sOME mORE iNCONVENIENT pHYSICAL fACTS cONCERNING THE sTRATA AS rECORDS OF TIME pERIODS

tHIS IS A GREATION i'VE HAD FOR SOME TIME AND i THOUGHT i'D HAVE BEEN BLE TO ANSWER IT BY NOW.  i KEEP TRYING OUT VARIOUS yOU TUBE VIDEOS ON THE FOSSIL REORD AND PALEONTOLOGY AND SO ON BUT SO FAR i DON'T GET A CLEAR ANSWER.   

hERE'S THE QUESTION.  hOW MANY DIFFERENT FOSSILS ARE REPRESENTED IN EACH OF THE TIME PERIODS.   iN THE CAMBRIAN THERE WAS SUPPOSEDLY THE CAMBRIAN "EXPLOSION" I WHICH A HUGE VARIEYT OF COMPLEX CREATURES SUPPOSEDLY SHOWED UP MORE OR LESS ALL AT ONCE IN THE FOSSIL RECORD, A GRET EXPLOSION OF LIFE AS THEY THINK OF IT.  sHOULDN'T WE THEN SEE THOSE SAME CREATURES IN ROUGTHLY THE SAME NUMBERS SHOWING UP IN ALL THE SUBSEQUENT STRATA OR TIME PERIODS AS WELL?  aLONG WITH WHATEVER NEW FOSSILS ALSO SHOW UP?  aND THEN WITH THOSE NEW FOSSILS SHOUDLJ'T THE WHOLE COLLECTION KEEP SHOWING UP ABOVE THAT TOO, ALL BEING CARRIECDD THOUGH ALL THE STRATA AND TIME PERIODS TO THE VERY TOP OF THE GEOLOGICL COLUM?  

tHE SUPPOSED EXTINCTION EVENTS OF COURSE WOULD HAVE HAD AN EFFECT.  tHEY JUDGE SUCH EVENTS BY THE ABSENSE OF PARTICULAR LIFE FORMS IN STRATA ABOVE THE SUPPOSED OCCURRENCE OF SUCH AN EVENT.  aND THER HAVE EEN MANY OF THEM, ALL OF COURSE SUPPOSED TO HVE HAPPENED BECAUES OF THE ABSENSE OF SOME FOSSIL OR ALNOTHER WHERE THEY EXPECT IT TO SHOW UP.    sO i DON'T KNOW IF ANYTHING EVEN STILL EXISTS TO ANSQER MY QUESTION.  wAS THERE AN EXTINCTION EVENT THAT WIPED OUT THE FOSSILS IN TEH CAMBRIAN EXPLOSION?  tHEY'D ALL BE THERE ABOVE THAT ROCK IN COMPARABLE NUU,MBERS OTHERWISE WOULDN'T THEY?  

i SUSPECT THERE'S MORE EVIDENCE AGAINST EVOLUTION IN THIS QUESTION OF COURSE, THAT'S WHY i'M ASKING IT.  iF EACH SUPPOSED TIME PERIOD IS MOSTLY POPULATED BY FOSSILS OF THE PARTICULAR CREATURE SUPPOSED TO HAVE EVOLVED FROM EARLYIER PERIODS TO BECOME CHARACTERISTIC OF THIS HIGHLY POPULATED PERIOD THAT CASTS DOUBT ON THE THEORY RIGHT THERE.  bECAUE PERSUMABLY EVERYTHING THAT LIVED BEFORE CONTINUED ON INTO THE FUTURE.  bARRING AN EXTINCTION EVENT.    aRE THERE AS MANY OF A GIVEN SPECIES PRESENT ABOVE THEIR SUPPOSED FIRST APPEARANCE IN A LOWER ROCK  AS SHOUJLD BE EXTPECTED OR NOT?  iF NOT THEN SURELY SOMETHING OTHER THAN EVOLUTION IS THE EXPLANATION FOR THESE STRATA AND THEIR SUPPOSED TIME PERIODS.

