[BroJoeK]

Danny Denier post #433 cont. 2: "I wonder how the NAGS might explain the 5 or so perfectly-sorted, micritic-carbonate-capped megasequences discovered by the geologist Sloss?
I am particularly curious how they might try to explain away the micritic carbonate caps."

Danny Whiny Denier: "A rule of thumb in the evolutionism cult smear game is:
1) If creationists quote secular scientists, the creationists are guilty of hijacking the secular scientists' work.
2) If creationists quote other creationists, they are guilty of avoiding peer-reviewed sources.
Now you know how the "you can't win" smear game is played by the devout, fundamentalist evolutionist."

So now you whine, lie, deny... lie, whine, deny.... deny, lie, whine, always the same, never stops.
Denier Rules #5, #6 & #7.

Danny Whiny Denier: "We love you anyway, Derek.
After all, you did help shatter the uniformitarian myth."

It was a simple case of science following the evidence, which is what they're supposed to do and which you whiner-deniers will never do.

Danny Whiny Denier: "Ager never said his previous calculations were ridiculous."

Of course he did, go back and read your own quote again.
In it he performed some calculations producing absurd results -- which however you deniers love & embrace -- then Ager commented that was "ridiculous".
Ager did not appreciate your quote mining and hijacking his words out of context.

Danny Whiny Denier: "In his calculations regarding polystrate trees, he merely explained that applying uniformitarian principles to those polystrate coal seam trees is ridiculous."

So you do agree those calculations were ridiculous, you just don't want to say so publicly?

Danny Whiny Denier: "I am not sure if he mentioned that polystrates have been found pointing upward through multiple coal seams, which is evidence of rapid coal seam formation over perhaps a year, rather than hundreds of thousands, or even millions of years."

And yet somehow we have neither photos nor scientific reports on such alleged occurrences.

Danny Whiny Denier: "We have not hijacked Ager's work, Child. "

Liar.

Danny Whiny Denier: "Creation scientists were catastrophists long before Ager showed up. "

Well... first, your term "creation scientists" is an oxymoron, a contradiction in terms, a nonexistent mythical being equivalent to unicorns & dragons.
Denier Rule #2.

Second, the first catastrophist was not a "creation scientist" but an early paleontologist named Georges Cuvier (1769-1832).
Cuvier explained extinctions in the fossil record as resulting from periodic catastrophic events, including region-wide floods.
Some of Cuvier's followers (i.e., Buckland & Jamison) tried to tie Cuvier's ideas to Noah's flood, but that was not Cuvier's intent.

Uniformitarian gradualism came later, popularized by Charles Lyell (1797-1875) & others, it became dominant and still today is considered the biggest of geological factors, with catastrophic asteroid strikes like Chicxulub, Mexico, the relatively infrequent exceptions.

Danny Whiny Denier on Ager: "No, Joey, you misunderstood him, or you are not making yourself clear."

No, I understood perfectly your own quote, by which you hoped to hijack Ager's words for your own nefarious purposes.

Danny Whiny Denier: "Those trees reveal only that, at one time, they were buried in highly-mineralized mud, of some sort."

Petrified over millions of years.

Danny Whiny Denier: "You are avoiding my point, Joey, which is the widespread presence of uneroded, unbioturbated strata in the geological column."

So, yet again you claim the absence of evidence is evidence of... what?
In fact there was lots of erosion between and within cratonic sequences.

Danny Whiny Denier: "The photo posted above of the alternate mud-coal layering demonstrates the absence of erosion."

Note again the six Cratonic Sequences:

So, again, you claim the absence of evidence is evidence of... what?

As for erosion & weathering, the Grand Canyon has a great example in what's called, "the Great Unconformity".

"Powell's Great Unconformity is part of a continent-wide unconformity that extends across Laurentia, the ancient core of North America.
It marks the progressive submergence of this landmass by a shallow cratonic [they mean epeiric] sea and its burial by shallow marine sediments of the Cambrian-Early Ordovician Sauk sequence.
The submergence of Laurentia ended a lengthy period of widespread continental denudation that exhumed and deeply eroded Precambrian rocks and exposed them to extensive physical and chemical weathering at the Earth's surface.
As a result, Powell's Great Unconformity is unusual in its geographic extent and its stratigraphic significance.[8][9]"

Danny Whiny Denier: "No, Joey.
The presence of uneroded, unbioturbated, layering is evidence enough of a global flood.
The lack of erosion of the layers "sandwiching" a missing layer is additional evidence that cannot be quibbled or obfuscated away."

