Some Help from the Creationist

If the water started to rise from the ocean floor, as well as rain from the sky, and then receed rather quickly, all the evidence could be on the ocean floor.Plus maybe the earth wasn't that populated at the time of the flood, so that is why we don't see the evidence, kind of like transitional species, lmao.

Not all dinosaurs were alive at the same time. In fact, there were animals prior to and after the dinosaurs. Dinosaurs that did live at the same time show up in the same layer.The Earth is shifting, but it's not "messing with the layers". If it were the layer would be destroyed, and the fossils within it would be lost. There are plenty of great pictures available of sediment layers if you google them. They are quite clear. And what if they were all sucked up into the mothership and it's hiding on the far side of the Moon?If every living thing were sucked into the ocean and buried there we'd expect to see a random assortment of fossils. We should find hippo fossils next to t-rex fossils next to giant ferns next to oak trees. We don't.To speculate that we would if we just look harder is being silly. Sometimes they can tell. For example, all the animals coming out of the ash deposits in China were killed by the volcano. Or they'll find a fossil bone with teeth marks on it, etc. But for the most part, fossils are not a great way to tell how something died.

This contradicts the "fish fossils on top of mountains" theory of the flood. Can't have it both ways.Either the flood deposited the fish fossils on top of the mountains, and in that case where's all the rest of the evidence? -or - the flood washed all the evidence away, in which case where'd those fish fossils come from?Flood theory is full of - "But what if it was different in the past?" statements. But was it different in the past? Have we found any evidence that suggests that erosion happened different? That sediment settled different? That cactus did better underwater in the past? Etc.

Mothership? Thanks for your humor, but I am a realist. It's not unrealistic to think that the majority of dead animals caused by a worldwide flood would have swept away into the ocean when the waters receeded. People, buildings, animals do get washed away into the ocean even today during floods.And I disagree that the fossils would be mixed up. They would be in the same layer, but the layer may be rather large. IT would only contain fossils up to a certain date.

I mention it because according to people like you, fish fossils on a mountain top are not evidence of a worldwide flood. For whatever reason. Kind of like gaps in TOE, but you believe that don't you?

This "but what if" banter is great, but could a least one creationist (any lurking?) give at decent response to the OP?

Quite possibly but if that is the case then you can't also claim that all the rock layers making up the grand canyon and the world's various mountainous regions, are flood deposits. They would have to be pre-flood. Doesn't seem to read that way in the bible though. Why flood the whole world if only a small part of it is populated. Seems kind of pointless.

Too bad you haven't got any gaps to mention. If you did you'd be able to take them to an appropriate forum. It appears that after all this time you haven't been able to remember just what a theory is. That suggests a serious learning problem or a significant logic shortfall.

And no evidence has ever been found of such a layer anywhere in the world. So, Mr. Realist, what does that lead you to conclude?

That "whatever reason" is called geology. Care to give us a few examples? PLease explain to mean where in the Theory of Evolution there is a gap. Show me where the ToE contradicts the physical evidence. Or, better yet, how the Theory contradicts ALL the physical evidence.

He can't dude. I feel like pulling my hair out.

When I say not as populated, I do not mean locally, but globally. If the population was down, then the fossil would be fewer.These are just random uneducated thoughts, pay no mind to me. I just recognize that there is always more to learn.

You mean there is no missing evidence from TOE?

I seem to know what a theory is, and when to believe in one or not.

Rat, the reason it is not evidence for the flood is because we not only find fish fossils on the mountains but we also find them IN the mountains.