Did the Flood really happen?

In other words stop being a YEC.I was clear exactly when and where I make observations of phenomena that are not dictated by the Bible.

Christians HERE? Who said that to you?

Wouldn't one expect the trace fossils to occur in the strata where the creature that made them got overtaken by the Flood?

Said you should be shot? You can't just accuse people of something like that without evidence.

The trace fossils should be found in a place where the Flood would have overtaken and buried them.

Sorry, not following you.

This granite boulder thing has gotten way out of hand. Percy originally introduced it as a complete misreading of something I'd said about the uniformity of the strata as an argument against the ToE interpretation or something along those lines. I know I tried to be clear but maybe I wasn't. I was talking only about the FORM of the strata, their flatness, straightness, all stacked neatly one on top of another. Percy wanted to prove that the granite boulder does not demonstrate uniformity, by which he meant the texture of the rock, which had nothing to do with what I was talking about. So then said granite isn't even part of the geo column by which I meant the strata which I'd been talking about and off we galloped into neverneverland. So now the whole discussion is all garbled up but hey nothing new there.Cheers.

And I answered that question about how it got there according to the Flood model. I'm sure it had nothing to do with the Flood but with something that happened afterward. But that wasn't his only question about it; the other was how I explain its apparent lack of uniformity in texture or pattern when yu cut it open, since he misunderstood that I was talking about the uniformity of the form of the strata, their flatness and straightness etc. Original horizontality.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

I already explained that diagram but as usual you don't get it, though you always accuse me wrongly of misunderstanding the physical world. It's you who misunderstand it and say the most absurd things, as about the GC cross section years ago and then the shadow in the picture of the ledge of the Tapeats sandstone, and then the contact line between two layers whose identity I forget. You really have a terrible time understanding the physical world,but the problem for me is that your inability to understand becomes the standard you use against me.The diagram is of the strata long after they were laid down straight and flat and horizontal, then after the tectonic upheaval that broke off the strata to the left and knocked down the rest into those "slices of bread" across the surface of the island, and ALSO pushed the right side of the strata beneath what is now the island's sea level, where over time their remaining saturated with water and never drying out distorted them.That's my interpretation. Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Yes the Flood shaped the general condition of the planet, but that doesn't mean other things didn't happen in the ensuing four plus thousand years. Earthquakes, volcanoes, avalanches, whatnot.

The boulder interrupted what I was saying about the strata. I have no interest in it. It would take a lot of information about the environment in which it is found to figure out anything about it anyway. But I'm back in the strata myself and not interested. You of course who really do have geological knowledge (apart, of course, from all that historical hooha I mean) might have a notion about it you could most kindly and generously bestow upon us?Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Not granite, wow, and here I accepted Percy's saying it was granite.Transported, makes sense. Bedrock clue OK.Glacial, good possibility, yes.You really did bless us with your knowledge and here I was expecting the usual putdown. Thank you.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

We disagree, I don't accept your dates, the Flood is my assumption based on the Bible and that is that. If it is going to be questioned at every turn there is no point in this discussion at all.

There is no intent there to end the disacussion. The Flood is my basic assumption, there is no way to get rid of that fact without ending the discussion, so Percy's endless complaining about it is what would end the discussion. Leave it alone, it's my assumption, I am engaged in explaining most of these issues on its basis. if that is not acceptable SAY SO AND WE CAN END THIS CHARADE.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Let us now note that you are making up any old thing you can think of to discredit anything I say and support Percy and the whole thundering herd of people who are anti-creationist here. Maybe if you trample me to death you'll win?