But if the global flood story is true, we should see highly organized sediments and fossil sequences that are structured into discrete, systematic units
I'm not sure who said this but it is a prime example of an untested conditional probably based on an strawman version of the flood.
I said it and I am glad that you agree with me that it is a ridiculous expectation for the flood since I was making the point that it seems as if Faith's ideas about what we should expect to observe were a global flood true are backwards. Essentially, her contention is that if a global flood were true we should expect the geological record to look exactly like it does which is highly ordered and sorted - both fossils and sediments. Yet... she seems to be at a loss as to HOW the flood could produce the order in the geological record.
What we actually see from experimental testing with flumes, is that uniform principles do not apply to flowing currents which provably show that facies can be created quickly, and they break both the principle of superposition and continuity.
IOW, when strata, under experimental conditions, are formed quickly, it can be shown that they are created by direction of the current and are laid down vertically and laterally, SIMULTANEOUSLY.
You do realize that if you consider results of experiments or processes that can be conducted and observed today and apply them to past events, you are essentially operating under the assumption of uniformitarianism? We assume that processes we observe today are the same processes that operated in the past and that those processes are sufficient to explain Earth's geology. Uniformitarianism doesn't assume there was not a global flood, but assumes that if there was, we would be able to predict the consequences and examine the effects. Catastrophism, on the other hand, assumes that major cataclysmic events occurred in the past that relied on processes that are for the most part not operating today. Flood geology generally relies on the catastrophism principle, suggesting that, for example, there was some mysterious process that sorted fossils and sediments in the manner which it did. No one is able to adequately explain that mysterious process.
The Coconino sandstone in the Grand Canyon has many track-ways (animals), but is almost devoid of plants. Implication: these rocks are not ecosystems but are evidence of catastrophic transportation.
A good example of an unexplained, mysterious mechanism/process - "catastrophic transportation."
Here is a paper that explores the implications of such "catastrophic transportation" of the Coconino Sandstone.
Sediment Transport and the Coconino Sandstone: A Reality Check on Flood Geology
quote:
These calculations indicate a slab of sand 25 m high,
1,600 km wide, and 1,000 km long would have to be
continuously sliding southward across the boundary
at one meter per second to form the Coconino Sandstone
in twelve days. This corresponds to a sediment
transport rate of 4.8 x 104 kilograms (48 metric tons)
per second per meter!
HOW could that happen? What is the mechanism to transport that quantity of material, Mike? Are there any experimental results indicate that it's even possible? Or do we rely on the idea that we just can't understand the mechanisms of such a catastrophic event?
HBD
Whoever calls me ignorant shares my own opinion. Sorrowfully and tacitly I recognize my ignorance, when I consider how much I lack of what my mind in its craving for knowledge is sighing for... I console myself with the consideration that this belongs to our common nature. - Francesco Petrarca
"Nothing is easier than to persuade people who want to be persuaded and already believe." - another Petrarca gem.
Ignorance is a most formidable opponent rivaled only by arrogance; but when the two join forces, one is all but invincible.
™ Version 4.2