Here is yet another example of erosion in Grand Canyon strata.

"About 800 million years ago the supergroup was tilted 15° and block faulted in the Grand Canyon Orogeny.[21][22]
Some of the block units moved down and others moved up while fault movement created north–south-trending fault-block mountain ranges.[9]
About 100 million years of erosion took place that washed most of the Chuar Group away along with part of the Unkar Group....
The mountain ranges were reduced to hills, and in some places, the whole 12,000 feet (3,700 m) of the supergroup were removed entirely, exposing the basement rocks below.[5]
Any rocks that were deposited on top of the Grand Canyon Supergroup in the Precambrian were completely removed.
This created a major unconformity that represents 460 million years of lost geologic history in the area.[23]"

And another:

"Nankoweap Formation is around 1,050 million years old and is not part of a group.[16]
This rock unit is made of coarse-grained sandstone, and was deposited in a shallow sea on top of the eroded surface of the Cardenas Basalt.[9]"

"The lower (ferruginous) member of the Nankoweap Formation consists of thin, 15 m or less thick, erosional remnants that overlie deeply eroded and often deeply weathered basaltic lava flows of the Cardenas Basalt. "

And yet more:

"Temple Butte Formation was deposited on the eroded surface of the Muav Limestone.
It in turn was buried by Redwall Limestone"

"The Grand Canyon Supergroup, of which the Nankoweap Formation is part, unconformably overlies deeply eroded granites, gneisses, pegmatites, and schists that comprise Vishnu Basement Rocks.[6][7][8] "

"In late Mississippian time, the Grand Canyon region was slowly uplifted and the Redwall was partly eroded away.
A Karst topography consisting of caves, sinkholes, and subterranean river channels resulted but were later filled with more limestone.[8]"

"Formations totaling over 4,000 to 5,000 feet (1,200 to 1,500 m) in thickness were deposited in the region in the Mesozoic and Cenozoic but were almost entirely removed from the Grand Canyon sequence by subsequent erosion.[56]
The geology of the Zion and Kolob canyons area and the geology of the Bryce Canyon area records some of these formations.
All these rock units together form a super sequence of rock known as the Grand Staircase."

"The next two periods of geologic history, the Ordovician and the Silurian, are missing from the Grand Canyon sequence.[25]
Geologists do not know if sediments were deposited in these periods and were later removed by erosion or if they were never deposited in the first place.[31]
Either way, this break in the geologic history of the area spans about 65 million years."

"Geologists do know that deep channels were carved on the top of the Muav Limestone during this time.[31][32]
Streams were the likely cause, but marine scour may be to blame.
Either way, these depressions were filled with freshwater limestone about 385 million years ago in the Middle Devonian in a formation that geologists call the Temple Butte Formation (see 4a in figure 1).[10]"

As for "bioturbation", fossils & tracks should fill that bill nicely:

"Averaging 1,250 million years old, this is the oldest layer exposed in the Grand Canyon that contains fossils—stromatolites.[11]"

"Tapeats Sandstone averages 525 million years old and is made of medium- to coarse-grained sand and conglomerate that was deposited on an ancient shore (see 3a in figure 1).[10]
Ripple marks are common in the upper members of this dark brown thin-bedded layer.
Fossils and imprint trails of trilobites and brachiopods have also been found in the Tapeats."

"Temple Butte Formation is a cliff-former in the western part of the park where it is gray to cream-colored dolomite.
Fossils of animals with backbones are found in this formation; bony plates from freshwater fish in the eastern part and numerous marine fish fossils in the western part"

"Many fossilized crinoids, brachiopods, bryozoans, horn corals, nautiloids, and sponges, along with other marine organisms such as large and complex trilobites have been found in the Redwall.[31]"

"Surprise Canyon Formation is a sedimentary layer of purplish-red shale that was laid down in discontinuous beds of sand and lime above the Redwall (see 4c in figure 1).
It was created in very late Mississippian and possibly in very earliest Pennsylvanian time as the land subsided and tidal estuaries filled river valleys with sediment.[31]
This formation only exists in isolated lenses that are 50 to 400 feet (15 to 122 m) thick.[37]
Surprise Canyon was unknown to science until 1973 and can be reached only by helicopter.[36]
Fossil logs, other plant material and marine shells are found in this formation.[31]
An unconformity marks the top of the Surprise Canyon Formation and in most places this unconformity has entirely removed the Surprise Canyon and exposed the underlying Redwall."

