Indeed, a good question, and I imagine that’s why this is such a remarkable find. However, simply because we may not understand the exact mechanics of the preservation, doesn’t mean we should throw out facts in evidence. The facts clearly show the rocks surrounding the petrified forest are volcanic in nature. Thus, we cannot conclude they were burried by a great watery flood, for if they were, the rocks would be sedimentary in nature.
Possible answer to the question posed though is, that a nearby volcano spat out hot ash and similar hot volcanic rocks that quickly covered a surrounding forest, quickly enough that even oxidation (fire) could not occur due to the lack of oxygen in the local atmosphere. Think Pompeii on an even grander and quicker scale.
Contrary to what many may read into my posts, I am not throwing out the facts. I don't dispute any physical facts shown here.
However, I believe that science tends to dismiss or ignore possibilities simply because they don't agree with those possibilities.
Think Pompeii on an even grander and quicker scale.
While Pompeii holds many preserved buildings and people, I don't believe (correct me if I'm mistaken) that any vegetation is preserved in the same way. Ash may fall and cover things--but not fast enough to prevent burning. Look at the recent Mt. St. Helens explosion. The speed of that explosion was enough to flatten the forests around for miles.
Again--I'm not saying I know what happened here. But I am saying that science doesn't know either, and the proclamation of their guess is premature at best, and totally wrong at worst. I'm guessing somewhere in the middle.