I had to look up "disingenuous". It means insincere, lacking frankness.
(and I thought I was too blunt!) But I think I understand what you mean.
I see that I made a mistake in the above paragraph, implying that the
dinosaurs only made tracks on areas that were not yet fully eroded.
Obviously that's ridiculous, because when the areas were eroded, so would
those tracks be. What I meant was that tides would be expected during the
flood, so that the land was alternately inundated and exposed. This
includes uneroded areas, until there were no more, and areas of deposition
(new layers) that were temporarily exposed at low tide. Tracks on these
layers, if they were covered without being eroded, would be preserved.
Dinosaur tracks are not found down near the
>base of the Cambrian (the earliest "flood" sediments). They are found only in
>Mesozoic-age rocks. Mesozoic rocks in the western U.S. typically have
>thousands
>of feet of Paleozoic age rocks beneath them. Those Paleozoic rocks are
>presumably
>flood sediments. Those dinosaurs had to leave tracks after MOST of the flood
>sediments HAD ALREADY BEEN DEPOSITED. Presumably after the highest mountains
>had been covered by flood waters leaving the poor dinosaurs no place to
>walk to
>in their escape.
Right. And different dinosaurs were deposited in different layers (some
middle Jurassic, others Upper Cretaceous, etc.) because of differences in
their success in evading the waters for a time, different strength and
endurance in swimming ability, different floatational characteristics, etc.
>
> If I'm misrepresenting your position, perhaps you could explain exactly what
>you are envisioning regarding which sediments are flood sediments and which
>sediments are not flood sediments and how long the flood lasted.
>
No, you got it right. I see the worldwide water catastrophe as extending
at least from the pC-C (Cambrian) boundary to at least the K-T. (So the
K-T crisis is part of the C-T catastrophe.)
One large scale catastrophe in past earth history.
Mercifully, only one.
Karen