Evidence that the Great Unconformity did not Form Before the Strata above it

Faith, decades ago I listened to a presentation by a former fundamentalist minister, one who had grown up a fundamentalist. He described the condition of being a fundamentalist as being when your theology becomes your psychology. In the subsequent decades, especially after my divorce, I have seen his description born out as true, especially in the fact that fundamentalist and near-fundamentalist Christians need specially-trained counselors and in how their own DivorceCare program and singles counseling presentations have nothing positive for non-Christians (eg, DivorceCare repeatedly emphasizes that you cannot ever possibly recover from divorce, but rather that only Jesus can help us to recover -- ergo they teach that only Christians could ever possibly recover from divorce; please note that the US Army Chaplain Corps had required that all Army personnel going through marital problems to undergo the DivorceCare program). BTW, that former fundamentalist minister and life-long fundamentalist was Dan Barker, now known as "America's Leading Atheist."Faith, you have your own unique way of looking at the world. It is your theology that controls how you think. I asked you directly what it would mean it you were wrong. That is all tied up with your theology. With your Man-made humanly fallible theology.The rest of us do not share your theology and therefore are not bound and blinded by your theology.One Sunday afternoon, my Lindy Hop instructor offered this thought. We rotate partners during the class. With some partners, the moves we're learning work, but with some partners they don't. So we expect to see that with some partners it will work (because they know what they are doing) and with others it won't (because they do not know what they are doing). If it doesn't work, then either you are the problem or your partner is the problem. His suggestion that Sunday afternoon was that, if it doesn't work with any of your partners, then you are the problem.BTW, FWIW, my prevailing experience as a leader was for my new partner to exclaim joy that she was finally able to perform the move, followed by a sigh or groan of regret when she had to rotate to the next guy.Faith, you think differently than we normals do. Here is a hint at how we think:We are familiar with physics. Physics explains how the universe works. Therefore, we are familiar with how the universe works.You are not familiar with physics. In fact, you have explicitly expressed opposition to even attempting to learn anything about physics. Therefore, you have no idea how the universe works nor do you have any desire to learn.Therefore, you are not familiar with how the universe works. And hence any statements you may attempt to make regarding how the universe works can only be met with dismissal and uncontrollable sniggering.We are familiar with basic geology. You are not. In fact, you have explicitly expressed opposition to even attempting to learn anything about geology. Therefore, you have no idea how geology works nor do you have any desire to learn.Our motivation is always to examine and follow the evidence. Your motivation is to always adhere to some kind of dogmatic stance that you never fully reveal to anyone. We seek the truth, whereas you seek to support your dogma no matter what. That should be a red flag to any seeker of truth.We understand how depositation occurs. You do not. You have received a kit with which you can perform your own experiments, but to my knowledge you have refused to do so. And yet you continue to pontificate on how depositation occurs. All of which is completely and utterly false.Logic is orderly thought, but logic always depends on premises. You can form any number of different logics upon different sets of premises. Pick idiotic and false premises and you can derive a valid logical conclusion, only it will be utterly false (actually, it could be true, but you cannot prove it to be such with this logical argument). Start with true premises and you can arrive at a conclusion whose truth you can be assured. Premises that are in accordance with observable and testable truth are far more trustworthy than premises that are contrary-to-fact.What the rest of us here discuss is based on our understanding of the universe. Everything that we say and think is compatible with that understanding. That understanding is based on physics and geology and direct experience and a myriad of other sources. What we know from all of those sources is self-consistent. And we are able to construct any number of experiments with which to test our own understandings and which confirm what we understand about the universe.Faith, you have no understanding of the universe. You have a set of arbitrary and contrary-to-fact assertions that you somehow feel must be absolutely true even though everything that is known about the universe indicates otherwise.Going back to Lindy Hop class, you are the one who always has a problem with every body else. That means that you are the problem.

Faith, I asked you this before: What if you are wrong?You really do need to answer that question.Other "true Christians" have taken the position that if they are wrong, then the Bible is false and God does not exist. Is that your position? If it is, then you need to tell us so. If it is not, then you need to tell us so.You have mumbled something about you protecting the truth of the Bible. But your theology has nothing to do with the truth of the Bible, except for what your theology tortures the Bible to imply as opposed to what it actually says (your description of our methodology in the discussion of biblical support for the Trinity was most instructive; thank you very much for that).If you are wrong, then your theology is wrong. Your Man-made fallible theology. Says nothing about your Bible nor about your god.You are willing to deny everything about reality. Why? What if you're wrong?