There are two ways:
(1) Water existing in many locations for much longer than 40 days. The recession rate was most certainly different in different places around the globe.
(2) I already explained the transplantation method, in which strong current carry already developed organisms to new locations. They settle in, take root, or otherwise inhabit the area until the water recedes.
The problem is, Russ, you are speculating without actually looking at the evidence in the fossil record.
Brachiopods are found in the
Burgess Shale, a famous
Lagerstätte. The Burgess Shale is found in the Canadian Rockies of British Columbia, on a ridge between two mountains. It consists of 10 strata which are full of mostly benthic (bottom-dwelling) organisms. Some moved about and some (such as brachiopods) were permanently attached to the sea floor. The majority of them fed on organic content in the muddy sea floor; others filtered out particles from water. There is also evidence of burrowing and trackways in the strata.
Now let's try to match this to your flood scenario. The flood takes one or all of these strata from the sea floor and transports them up to a mountain, where it deposits the whole thing in a crack in the rock. All of those benthic organisms that are attached to the sea floor in a similar way to plants (such as sponges) have managed to stay attached to the sea floor rather than being ripped out by the turbulence. Every single one of the organisms from the ecosystem has been systematically transported to the crack in the rocks and no other organism has been mixed with them -- no seahorses, no fish, no seaweed, absolutely nothing we'd recognise as being from later geologic eras. Nor have they been disarticulated or died; they thrive in those rocks inside the mountain ridge. And if all 10 strata weren't magically transported at once, then they grow one at a time, in that crack, with no sunlight, and somehow plenty of mud and silt. All this happens while the flood waters are high enough to cover mountains.
Just how silly is this going to get before you admit to yourself that it isn't what happened? And where do the volcanoes you mentioned fit into it?
You have continually denied that this model works, yet, it has been demonstrated physically for you.
I really can't help you with this one because you just keep denying what you see before you.
This has gone beyond silly. Wet. Sand. Rolls. Down. A. Slope.
What's more, your erudite knowledge of geology brings you to the conclusion that all phanerozoic strata on earth should consist of a giant marine transgression, which your video doesn't even claim. I don't suppose there's any point in trying to reiterate that this is wrong too. As long as you sit in your chair and don't go outside to look at rocks with a little geological knowledge, you can no doubt feel free to claim anything you want to regardless of its basis in reality.
That geologists don't know how polystrate trees form?
Geological explanationa) Strata around polystrate trees form relatively quickly.
b) Some other types of sediment, such as varves and limestone, form slowly.
a) does not disprove b).
c) Red. Herring.