"Supai Group formations in the western part of the canyon contain limestone, indicative of a warm, shallow sea, while the eastern part was probably a muddy river delta...
...Fossils of amphibian footprints, reptiles, and plentiful plant material are found in the eastern part and increasing numbers of marine fossils are found in the western part.[40]"

"Like the Supai Group below it, the Permian-aged Hermit Formation was probably deposited on a broad coastal plain (see 6a in figure 1).[38]
The alternating thin-bedded iron oxide, mud and silt were deposited via freshwater streams in a semiarid environment around 280 million years ago.[10]
Fossils of winged insects, cone-bearing plants, and ferns are found in this formation as well as tracks of vertebrate animals.[32] "

"Coconino Sandstone formed about 275 million years ago as the area dried out and sand dunes made of quartz sand invaded a growing desert (see 6b in figure 1).[10]
Some Coconino fills deep mudcracks in the underlying Hermit Shale[38] and the desert that created the Coconino lasted for 5 to 10 million years.[46]…
...Also fossilized are tracks from lizard-like creatures and what look like tracks from millipedes and scorpions.[50]
An unconformity marks the top of this formation. "

Danny Whiny Denier: "LOL!
It this guy for real?
Nobody cares about the missing layer, Joey.
The lack of erosion in the layers adjacent to the missing layer is what should make any old-earth geologist worth his salt reconsider his intrepretations."

Nonsense, erosion and bioturbation are found in many places between Grand Canyon strata, as illustrated above.

Danny Whiny Denier: "If I didn't know better, I would think you were trying to be funny, Joey."

No, I simply note with amazement how frequently you attempt to use the lack of evidence of... {whatever}… as evidence for... {wait for it}… yes, Noah's flood!

Danny Whiny Denier: "LOL! This is like talking to a wall."

And yet again you fall back on Denier Rules #5, #6 & #7.

Danny Whiny Denier: "That is an observable, scientific fact, Joey.
Practically everywhere you walk on earth, even in many desert areas, there is evidence of bioturbation.
There is also evidence of the beginning of bioturbation in many of the sedimentary rock layers, which suddenly stopped, leaving only a few tunnels and fossilized borers.
That reveals there was potential for bioturbation, but some process stopped it, such as a new layer of sediment."

As illustrated above, "bioturbation" in the form of fossils and animal tracks is found in many Grand Canyon strata.
The tracks are proof positive that the ground was exposed before being buried under later layers of sediment.

Danny Whiny Denier: "These parts from Gingras et al. explains bioturbation.
They also mention sequence stratigraphy:"

I can't find anything on your man Gingras suggesting he is either young earth or creationist.
So I have to wonder if you people have yet again hijacked a serious scientist for your own nefarious purposes?

Danny Whiny Denier: "The Journal of Creation is a peer-reviewed journal."

No, it's bogus theology masquerading as science.

Danny Whiny Denier on igneous strata: "No. Perhaps you will enlighten us."

Naw, you are incurious about matters outside the scope of your theological fantasies.

Danny Whiny Denier quoting Hood 2017: "In analysing the barcodes across 100,000 species, the researchers found a telltale sign showing that almost all the animals emerged about the same time as humans..."

Which those researchers said was about 200,000 years ago... ooops, so much for young earth.
Reports on this study are few and uninformative, but suggest to me it was highly flawed in both assumptions and methodology.
For starters, they only looked at a sub-set of mitochondrial genes called COI, which may, or may not, represent overall speciation.

For another, the study totally begs the question "what is a species?"
For another, the study assumes a constant rate of COI mutations over hundreds of thousands of years, a "fact" which is not fully in evidence, and is not accepted by Creationists as evidence in any other context I know of.

