Did the Flood really happen?

quote:

---

The whole surface of the land would be so defaced just from the forty days and nights of rain it would be unrecognizable and then the strata piled on top of it would further erase any recognizable remains.

---

Now you're saying almost all plant and animal life would survive that defacing? Magic water indeed! So the first layer and each subsequent layer would overly all the fossils. Is that what we see?

That's one of your claims. Your claims are not evidence for your claims.You said "many signs of having been formed after all the strata were laid down". You neglected to list any. Because there aren't any. That's one of your claims. Your claims are not evidence for your claims.Again, why not?

It's only right to respond with explanation when someone asks for further information.I did what I could to figure out your meaning. Your evasion reinforces my opinion that "unthinking knee-jerk reaction in a vain attempt to avoid having to address the issue" is why you think it's not sea floor.

quote:

---

a : a great body of salt water that covers much of the earth
broadly : the waters of the earth as distinguished from the land and air
b : a body of salt water of second rank more or less landlocked
the Mediterranean sea

---

(Merriam-Webster)

quote:

---

The sea, the world ocean or simply the ocean is the connected body of salty water that covers over 70% of Earth's surface (361,132,000 square kilometres (139,434,000 sq mi), with a total volume of roughly 1,332,000,000 cubic kilometres (320,000,000 cu mi)).

---

(Wikipedia)

quote:

---

sea
1. the continuous body of salt water covering the greater part of the earth's surface; ocean
2.a large body of salt water wholly or partly enclosed by land: the Red Sea, Irish Sea

---

(YourDictionary)

quote:

---

1. one of the larger bodies of salt water, less than an ocean, found on the earth's surface; a body of salt water of second rank, generally forming part of, or connecting with, an ocean or a larger sea; as, the Mediterranean Sea; the Sea of Marmora; the North Sea; the Carribean Sea

​

2. an inland body of water, esp. if large or if salt or brackish; as, the Caspian Sea; the Sea of Aral; sometimes, a small fresh-water lake; as, the Sea of Galilee

​

3. the ocean; the whole body of the salt water which covers a large part of the globe

---

(Webster)Looks as if Faith's definition of "sea" will be as quirky as her definition of "geologic column". If we ever tease it out of her. Edited by JonF, : No reason given.

Thus spake Faith, making yet another unsupported claim.You really are incapable of a clue about "evidence". Amazing.BTW, the discussion is about what's happening today. Do you understand the concept of "today"? When the Gulf of Mexico is part of the ocean and strata are being laid down there?Edited by JonF, : No reason given.

So all the definitions of *the* geologic column that I posted are wrong?

quote:

---

The whole surface of the land would be so defaced just from the forty days and nights of rain it would be unrecognizable and then the strata piled on top of it would further erase any recognizable remains.

---

Now you're saying almost all plant and animal life would survive that defacing? Magic water indeed! So the first layer and each subsequent layer would overly all the fossils. Is that what we see?Faith? Are you there?

It's an inescapable logical deduction from your claim that all the fossils were created by the flood and this: Seems to me you said the vast majority would have been killed by being "defaced just from the forty days and nights of rain" I meant "overlay". Here's the sequence:

• Forty days and forty nights of rain
• Dead animals and plants all over the surface of the Earth
• First sedimentary layer deposits
• Dead animals and plants covered by the first layer

If you want to claim they were picked up and saved somewhere to b e deposited in later layers, that's not physically possible no matter how much water you throw at it.Edited by JonF, : No reason given.

Thus spake Faith, making yet another unsupported claim.
You really are incapable of a clue about "evidence". Amazing.BTW, the discussion is about what's happening today. Do you understand the concept of "today"? When the Gulf of Mexico is part of the ocean and strata are being laid down there?I now take it from your abandonment of the Gulf of Mexico discussion that you have no more unsupported claims and we can proceed on the basis of the geologic column still accumulating.

I don't see how that disproves sedimentation in the Gulf of Mexico. Please explain.ABE I note the fourth image is of West Texas TexLibris | UT LibrariesEdited by JonF, : No reason given.

I think that she thinks that, since all the strata were laid down by the fludde, the Gulf didn't exist when the strata were laid down. Then magic created the Gulf.Irrelevant to the fact that deposition and strata formation are happening in the Gulf, of course.

In a bowl they form a bowl. Thinner at the edges and thicker in the middle.Of course, in your black-and-white view there are no exceptions to the principle of original horizontality. It's not universal like the law of gravity. It is an expression of how gravity and topography and fluids interact to mostly produce horizontal flat surfaces. Um, you think that's how it happened. You just think it happened quickly. Edited by JonF, : No reason given.

So can it be imagined? Especially based on physics, chemistry, hydrodynamic, and geology?

300 million-ish.Edited by JonF, : No reason given.

You have no clue what evidence is. Such as your insistence that the definition of "the" geologic column shared by everyone but you is wrong. For example:"My definition is the only rational one" includes no evidence."My definition is correct because the esteemed sedimentologist Professor Milo Minderbinder agrees with me" is better but weak because you may have misinterpreted him."My definition is correct because the esteemed sedimentologist Professor Milo Minderbinder wrote, in Principles of Sedimentology second edition, 'the geologic column consists only of sedimentary layers above the basement rocks on land." contains significant evidence.Of course this was a waste of time. You are incapable of understanding the concept.