universalchiro wrote: The rate of settling will be according to density globally, but the content settling may vary because of eddys or turbulance in the flood waters. for one there may have been more biomass in the middle east region and in Texas, etc. But always things settle according to density to form layers.
The point it this, that picture shows that the above statement is false. If it were true, the layers would always be segregated in the same order. Calcium carbonate is either lighter that quartz or heavier, so in your version of events, one will always be on top of the other. So why are there layers of limestone over sandstone, under sandstone, in between sandstone, at the top layer, at the bottom layer and every other sort of variation, not only all around the world, but even within this one single site?
universalchiro wrote:But for the slow gradual depository hypothesis of evolution, there is a problem of viewing segregated sediment, vegetation and biomass in layers. For uniformitarian theory doesn't allow segregated layers with all sediment soil types deposited simulyaneously. And there can't be any rain for millions of years because there are no erosion marks commingling the layers.
What are "erosion marks"? What is "commingling the layers"? Erosion is very gradual, and often produces effects that seem smooth, just look at a riverbed, water often polishes rocks smooth as it washes over them. Just look at the pyramids, as the wind rolls over them they become flatter and less distinguishable from the sand below. The elements are plenty commingled, and we can observe changes form each era, both gradual and drastic. You are the one asserting that a gazillion gallons of water produced uniformity, not chaos, so why do the rules change for a few drops of water or a minor flood? Water is water, so the resulting "eroded" minerals naturally obey the laws of gravity by settling back down into a relatively smooth way.