Danny Whiny Denier: "Regarding the last sentence, I wonder what the catastrophic event could have been that nearly "wiped the slate clean"? LOL!"

We're talking 200,000 years ago here.
Roughly 200,000 years ago the Earth was ending a long interglacial period, climate then similar to today:

[Kalamata]

>>Danny Denier post #433 cont. 2: "I wonder how the NAGS might explain the 5 or so perfectly-sorted, micritic-carbonate-capped megasequences discovered by the geologist Sloss? I am particularly curious how they might try to explain away the micritic carbonate caps."
>> Little Joey pasted some Power Point images, including a chart of Sloss's Megasequences.

That chart deserves an explanation:

Sloss's Megasequences

****************

>>Danny Whiny Denier: "A rule of thumb in the evolutionism cult smear game is:

1) If creationists quote secular scientists, the creationists are guilty of hijacking the secular scientists' work.
2) If creationists quote other creationists, they are guilty of avoiding peer-reviewed sources.

>>Now you know how the "you can't win" smear game is played by the devout, fundamentalist evolutionist."

>>Little Joey whined: "So now you whine, lie, deny... lie, whine, deny.... deny, lie, whine, always the same, never stops. Denier Rules #5, #6 & #7."

Whiny Child.

****************

>>Danny Whiny Denier: "We love you anyway, Derek. After all, you did help shatter the uniformitarian myth."
>>Little Joey whined: "It was a simple case of science following the evidence, which is what they're supposed to do and which you whiner-deniers will never do."

That is silly. Derek Ager was a heretic to the religious cult of Lyellism. His doctrine, also known as Neo-Catastrophism, was comparable to the doctrine of another heretic named Velikovsky. The establishment was none too pleased:

The Velikovsky Encyclopedia: Derek Ager

****************

>>Danny Whiny Denier: "Ager never said his previous calculations were ridiculous."
>>Little Joey whined: "Of course he did, go back and read your own quote again. In it he performed some calculations producing absurd results -- which however you deniers love & embrace -- then Ager commented that was "ridiculous"."

No, Child, you have a reading comprehension problem. Derek Ager looked at the evidence, compared it to the uniformitarian principle of a constant rate of sedimentation, and called the uniformitarianism principle "ridiculous." This is Ager, again:

"Obviously sedimentation had to be very rapid to bury a tree in a standing position before it rotted and fell down. David Smith of BP did an instant calculation when I had talked about these things, as to what this meant in terms of rates of sedimentation (personal communication 1988). I later did my own calculation and it proved even more surprising. If one estimates the total thickness of the British Coal Measures as about 1000 m, laid down in about 10 million years, then, assuming a constant rate of sedimentation, it would have taken 100,000 years to bury a tree 10 m high, which is ridiculous." [Derek V. Ager, "The New Catastrophism: The Importance of the Rare Event in Geological History." Cambridge University Press, ISBN 0 521 42019 9, 1993, Chap 4, p.49]

Ager was a scientist, and he assumed the readers of his work would have reasonable science aptitude. Don't take it personally.

****************

>>Little Joey whined: "Ager did not appreciate your quote mining and hijacking his words out of context."

Quit lying, Little Joey. I have never taken Ager's words out of context; and I couldn't care less whether he appreciates my quoting his work, or not. Besides, (paraphasing Dr. Terry Mortenson,) "He is dead, so now he knows the truth."

****************

>>Danny Whiny Denier: "In his calculations regarding polystrate trees, he merely explained that applying uniformitarian principles to those polystrate coal seam trees is ridiculous."
>>Little Joey whined: "So you do agree those calculations were ridiculous, you just don't want to say so publicly?"

The Lord has taught me patience over the years; but it is most difficult to debate someone who is both arrogant and scientifically-challenged.

****************

>>Danny Whiny Denier: "I am not sure if he mentioned that polystrates have been found pointing upward through multiple coal seams, which is evidence of rapid coal seam formation over perhaps a year, rather than hundreds of thousands, or even millions of years."
>>Little Joey whined: "And yet somehow we have neither photos nor scientific reports on such alleged occurrences."

This is one. The tree begins near the top of a layer of coal, penetrates a layer of soil, and then a layer of coal, and perhaps more layers now shown:

There are many reports, Joey, but they never seem to make it into the establishment literature. I wonder why?

