[Nataku X]

Not necessarily--if the Flood really did deposit all of the world's strata, why not deposit it around a large animal? In fact, fossils are often found *tilted* but perfectly aligned with the (also tilted) strata. For example, whales probably would survive the Flood the longest, and sink on top of the sediments before finally dying. You'd think that layers would build around a whale, but instead, whales are found in only one layer--as with all other mammals. In any case criss-crossing animal fossils are a disaster scenario for evolution.

There's a specific reason why I mentioned animals; someone already gave you a link to polystrate trees.

[nonsporting]

...if the Flood really did deposit all of the world's strata, why not deposit it around a large animal?

Who mentioned "the Flood?"

We can look at the aftermath of Mt. St. Helens to see why trees are better candidates for spanning strata than any animal. The root ball sinks causing the tree to be upright when rapid deposition takes place. (Try doing that with a Whale).

Catastrophism in and of itself does not preclude long-aged models of deposition. The presence of a polystrate mammal fossil, as rare as it might be, could be dismissed as a "tiny mystery" (as Gentry's Polonium radiohalos were).