Summations Only

Oh good GRIEF.

Another version of the Just-So imaginary landscape. I wonder if anyone will ever get around to noticing that when the "landscape" reverts to a new layer of sediment that's going to become a flat rock in a stack of flat rocks, neatly smack up against the rocks above and below, that all living things imagined to have populated that imaginary landscape would be dead.? That's the only thing that could come of such a landscape that builds up on a rock of the strata and then erodes down and disappears into the next rock of the strata. The reality of the actual situation just doesn't get across, does it?And has anyone commented on the problem of the seas Geology says occurred in the same time periods as the dinosaurs? Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

The deep ocean and the transgressing-regressing epeiric seas are detailed in the sixth edition of the textbook Historical Geology by two respected professors of Geology named Wicander and Monroe. They seem to have failed to notice that their seas would be a problem for their dinosaurs in the same time periods.Oh Paul, I don't expect you to EVER accept anything I say; fear not, your delusions are quite safe. Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Most likely creatures that survived the first phases of the Flood leaving evidence of their presence in the latest deposit of sediment before being overtaken by the next. You do notice that the sediments were WET, right? Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

What??? Do you know how to read? Where did I say anything about "directly following the deposition of the Chinle formation?" All I said was that the Chinle Formation has a lot of dinosaur fossils, it's a Triassic deposit, and it covers a lot of territory west of the Rockies, which according to the textbook mentioned was under deep ocean during the Mesozoic time periods.I understand there is a later edition of that textbook online if you want to see if it contains the same information.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

PRESERVED tracks in aeolian deposits. OK. Dry sand fills in tracks in dry sand and they get preserved. Wow.

The supposed aeolian deposits weren't. That's all.

Landscapes occur on top of exposed layers, but never occurred on any layer that is still in the stack. And I don't see what is so hilarious except your determination to garble the point: it is the creatures fossilized in the rock that are supposed to have been alive in the supposed landscape of the supposed time period, in which as I'm pointing out, nothing could have remained alive given the actual situation that you are all ignoring. But anything to obfuscate, right? There is no way any dinosaurs escaped, but that isn't going to stop you all from making up the usual plausible Just-So rationalizations.The fact of the strata kills the whole claim of the landscapes. But the epeiric seas do an even better job of that.I've got to get out of here. It's become nothing but mean-spirited bickering. I've made my case, it's a good case to anyone willing to understand it fairly, and that's the end of it.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

What on earth are you blathering on about? You have a serious problem with reading a very simple description. The Chinle formation was mentioned as an example of a very extensive formation of fossil beds in the western USA in the supposed Triassic Period, which supposedly indicates a large population of living things in that time period; but there was deep ocean covering that part of North America during the Triassic Period -- and the Jurassic and the Cretaceous.The point is that Geology is contradicting itself. Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

I don't respect you enough to bother to produce the quotes from the book in question. Think whatever evil-minded thing you want to think. According to the usual description that would be the case; the point is that they say that but they also have a whole section on the geological development of North America that has water covering the very areas where the fossil beds are found.Take it or leave it Paul. There is nothing reasonable about anything you ever say about me and my arguments anyway. It's all mean-spirited evilspeak that I get from you. If you want to check out the textbook reference, as I said I believe there are other editions of it online.

Far be it from me to expect to "demonstrate" anything to anyone here. But it's an OBSERVATION of mine that NOTHING happened between the layers EVER, and I've spent a lot of time arguing that quite well in my opinion.

You can search the book at Amazon. Search under Triassic Paleogeography or Jurassic or Cretaceous. They all have illustrations showing the west coast under deep ocean and the Jurassic and Cretaceous also show the epeiric sea extended eastward from the Rockies.HEre's the page on Trassic Paleogeographyhttps://www.amazon.com/...eology-Reed-Wicander/dp/0495560073ABE: The link doesn't go to that page so you'll have to search it yourself.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : correct quote code

Gosh you are just never at a loss for a nasty accusation, are you? That sort of thing must make up at least 90% of your communications to me. No wonder I don't respect you.

You can search the Amazon copy of the 6th edition, as I say in Message 82 but I know of people who have found it online and I hadn't heard of it described as pirated.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

I found the page on the Triassic including the map. Try other pages at Amazon.ABE: I just tried it again, searched on "Triassic Paleogeography" and got the page with the map. But it's the same link I posted before which doesn't work from here.abe: Starting from the "Wicander" page I went to the 6th edition page and was able to get not only the Triassic map but by hitting the right arrow got the Jurassic map as well. So far haven't been able to get the Cretaceous map.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.