The earlier literature contains plenty of reports of polystrates. Charles Lyell wrote extensively of them:

"We have just returned from an expedition of three days to the Strait which divides Nova Scotia from New Brunswick, whither I went to see a forest of fossil coal-trees—the most wonderful phenomenon perhaps that I have seen, so upright do the trees stand, or so perpendicular to the strata, in the ever-wasting cliffs, every year a new crop being brought into view, as the violent tides of the Bay of Fundy, and the intense frost of the winters here, combine to destroy, undermine, and sweep away the old one—trees twenty-five feet high, and some have been seen of forty feet, piercing the beds of sandstone and terminating downwards in the same beds, usually coal." [Letter to his sister, Marianne, from Truro, Novia Scotia, July 30, 1842, in Charles Lyell, "Life, letters and journals of Sir Charles Lyell Vol II." John Murray, 1881, pp.64-65]

"In a deep valley near Capel-Coelbren, branching from the higher part of the Swansea valley, four stems of upright Sigillarice were seen in 1838, piercing through the coal-measures of S. Wales; one of them was 2 feet in diameter, and one 131 feet high, and they were all found to terminate downwards in a bed of coal. ' They appear,' says Sir H. De la Beche, ' to have constituted a portion of a subterranean forest at the epoch when the lower carboniferous strata were formed.'" [Charles Lyell, "Elements of Geology." 1865, p.478]

And, of course, Ager mentioned them:

"Although we do not everywhere have the precision of Mesozoic chronology, we do from time to time find evidence, in all parts of the stratigraphical column, of very rapid and very spasmodic deposition in the most harmless of sediments. In the Late Cuboniferous Coal Measures of Lancashire, a fossil tree has been found, 11.5 m high and still standing in its living position. Sedimentation must therefore have been fast enough to bury the tree and solidify before the tree had time to rot. Similarly, at Gilboa in New York State, within the deposts of the Devonian Catskill delta, a flash-flood (itself an example of a modern catastrophic event) uncovered a whole forest of insitu Devonian trees up to 12 m high. By such means it is possible, within the Lancashire Coal Measures for example, to demonstrate that very rapid sedimentation alternated with very slow sedimentation and that the former was responsible for the bulk of at least some parts of the record." [Ager, Derek V., "The Nature of the Stratigraphical Record." John Wilson & Son, 3rd Ed, 1993, Chap 4, pp.65-66]

Ager believed the presence of polystrates demonstrated rapid sedimentation, contradicting the long time-periods assigned to the individual deposits by Hutton and Lyell.

****************

>>Danny Whiny Denier: "We have not hijacked Ager's work, Child."
>>Little Joey whined: "Liar."

You are the liar, Joey. We always give credit to Ager for his work. Perhaps you are thinking of your own nefarious methods.

****************

>>Danny Whiny Denier: "Creation scientists were catastrophists long before Ager showed up. "
>>Little Joey whined: "Well... first, your term "creation scientists" is an oxymoron, a contradiction in terms, a nonexistent mythical being equivalent to unicorns & dragons. Denier Rule #2."

I believe you are confusing creation science with the pseudoscience religion of evolutionism, Joey.

****************

>>Little Joey whined: "Second, the first catastrophist was not a "creation scientist" but an early paleontologist named Georges Cuvier (1769-1832). Cuvier explained extinctions in the fossil record as resulting from periodic catastrophic events, including region-wide floods. Some of Cuvier's followers (i.e., Buckland & Jamison) tried to tie Cuvier's ideas to Noah's flood, but that was not Cuvier's intent."

Perhaps you are unfamiliar with the work of Nicolas Steno (1638-1686,) who was a Noachian:

"There are those to whom the great length of time seems to destroy the force of the remaining arguments, since the recollection of no age affirms that floods rose to the place where many marine objects are found to-day, if you exclude the universal deluge, four thousand years, more or less, before our time. Nor does it seem in accord with reason that a part of an animal's body could withstand the ravages of so many years, since we see that the same bodies are often destroyed completely in the space of a few years. But this doubt is easily answered, since the result depends wholly upon the diversity of soil; for I have seen strata of a certain kind of clay which by the thinness of their fluid decomposed all the bodies enclosed within them. I have noticed many other sandy strata which preserved whole all that was entrusted to them. And by this test it might be possible to come to a knowledge of that fluid which disintegrates solid bodies. But that which is certain, that the formation of many mollusks which we find to-day must be referred to times coincident with the universal deluge, is sufficiently shown by the following argument." [Steno, Nicolaus, "The Prodromus of Nicolaus Steno's Dissertation Concerning a Solid Body Enclosed by Process of Nature Within a Solid." The MacMillan Company, 1916, p.258]

