Laughing, this time at you. You have accused me of this before. I use a bunch of lines when I have to reason my case – just look several comments above. But when people accuse me with empty remarks, I simply return the favor.
A little passive agressive, eh?
Whatever you like.
Because it’s all you do…
And that’s certainly comfortable. But I’d rather find out what’s true than just be comfortable. I’m not on this website to get my preconceptions confirmed believe it or not.
Why are we continuing?
I can’t answer for the both of us. I’m continuing because I want to see what you have to say in response to things I and others say. It could be informative, or instructive.
Are you worried I might be right?
No. Should I be?
1 Like
I didn’t see you post your physical mechanism for how your Flood produced angular unconformities with fossils in the bottom and top layers. 
2 Likes
Yes…
Okay. We’ll I’m not, so there’s that. Do you want to continue or what?
Not seeing it here, Lloyd.
Guys, if this continues in this vein we will have to move into the Porch. Please hold back yourselves and take a breather instead of devolving this thread further into a series of one-liners. 
3 Likes
There does not seem to be a way forward, so maybe the discussion should end. Looking at something in specific at the moment, and I may post one more comment, though.
How about the extensive quaternary igneous layers which lie on top of the grand canyon, and date back to around 750,000 years ago? Would those be “pre-flood” according to your timescale?
https://prd-wret.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/assets/palladium/production/s3fs-public/atoms/files/GrandCanyonGeologicMap.pdf
Specifically those around Tuckup canyon, for example?
On top of the Grand Canyon? Then no, of course they are not pre-Flood. But then, neither are those flows 750,000 years old. The macro and microscopic contamination within the flows is that old because it is from the earth’s interior.
I am reading some of Stone and Stevens. Different events cause layers of unconformities. Right now I am looking at eustatic flows. Very interesting and fits nicely with a layer-by-deadly-layer laid down by the Flood.
And it just so happens that the amount of “contamination” giving older ages increases the further down the geologic column we sample?
1 Like
This is very interesting and I may have more to say later. This definitely fits with the Flood model. The kill of life was slow in vast regions like the vast desert you have cited. It may very well have been that the layers occurred as
Kill - months wait - overlayering - months wait - another kill, etc.
Correct. And it should do that logically. We already touched on that in another thread.
At the risk of piling on here’s one more example of things YECs or YLCs can’t explain.
Deformed fossils. Occasionally rocks containing fossils are later carried deep underground by plate tectonics where they are subjected to tremendous heat and pressure which makes the rocks pliable. Fossils in such rocks may then become deformed and distorted without fracturing. This is another geologic process which takes millions of years after the fossil formation which itself took millions of years.
Here is a classic example of a normal trilobite fossil and a severely deformed one.
Of course there is no YEC or YLC explanation for how this happened in a one year Flood. 
2 Likes
How so? And why do these ages match those from other dating methods?
The nicest part of being a YEC or YLC has always been you get to make up crap as you go.