I have my own theory on how the layers got there, and its not based on evolution. But I'm not discussing evolution in this thread, I'm discussing how the current flood model explains the following:
Good question! Is there anything other than suppositional opinion that covers how the layers got there? The lack of empiricism renders the opinions as “man-made”
Another good question! Do you have factual evidences that cover the explanations, OR are you following the ‘a priori’ opining’s of evolutionists?
Therefore, the lack of empiricism renders these opinions as “man-made”
From a flood perspective: Right down at the bottom of most flood deposits is a layer of mainly lichen. This layer has been studied and shows signs of high co2 levels, above this worldwide layer of lichen is a worldwide layer of low carbon 13 levels showing no lichen, and then above this layer is another worldwide layer of lichen and other fossils showing increases in carbon 13 levels again. Nothing is based on suppositions, these layers exist, and the carbon 13 levels are empirically tested.
If you can explain how the flood managed to do this layering, then can you also explain how the flood managed the other points 3,4,5 mentioned in the opening post.That's what the current flood model says, but other than creationist assumptions on the geologic column, I think that only Chris has understood the implications of the opening post so far.
Once again, man-made opinion… And, I have no problem with opinion, as long as we call it what it is.
But, the bottom line is this; this man-made ‘Geologic Column’ was constructed by evolutionists as a way to support their presupposed transition (macro-evolution) from primitive life forms to complex life forms.
I think that the use of labels for each layer is distracting you from the fact that across the earth the lower "flood" layers show signs of lower oxygen levels, and the slightly higher layers show signs of increased oxygen levels, this is established by studying the chemical content of the fossilised plant-life. How can a flood possibly do this?
Also note that according to John Woodmorappe (see The Essential Non-Existence of the Evolutionary Uniformitarian Geologic Column) “only a small percentage of the earth’s surface obeys even a portion of the geologic column…the claim of their having taken place to form a continuum of rock/life/time…over the earth is therefore a fantastic and imaginative contrivance."
There are many other problems with the so called ‘Geologic Column’, but there is no doubt that it is contrived
I would say partially contrived, I deliberately chose those studies in the opening post because they were showing worldwide changes in consistent patterns as you go from lower to higher layers. The studies above are showing a geologic column. They are showing worldwide changes to atmospheric conditions that are demonstrated through chemical content between the layers that has not yet been explained from an empirical basis from any creationist in this thread.
I believe slight adjustments to the current flood model would explain all this, and we would have better ammunition against the evolutionists when we agree that some aspects of the geologic column have been correctly defined by them.
As I explained in my opening post, the Geologic Column is entirely man-made. It is a contrivance based upon assumptions with a smattering of facts. Also yours is a hypothesis (not theory).