****************

>>Little Joey whined: "Uniformitarian gradualism came later, popularized by Charles Lyell (1797-1875) & others, it became dominant and still today is considered the biggest of geological factors, with catastrophic asteroid strikes like Chicxulub, Mexico, the relatively infrequent exceptions."

Henry Morris placed Cuvier in that mix:

"It is significant that this uniformitarian revolution was led, not by professional scientific geologists, but by amateurs, men such as Buckland (a theologian), Cuvier (an anatomist), Buffon (a lawyer), Hutton (an agriculturalist), Smith (a surveyor), Chambers (a journalist), Lyell (a lawyer), and others of similar variegated backgrounds. The acceptance of Lyell's uniformitarianism laid the foundation for the sudden success of Darwinism in the decade following the publication of Darwin'sOrigin of Species in 1859. Darwin frequently acknowledged his debt to Lyell, who he said gave him the necessary time required for natural selection to produce meaningful evolutionary results. . . Yet all the while the foundation was nothing but sand. Uniformitarian geology was contrary to both the Bible and to observable science. Now, a hundred years later, the humanistic and naturalistic culture erected upon that foundation is beginning to crumble, and men are beginning again to look critically at the foundation." [Henry M. Morris, "Geology and the Flood." Institute for Creation Research, Aug 1, 1973]

The supposed asteroid strike in Mexico is another just-so story Joey keeps presenting as a fact. {sigh}

****************

>>Danny Whiny Denier on Ager: "No, Joey, you misunderstood him, or you are not making yourself clear."
>>Little Joey whined: "No, I understood perfectly your own quote, by which you hoped to hijack Ager's words for your own nefarious purposes."

Joey, you wrote in #422:

"Ager himself recognized his calculations were "ridiculous", my word was "nonsense".

I am trying to help you out, Joey, but you are too pig-headed to keep from making a fool of yourself. Ager claimed uniformitarianism was ridiculous. This is Ager, again, for the umpteenth time:

"Obviously sedimentation had to be very rapid to bury a tree in a standing position before it rotted and fell down. David Smith of BP did an instant calculation when I had talked about these things, as to what this meant in terms of rates of sedimentation (personal communication 1988). I later did my own calculation and it proved even more surprising. If one estimates the total thickness of the British Coal Measures as about 1000 m, laid down in about 10 million years, then, assuming a constant rate of sedimentation, it would have taken 100,000 years to bury a tree 10 m high, which is ridiculous." [Derek V. Ager, "The New Catastrophism: The Importance of the Rare Event in Geological History." Cambridge University Press, ISBN 0 521 42019 9, 1993, Chap 4, p.49]

****************

>>Danny Whiny Denier: "Those trees reveal only that, at one time, they were buried in highly-mineralized mud, of some sort."
>>Little Joey whined: "Petrified over millions of years."

You can't be that stupid, Joey. There is this little thing called rot that sets-in in a few years.

****************

>>Danny Whiny Denier: "You are avoiding my point, Joey, which is the widespread presence of uneroded, unbioturbated strata in the geological column."
>>Little Joey whined: "So, yet again you claim the absence of evidence is evidence of... what?"

The absence of evidence is NOT evidence, Joey. Uneroded, unbioturbated strata, however, IS evidence -- evidence of rapid deposition. The lecture segment linked previously explains. Here it is again:

Sloss's Megasequences

****************

>>Little Joey whined: "Note again the six Cratonic Sequences."

Those are called megasequences, Joey. The layers in between are virtually undisturbed, indicating the entire megasequence was deposited rapidly, The flood waters retreated, and then returned, five times.

****************

>>Little Joey whined: "So, again, you claim the absence of evidence is evidence of... what?"

