The only context I recall ever mentioning a tsunami in my Flood scenario is during the receding phase when I picture tsunami-SIZED waves covering huge areas. SIZE. That's not about the mechanics of tsunamis, it's just about a very long wave due to the high level of the water over the land during the receding phase when the land has begun to be exposed again, now covered in a great depth of stacked sediments. You are making up the stuff about energy and indeed the whole tsunami scenario.
I've posted pictures of mudslides caused in various places from just a few days of rain. I've even seen it personally. Rain soaks the soil, it doesn't take long, but the Flood had forty days of heavy rain working on every square inch of the planet at once. Your "implications" belong to some other scenario than the one I've had in mind
HERE, watch some mudslides on video in different parts of the world. All it takes is heavy rain, and it happens even where there are plenty of plant roots to stabilze the soil. The first one shows a forested area in British Columbia where a slide takes out trees:
A couple other things to think about. Would the liquid flour paste have a problem when covered with water? I see you didn't mention water, so maybe you're planning to drop stones on the flour paste layers directly through the air. That might work, though of course without water you couldn't see how sediments would gather around it later, though I guess you could drop the sand through the air, too.
I just want to see what happens when the pebble drops into the flour paste, I don't see that water is needed beyond the amount to create a consistency that the pebble can penetrate without dropping too far into it. There should also be no need for sand afterward. The idea is to see if the existing medium forms over it without any additions.
My understanding of Walther's Law is that the rising sea water deposits whatever is carried in it. Limestone deposits originate in the ocean, so does sand. Since the rising water would already be full of eroded material already caused by the mudslides I don't see the need for much erosion from the sea water itself for it to be the source of deposits.
As usual you have a totally inadequate idea of what a worldwide Flood would do, based on local floods. How long is a standing lake going to stand when the rain keeps coming and the mudslides keep coming and the sea water is rising? You are demanding that I account for "contradictions" created by your own inadequate imagination, not by the scnarios I've had in mind.
The only sand I have is a jar of it that Coragyps sent, not enough to play around with for other purposes.
I did think of using a nut and I may have some in the toolbox.
Sifting the flour would work for layering and that's a good idea except that it's hard to get flour to absorb water so I'm going to have to start by mixing that up, then testing it for consistency, dropping pebbles or nuts into it to see how deep they go, before I try forming anything approximating layers.
Wow, I could build my own Grand Canyon almost! Thank you but I feel bad that I haven't done the experiment yet and I didn't even get out to look for pebbles today. Let's see if I get this done before I ask for more. But that's nice to know.
Yes it will be more like a batter but I think that should work for the dropstone experiment. It wouldn't work for the horizontality experiment of course. It also makes paper mache glue, so when I'm finished I can make a piata. And if it really doesn't work very well then I'll start over with sand.
Since you can make the flour paste as watery as you like it should be easy to make it so the pebbles just plop right to the bottom, in which case you should see something like this:
True, I could, though I don't see why I would.
I want the experiment to show one of the two following possibilities:
The left side would require further deposition to create a curved layer over the stone, the right side would not.
As usual you have a totally inadequate idea of what a worldwide Flood would do, based on local floods.
Well, apparently, YECs aren't helping much, so someone has to do it.
I've given as much of an idea of what I think must have happened in the Flood as I happen to have, and when I learn something new and relevant I'll take that into account.
It doesn't matter whether the rising sea water eroded the land or not since the rain and mudslides would have done quite enough, but since Percy seems to think I insisted that the sea water eroded the land it's good to know that it normally would erode the land.
What would you all expect except imagining the possibilities as well as one can? I start from the fact that a worldwide flood as described in the Bible couldn't possibly act like any local flood except in very brief temporary episodes at the very beginning. Mudslides are inevitable from rain-saturated hillsides. In a local situation they may take out a town, but on a worldwide scale they are going to combine to take out millions of towns. Any accumulated lakes such as Percy illustrated are going to merge with millions of others very soon, be filled with mud etc etc etc. It's all going to flow downhill wherever there is a downhill incline. That's all pretty obvious isn't it?
Then because we know the water covered all the land we know the sea is rising and will eventually mix with all the land sediments, how soon no idea but the whole time of its rising to its height is about five months. It should be depositing its sediment loads during that whole period shouldn't it? Including the enormous sand and limestone deposits which would probably have originated in the sea water. Picking up more as it goes too. It covers the entire land mass so should deposit its layers across the whole geography.
Then it sits for a while at its height, a couple months IIRC, continuing to deposit whatever there is to deposit. I'm just trying to describe some obvious things that should have happened in such an event.
Then it drained, taking another five months or so for that process. It's from looking at such things as the GC-GS cross section that I conclude it eroded away an immense amount of the strata it just got through depositing, leaving the most compacted lower layers intact. There is also evidence on that cross section that there was no tectonic or volcanic activity during the entire Phanerozoic era, and I've been arguing that there was none before that either, but it is quite apparent after all the sediments were in place up to the uppermost layer of the Grand Staircase.
Any time I write this I may leave out something of course.
Like I said, if YECs would throw us a line, we might be able to address your arguments.
I put up videos of a variety of reports of mudslides from many different places. California is extremely susceptible because of their yearly fires which removes foliage and their protective root systems, but for that reason I chose some videos of mudslides in heavily forested areas to show it happens there too. And forty days of continuous rain absolutely everywhere shouldn't stretch credulity too far in imagining that even the areas least prone to mudslides would get saturated. Not ALL areas have to become mudslides for that much rain to soak them through and turn them into suspended sediments in the flood water.
The thing is nobody knows exactly what the pre-Flood terrain was like. The likelihood is that there were no deserts because it should have been very lush with plants. There wouldn't have been high mountains like the Rockies and Himalayas, but probably would have been lots of hilly country. As someone on one of the videos said, anywhere in the world there is an elevation of any height there is the possibility of mudslides, and that's now.
There may have been plains here and there but probably not all that many and not as extensive as Texas or the prairies of the Midwest. However, if all the elevations everywhere were getting saturated to mudslide condition, and the sea water is rising everywhere, plains are soon going to be mud lakes anyway, or twenty feet underwater.
Do you understand that modern floods and marine trangressions in the geological record are actual evidence, whereas you have nothing but ignorance about your flood?
Whatever the geological record says needs to be interpreted in relation to the Flood which we know occurred. Marine transgressions should be good evidence for that. However, the guesses I've made are perfectly reasonable.
For instance, if wild fires are an element of mudslides, show us evidence of forest fires at the beginning of the flood.
I did not say fires had anything to do with it. In California today they do, which I mentioned in agreement with Percy who said California is an unusual situation, but as one of the videos said, mudslides can happen anywhere there's an elevation (might have been the NOVA program on mudslides), and it just makes sense that the amount of rain happening all over the planet at one time would turn all the elevated areas into mudslides.
But then you have the problem with the fact that there are not even any trees at the time, and in fact, no terrestrial life. So forest fires are out.
But I did not say there were any forest fires, you got that out of your own head, and there WERE trees, bazillions of trees, and every kind of life in huge numbers because the world was so lush.
This is the problem 'imagining' things. What you are actually doing is 'making things up' to support a ancient myth.
I'm making things up based on the likelihood of the situation that both God Himself and Nature suggest had to be the case. Speaking of making things up, Old Earthism is the champ at that.
™ Version 4.2
(1)
