I know you would, but scientists don't.
In fact, at the age given for the flood you are generally dealing with sediments, not geological formations. In the western US where I work we have a lot of sites with good continuous records of sediments, faunal remains, radiocarbon dates and human occupation (mtDNA haplogroups) before, during and after the dates given for the flood. No evidence of the kinds of erosion you would have, nor of the deposition of all of the eroded soils. (Don't bother bringing up geological strata, they are millions of years too old.)
But none of this will matter; judging on your past posts your belief is sturdier than any pesky facts.
As I understand it, stratification is found on a global scale, and that stratification is chiefly observed by those who indulge geological sciences. Some of it is doubtless due to the laws of physics at the time the planet was formed. If there was a world-wide flood one would expect the world to be replete with examples of mixed up remains of biological entities, much as is found in the fossil record and other bone deposits denoting a catastrophic occurence. It generally takes water and sedimentation to make a fossil, does it not?
Not all scientists dismiss a world-wide deluge as quickly as you. Not all scientists begin with an atheistic set of ground rules. The evidence is decent for accepting a world-wide deluge at some point in the planet's history.