The absence of evidence is NOT evidence, Joey. Uneroded, unbioturbated strata, however, IS evidence -- evidence of rapid deposition. The lecture segment linked previously explains. Here it is again

Sloss's Megasequences

Have you ever noticed that Joey keeps asking the same dumb question over and over again?

****************

>>Little Joey whined: "As for erosion & weathering, the Grand Canyon has a great example in what's called, "the Great Unconformity".

The Great Unconformity separates the pre-Cambrian "basement" rock from the Cambrian "sedimentary" rock, which was deposited by the flood surge that created the Sauk Megasequence. It has nothing to do with the point in question, which is, erosion between and within the sedimentary rock layers.

****************

>>Danny Whiny Denier: "No, Joey. The presence of uneroded, unbioturbated layering is evidence enough of a global flood. The lack of erosion of the layers "sandwiching" a missing layer is additional evidence that cannot be quibbled or obfuscated away."
>>Little Joey whined: "Here is yet another example of erosion in Grand Canyon strata. "About 800 million years ago the supergroup was tilted 15° and block faulted in the Grand Canyon Orogeny.[21][22]"

800 million years? Baloney. That is another just-so story. Tricky Joey is using misdirection to trick you into believing there is a lot of erosion between the sedimentary rock layers. That is ONLY true of the upper and lower boundaries of the megasequences. The many layers in between are uneroded and unbioturbated.

The question any curious person would ask is, how does a sedimentary rock layer survive many millions of years without substantial erosion and mixing by boring animals? The answer is, the layers were all laid down rapidly. The lecture segment linked previously explains. Here it is again

Sloss's Megasequences

****************

>>Little Joey whined: "And another: "Nankoweap Formation is around 1,050 million years old and is not part of a group.[16] This rock unit is made of coarse-grained sandstone, and was deposited in a shallow sea on top of the eroded surface of the Cardenas Basalt.[9]"

That is another just-so story, this time about pre-flood rock. Obviously, Joey doesn't have a clue what I am talking about or he wouldn't copy/paste something from Leftwing Wikipedia so unrelated to the topic.

****************

>>Little Joey whined: "And yet more: "Temple Butte Formation was deposited on the eroded surface of the Muav Limestone. It in turn was buried by Redwall Limestone"

That is an example of erosion within the flood sediments, but there are only a handful of those boundaries. Joey is either ignorant of the strata, or he is trying to trick you into believing there is massive erosion. This chart reveals the low frequency of erosion boundaries in comparison to ueroded layering:

Notice there are only a handful of erosion boundaries. The rest are flat and uneroded, which could only exist today if the layers were deposited rapidly, with the subsequent layers preventing the previous layers from eroding.

****************

>>Little Joey whined: "As for "bioturbation", fossils & tracks should fill that bill nicely: "Averaging 1,250 million years old, this is the oldest layer exposed in the Grand Canyon that contains fossils—stromatolites.[11]"

Joey doesn't understand bioturbation. This video segment will explain:

Lamination and Bioturbation

****************

>>Danny Whiny Denier: "LOL! It this guy for real? Nobody cares about the missing layer, Joey. The lack of erosion in the layers adjacent to the missing layer is what should make any old-earth geologist worth his salt reconsider his interpretations."
>>Little Joey whined: "Nonsense, erosion and bioturbation are found in many places between Grand Canyon strata, as illustrated above."

You really are scientifically-challenged. It doesn't help to copy/paste Leftwing Wikipedia articles, if you don't understand what you are copying.

My point is, there is a sedimentary rock layer in the Grand Canyon that formed and then remained undisturbed for supposedly 100 million years. Don't you think that is just a wee-bit far-feteched, Joey? [Joey doesn't get it.]

****************

>>Danny Whiny Denier: "If I didn't know better, I would think you were trying to be funny, Joey."
>>Little Joey whined: "No, I simply note with amazement how frequently you attempt to use the lack of evidence of... {whatever}… as evidence for... {wait for it}… yes, Noah's flood!"

You really are scientifically challenged, Joey, either that or you enjoy being a pest.

****************

>>Danny Whiny Denier: "LOL! This is like talking to a wall."
>>Little Joey whined: "And yet again you fall back on Denier Rules #5, #6 & #7.

Whiny Child.

