Are you aware that tsunami deposits are largely UNSORTED rubble with
particles of all sizes? That is NOT what we see in the geologic
column. We see excellently sorted particles, and microscopic fossils
sorted by either their shape or their exterior patterning on the tests
(shells). Why only animals with certain patterns are deposited at one
period during the flood remains a realy mystery to me and was one of the
things that eventually led me away from YECism.
> Since flooding mega-tsunami could only occure by impacts in large bodies of
> water, one would expect that the first depositions would contain primarily
> marine life.
Why could astroids only hit the water? Did the land have asteroid
blasting lasers that kept them at bay? Anti-asteroid cream? And
besides, the large tsunamis, come on shore rapidly and bury LAND animals
(and drag some of them out to sea). The land and marine animals should
be mixed up in this model. Hundreds of New Guineans were sucked into
the sea after their tsunami.
As the mega-tsuanmi sweep inland (several waves would
> generate from a single impact and each would follow the previous one ashore
> before the first had time to drain back off) more and more land would be
So where are all the land animals that are on land when the first waves
hit the beach. YOur model should predicts a fossil order of 1. land
animals 2. marine animals. This is backwards to what we see.
Following impacts on continental areas now covered by
> mega-tsunami distributed waters would start making depositions of land
> based plants and animals. The more moble animals (and birds) would be
> fleeing the mega-tunami for higher ground thus being (in general) the later
> ones to begin to be deposited. Body boyancy would also play a part, but
> not likely a major part. At this time, more detailed explanations that may
> account for the apparent ordering are lacking. But time will tell.
> Just how this model can explain the deposition of forams, nannoplankton and
> diatoms as described, I don't know at this time. But, in my optimism for
> the model, I expect an explanation can be found.
YOu are an unusually(unreasonably/blindly) optimistic fellow. You are
suggesting that NO explanation is a reason to believe your view.
Foundation,Fall and Flood Adam, Apes and Anthropology http://www.isource.net/~grmorton/dmd.htm