aaNOTHER QUESTION IS HOW COME WE HAVE PRETTY MUCH ALL SEASCAPES IN TEH LOWER ROCKS OF THE GEOLOGICAL COLUMN N AND LATER ON IN THE UPPER ROCKS WE START TO GET TERRESTRIAL LANDSCAPES WITH LAND ANOIMALS.  i'M THINKING ABOUT THE PHYSICAL POSSIBILITIES AGAIN AS USUAL.  tHESE ROCKS ARE ALL STACKED ONE ON TOP OF ANOTHER ANDYYET THE ENVIRONMENT CHANGES FROM BOTTOM TO TOP?  hAS THIS BEEN ACCOUNTED FOR AND HOW?    sHOULDN'T THERE ALSO HAVE BEEN A LOT OF LAND AREA DURING THE PERIOD OF THE LOWER ROCKS EVEN IF THERE WASN'T ANY LAND LIFE TO SHOW OF IT?  bUT WE DON'T GET EMPTY STRATA, ONLY STRATA FILLED WITH FOSSIL SEA LIFE, RIGHT?   tHEN IN THE UPPER ROCKS OF CCOURSE THERE WERE ALSO SEAS, OCEANS IN THE WORLD DURING THOSE PERIODS TOO BUT ALL WE ARE GETTING IS THE LAND ANIMALS IN THOSE STRATA, EVERYWHERE ON EARTH.  tHESE STRATA EXTENTDFC ALL OVE THE EARTH.  bUT THE EARTH DIDN'T CHANGE FROM ALL SEASCAPE TO ALL LANDSCAPE EEVER THAT i RECALL ANYTONE THEORIZING.    i HOPE MY QUESTION MAKES SOME IND OF SESNE, i MAY NOT BE ASKING IT ALL THAT CLEARLY.R 

tHERE AREN'T ANY LAND ANIMALS IN THE LOWER STRATA BUT THERE ARE SOME SEA CREATURES IN THE UPPER STRATA ALONG WITH THE LAND ANIMALS AREN'T THERE?  oR ARE THER?  hWO DID THEY GET THERE IF SO?  

mAYBE SOMEONE HAS SADDRESED THESE UESTIONS SOMEWHERE, i'M JUT NOT ABLE TO FIND IT.  i'VE LOOKED AT VIDEOS ON PAELEOGRAPHY AND EVEN STRATIGRAPHY, NOT A LOT BUT SOME AND SDON'T SEE ANYTHING RELEAVNT.

bY THE WAY i PRAY TO GET ANSWERS TO SUCH QUESTIOJS.  lABTELY i'VE GEENGETTING THE     UESTIOS THEMSEVLES TO ASK LIKE THESE.  

dRAT, i KNJOW i'M GETTING OLD AND MY MEMORY IS BECOMING IFFY AT TIMES AND M FINGERS DON'T WAN T TO DO WHAT i WANT THEM TO DO AND IT'S ALL VERY FRUSTRATING.  dRAT.  

oOPS THAT WAN'T VERY cHRISTIAN OF ME, i'M SORRY lORD.  i'M SUPPOSED TO REJOICE IN ALL CIRCUMSTANCES, EVEN THESE, BECAUE ALgOD ALWAYS BRINGS GOOD OUT OF ALL THINGS FOR THOSE WHO LOVE hIM AND ARE CALLED ACCORDING TO hI S PURPOSES.  eVEN MY FAILURES.  IN FCT hE LIKES TO USE PEOPLE WHO ARE FAILURES TO DISPLAY hIS EXISTENCE AND POWER, AND i MUST BE A GOLDMINE OF FAILURES FOR hIM TO WORK WITH SO THANKS yOU lORD.

kEEP FORGETRTING TO ADD MY NEW EMAIL IN CSE ANYONE WOULD LIKE TO COME AROUND AND UPGBRAID ME FOR MY FAILURES OR WHATEVER TOERH FORM OF ENTERTAINMENT MAY BECKON.

FAITHSWINDOW2MAIL.COM

tHERE IS AN EXPLANATORY NOTE ABOUT THIS YOU CAN FIND IF YOU PUT IN cONTACT poSSIBILITY IN THE SEARCH BOX TO THE AOVE LEFT.  THANKS.

Nibdat

Monday Sept nine

I mention in  a later ost that I did get more of a sense of what fossils are grouped together in different time periods and one thing did become clear, that there are both land and sea creatures buried int he same rock aka time period apparently fairly close together.  And this should by itself blie and disqualify the whole idea of time periods since according to the idea that they are a record of living tings tht lived in that period and were buried in those rocks you obviously couldn't have both land and crsea crfeatures buried in the same place.  

The questionj I'm asking above sounds pretty stupid ow that I know the answer since of course anyone who has studied the fossil record would know that there are both land and sea cretures in many of the rocks aka time periods.    they must have some way of accepting this as reasonable but I can't figure out how.  

Through most of this discussion I've contented myself with pointing out the wrojgn ideas of the evolutionists, but I might as well from time to time mention the right eidea of the creationjists, which hisch is that you can have both land and sea creatures i mone layer of rock if it was deposited by waves thta washed over the land during the Flood.