****************

>>Danny Whiny Denier: "That is an observable, scientific fact, Joey. Practically everywhere you walk on earth, even in many desert areas, there is evidence of bioturbation. There is also evidence of the beginning of bioturbation in many of the sedimentary rock layers, which suddenly stopped, leaving only a few tunnels and fossilized borers. That reveals there was potential for bioturbation, but some process stopped it, such as a new layer of sediment."
>>Little Joey whined: "As illustrated above, "bioturbation" in the form of fossils and animal tracks is found in many Grand Canyon strata. The tracks are proof positive that the ground was exposed before being buried under later layers of sediment."

That is NOT bioturbation, Joey {sigh}. This video segment will explain:

Lamination and Bioturbation

****************

>>Danny Whiny Denier: "These parts from Gingras et al. explains bioturbation. They also mention sequence stratigraphy:"
>>Little Joey whined: "I can't find anything on your man Gingras suggesting he is either young earth or creationist. So I have to wonder if you people have yet again hijacked a serious scientist for your own nefarious purposes?

The Oilfield Review is a secular paper, Joey. Perhaps you will feel more confortable with this secular Nature article, You can download the PDF for free:

The impact of deep-tier burrow systems in sediment mixing and ecosystem engineering in early Cambrian carbonate settings

The title and first two sentences summarize the process of bioturbation:

"Bioturbation plays a substantial role in sediment oxygen concentration, chemical cycling, regeneration of nutrients, microbial activity, and the rate of organic matter decomposition in modern oceans. In addition, bioturbators are ecosystem engineers which promote the presence of some organisms, while precluding others." [Zhang et al, "The Impact of deep-tier burrow systems in sediment mixing and ecosystem engineering in early Cambrian carbonate settings." Nature, Vol.7; April 4, 2017, p.1]

****************

>>Danny Whiny Denier: "The Journal of Creation is a peer-reviewed journal."
>>Little Joey whined: "No, it's bogus theology masquerading as science.

No, Joey. It is a peer-reviewed scientific journal. However, I will agree that Charlie Darwin's theory is theology masquerading as science, when it is not being presented as a fairy tale.

****************

>>Danny Whiny Denier on igneous strata: "No. Perhaps you will enlighten us."
>>Little Joey whined: "Naw, you are incurious about matters outside the scope of your theological fantasies."

I suspected you would punt on that one.

****************

>>Danny Whiny Denier quoting Hood 2017: "In analysing the barcodes across 100,000 species, the researchers found a telltale sign showing that almost all the animals emerged about the same time as humans..."
>>Little Joey whined: "Which those researchers said was about 200,000 years ago... ooops, so much for young earth."

You really cherry-picked that one good, Joey! No matter. The millions-of-years drama is being exposed as just another evolutionism fairy tale.

****************

>>Little Joey whined: "Reports on this study are few and uninformative, but suggest to me it was highly flawed in both assumptions and methodology. For starters, they only looked at a sub-set of mitochondrial genes called COI, which may, or may not, represent overall speciation."

I found lots of reports, Joey:

https://www.bing.com/search?q=Why+should+mitochondria+define+species%3F&PC=U316&FORM=CHROMN

No offense, Joey, but I do not have a lot of confidence in your scientific aptitude.

****************

>>Little Joey whined: "For another, the study totally begs the question "what is a species?"

There are many definitions of Species, as this Science blog attests:

A list of 26 Species "Concepts"

But, if you must whine about something, you can always nitpick.

****************

>>Little Joey whined: "For another, the study assumes a constant rate of COI mutations over hundreds of thousands of years, a "fact" which is not fully in evidence, and is not accepted by Creationists as evidence in any other context I know of."

Where did you copy/paste that from, Joey? You didn't include a source.

Darwin assumed all species evolved from a common ancestor, a fact not in evidence; but you seem to have no problem believing Charlie. Is he your prophet?

**************** >>Danny Whiny Denier: "Regarding the last sentence, I wonder what the catastrophic event could have been that nearly "wiped the slate clean"? LOL!"
>>Little Joey whined: "We're talking 200,000 years ago here. Roughly 200,000 years ago the Earth was ending a long interglacial period, climate then similar to today"

The 100,000 to 200,000 years is a very wild guess, Joey. There was only one ice age, and that followed the global flood.

Mr Kalamata