one again: This is a cross section of an offshore area in Indonesia, looking for oil. It shoes three rift cycles in which the ocean floor cracked or subsided to form a valley, and then flat layers filled in all or most of that valley, and then the ocean floor cracked or subsided again (distorting the flat and horizontal layers). Exactly what you claim is impossible.That's all part of the geologic column, which consists of "the vertical sequence of strata of various ages found in an area or region. Also known as column." or "a columnar diagram that shows the rock formations of a locality or region and that is arranged to indicate their relations to the subdivisions of geologic time". Not just the currently flat and horizontal strata, as you would have it.Remember this? The picture I posted just above (and the others you ignored) show deposition continuing and building on to the top of the geologic column in exactly the way you claim is impossible. Any deposition on top of any layer, no matter how folded and buckled and twisted and cracked that lower layer is, continues the endless building of the geologic column.Edited by JonF, : No reason given.