The TRVE history of the Flood...

That won't work.The Zuni transgression, one of the later ones, has trees and dinosaur tracks in the Mesa Verde Group which was in an area previously flooded by earlier transgressions. How did those trees grow in coal swamps in less than a year? Why and how did dinosaurs repopulate the area in one year only to be run off again by a rising 'tide'?ETA: This is the problem with ad hoc explanations. They eventually run into reality of contrary facts. Edited by edge, : No reason given.

So, you've never been to the California coast ...But remember, your tides have to move hundreds of miles every 6 hours. Do you really think the sediments they leave behind would look like mudflats? That's silly. You realize that waves are not actually moving water very far, don't you? Receding water would still produce waves. Certainly everywhere I've been, they do. There are some places where shallow shorelines eliminate waves, but I'd say that's not the rule. And you don't see that as a problem. Hundreds of kilometers would not be a problem? Every 6 hours? But they were in areas already overrun by your tides 12 hours previously. These are not stems. They are rooted trees. The formed in swamps with rivers running through them. Once again, they are rooted in areas already overrun by the flood and then eroded. See above. You are just saying the same thing over and over. Look at the chart of cratonic sequences which you call tides. This isn't working. THat's it?You don't know, but it must be so?And it must be less orderly?That's an argument? So now you reject the cratonic sequence theory. So, there weren't 6 cycles with tides rushing across the continent. Faith, it's hard to discuss this when you keep changing your story. What happened to the tides and the unconformities?Please get your story straight.

Exactly. In this case, I was assuming that Faith wanted each cratonic sequence to represent a single 'tidal' event. However, I am not sure now what she means. It just isn't clear. All that and how you would preserve any kind of deposits, fossils, etc., with water rushing around like that.But I don't think anyone is sure what Faith means. So, it's all moot I suppose. But I'm glad that you understood my argument.

Not sure where you get this. There is nothing on the chart to suggest that all of the dry land mass was covered at any single point in time. It only depicts a generalized craton. And I have been trying to interpret your posts in terms of the chart. Evidently, that was a waste of time. Seeing into the deep past is not easy. Demonstrably wrong. Fossilized forests militate against your hypothesis.Even forgetting about the cratonic sequences, you have a lot of questions to answer.

Well, the main cause we've discussed is loading by the sediments themselves, but there are others related to the mantle or temperature differences in the lower continental crust, or failed rifting and probably others. Sometimes there are inherited structures from Precambrian basement that cause basins to form. Yes, but it's not always that simple.And actually, they are basins forming on the thin edges of the craton and on parts of the oceanic crust nearby. This is where basins form, such as the Mississippi Delta basin which has been discussed. That is why I gave you the location of Moose's diagram showing the section I provided but converted to no vertical exaggeration (i.e., a 1:1 scale).

Likely so.I'm not quite seeing how the gravitational attraction of the moon would lift that amount of water and sediment onto the continent. You really need another mechanism that operates with greater force on the period that you want.

Not likely.For a number of reasons.First of all, the Yellowstone trees were buried by volcanic ash, not lake sediments. The comparison is invalid.Do you want more?ETA: Ah! I see that Dr. A beat me to this. Nice. Edited by edge, : No reason given.

The atmosphere cannot hold that much moisture, Faith. You need some ad hoc explanation for where that meteoric water came from. So, you are saying that there were no rock formations before the fludde, yes? Where did the mudslides flow if there were no hills? Why didn't rivers form? If they did, where are they in the geological record? Again, no hills, no mountains, no rock formations. Is that true?Do you have evidence of such mudslide events in the geological record? What do you mean 'their own sources'? Why would rising seawater carry huge sediment loads? What force is moving the water such that it can carry mud up onto the continent? And yet there are no human fossils in the early fossil record. Odd, yes? What about human artifacts, where are they in this mudslide. Please show us any known flood that deposited limestone. What kind of sediments are you precipitating here? Then what is the source of sediments? Why do we have shorelines throughout the record? And why do we not see deep sea sediments or fossils in the Cretaceous seaway, for instance? It would seem that they would be carried along with this load of sediment from the ocean. And limestone deposits would be impossible.Did Noah bring an aquarium on the Ark? Sounds like a multiple reversing global mudslide hypothesis.Which is not in the geological record...Not a good start, actually.

The record of people who say they speak for God is not very impressive.

You have a project? How else would water-lain sediments look? Why would they not be evenly bedded strata with sharp contacts? And why would a fludde create the strata as they are. AFAIC, your scenario is based on mudflows which are never known to create extensive, bedded strata.So, yes, something around here is delusional... Well, there you go. Start paying attention to the data. You keep saying that but never explain why.OH! That's right, it's obvious. A typical YEC discussion: Just shut it down.

Exactly.You don't want facts to get in the way of your preconceived story. So, ignore as many as necessary.

I have never understood why an omnipotent god would go to the trouble of a flood, with all of the collateral damage and pointless geological problems, to punish a single reprobate species. I mean, it only took 6 days to create the entire universe, so why spend a year with one simple task, leaving behind and entire planet of questionable evidence?

And the conclusion was what?Here is a more scholarly article on the topic of the Specimen Ridge petrified trees:Yellowstone fossil forests: New evidence for burial in place | Geology | GeoScienceWorld I have added bolding to direct you to the salient parts of the abstract. I think it's pretty clear that while some trees are transported, most of those in life-position were buried in situ.ETA: I think that the lesson here is that Jonathan Sarfati is not the best resource for geological information. Edited by edge, : No reason given.

True. Sarfati tries to plant some seeds of doubt, but never really commits himself. The guy isn't stupid, just wrong. And devious.

But this is a perfect ad hoc explanation.So you want 'waters above the firmamanet' ...Okay, what is a firmament? How did the water get there? How did sunlight reach the earth with all of that moisture in the air (or wherever)? Okay, so what is a 'window of heaven', where are they and why did the open?If it never rained before, how deep was the water table?So, yes, this is all ad hoc, just barely biblical and fanciful, all at the same time. Walther's Law does not apply to floods or mudflows.First of all, it takes time to create limestone formations. One year won't cut it. And then you have to deal with the fact that your tides carry so much sediment that it would overwhelm any carbonate minerals. Then once you go over a couple of kilometers depth, calcium carbonate goes back into solution. See? Now, you are 'stirring up the oceans'. How does that facilitate limestone formation?And what are 'fountains of the deep'? Where were they? Show us evidence that they existed. Well, I can only assume that the rising waters are carrying sediment to deposit on the continent. How do you move all of that sediment? What massive currents are your contriving? The first layer of a transgression is essentially a beach sand. If there was no rain and no sea and no waves prior to that, where did you get the sand?And 40 days of rain? That means flooding, and even today people die in relatively minor local floods; so don't tell us that people only lived on high ground or ran to higher ground. We see their homes and artifacts all carried away. So, where are their tools, their livestock, their dwellings in the early stages of the flood?You are simply not making any sense. Yes, and deposited in marine sediments, mudflows or whatever you are making up for the early flood stages. So, why do we see so many places with the uppermost strata in place? Where are the transported human fossils and artifacts in the ocean sediments? Actually, you aren't. Walther's Law does not address mudflows flowing up a continental slope and then across continents. And you claim to see that? A shoreline implies a land mass, and they are everywhere in the geological record. I had no idea. Then please find us a modern flood deposit that forms limestone.So, all I'm seeing here are ad hoc explanations, mostly made up by your or other YECs. They open up a host of questions that are never answered. I'd say that YEC is a failure and is, in fact, mostly extra-biblical.