What Strata does the Biblical Flood Begin & End?

For example, some creationists believe the flood started at the onset of the Cambrian, & ends with the Cretaceous. What's the consencus, & why?I also want to tie fossil gaps into this argument when we have some responses.Mark------------------
Occam's razor is not for shaving with.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Randy:
You don't really expect an answer to this question, do you?

​

Randy

---

It was written during one of my more optimistic episodes. Won't happen again Mark------------------
Occam's razor is not for shaving with.

quote:

---

Originally posted by TrueCreation:
--Mainstream science does have quite a bit more headway than that of YECists research initiatives, so I see no reason to say that looking toward the future isn't scientifically coherent. It did take Mainstream science quite a while to get its feet & we also have very little researchers in comparison. I personally, attempt to maintain a productive cerebral attitude in working in the midst of this 'hope' when finding answers.

​

---

TC,I fail to see the difficulty. I cannot understand why creationists are unable to predict & test where the flood deposits are. Shouldn't it be glaringly obvious? A global catastrophic flood followed by mainstream deposition/rock formation. Why isn't the line obvious?Mark------------------
Occam's razor is not for shaving with.

ABB,But given that strata can be cross-correlated globally to give a relative age, where did the flood begin & end with reference to the eras & epochs?Mark

---

There are 10 kinds of people in this world; those that understand binary, & those that don't

ABB, Nor does it explain all that sedimentary rock below the CB that looks exactly like the rock above it that was allegedly laid down in the flood. Nor does it explain how all the Precambrian fossils got where they are. Nor does it explain why radiometric dating shows no anomoly whatsoever when moving down the geologic column from the "present" into the Precambrian. Surely a flood would have messed things up a bit? But no, you can move down the GC uninterupted, & the rocks date older & older regardless of whether they were laid down by an alleged flood, or not. This presents even more of a problem, there are more pre-flood fossils to explain. The radiometric dating problem outlined above still exists, & so the the indiscriminate nature of pre-flood & flood sediments.This is a flood, I am told, that accounts for the geologic column & the fossils contained within it. Such a cataclysm must have left evidence. The rocks that are undisturbed by the flood should be in obvious evidence, & so should the layers deposited after the flood. There should be two crashingly obvious unconformities with flood strata in the middle. But there aren't.There is a fairly obvious conclusion to draw from this.Mark

---

There are 10 kinds of people in this world; those that understand binary, & those that don't