stratigraphic and geophysical data. Genesis 7 gives insight into the water levels and flooding of the continents on Days 1, 40 and 150 of the Flood year (Johnson and Clarey 2021). Previous attempts have been made to merge the sedimentary rock record with data from the Biblical text (Whitcomb and Morris 1961; Coffin 1983; Brand, 1997; Barrick and Sigler 2003; Barrick 2008; Snelling 2009; Walker 2011; and Boyd and Snelling 2014). But, many of these earlier attempts relied heavily on uniformitarian geological data sets or were limited in scope. The present study connects key dates (Days 1, 40, and 150) in the Genesis Flood directly to the rock data, showing the progression of the rising waters. III. METHODS Nearly 3000 stratigraphic columns were compiled from 100s of published papers and available oil wells, measured sections, crosssections and seismic data data from every major basin and uplift across North and South America, Europe, Africa and Asia. Within each column we identified the rock type and the stratigraphic megasequence intervals. Phanerozoic fossil-bearing rocks are divided into six packages of sedimentation based on the “megasequences” concept of Sloss (1963). We also kept track of a seventh “megasequence,” called the Pre-Sauk. We did not incorporate this into the present paper as much more research is necessary to sort out the amount derived from the earliest moments of the Flood vs. the amount derived from the pre-Flood. We input detailed lithologic data, megasequence boundaries and latitude and longitude coordinates into RockWorks, a commercial software program for geologic data, available from RockWare, Inc. Golden, CO, USA. Figure 2 is an example stratigraphic column showing the 16 types of lithology that were used for classification and the sequences. Depths shown in all diagrams are in meters. A graphics program in RockWorks allowed us to generate isopach (thickness) maps for each megasequence and to record the basal lithology in each megasequence. We assumed the basal lithologic unit (bottom rock type in each megasequence) was best preserved in the transgressive/regressive depositional/erosional cycle. We then trimmed the computer-generated isopach maps to match the extent of each megasequence shown by the basal lithology maps. Furthermore, our methods employed the identification of megasequence boundaries within each stratigraphic column. These were correlated across each continent and again, globally. We also utilized catastrophic plate tectonics as our mechanism for this model as discussed below. Finally, we used an exegetical study of Genesis 7 to match Days 1, 40 and 150 to the stratigraphic and fossil data (Johnson and Clarey 2021). A. Why Use Megasequences for Stratigraphic Correlations? Conventional geologists have divided much of the Phanerozoic rock record into six packages or sequences of deposition (Dapples et al. 1948; Sloss 1963). Each sequence was defined as a discrete package of sedimentary rock bounded top and bottom by inter-regional unconformity surfaces across the North American craton (Sloss 1963). Oil and gas geologists working for Exxon further advanced the concept of sequences to include identifiable patterns on seismic data, creating seismic stratigraphy in the process (Payton 1977). Mitchum (1977) further defined each sequence as a stratigraphic unit of relatively conformable; genetically-related strata bounded top and bottom by unconformity surfaces. Sequences supersede and include multiple geologic systems, and in many instances, can be recognized by their bounding erosional surfaces and sudden changes in rock type, independent of fossil content. Sequences record the sedimentology of the Flood, while fossils record what flora and fauna were buried within each sequence. They differ from the standard geologic time scale in that they are not solely based on changes of fossil content as are the Eras, Periods and Epochs. Terminology associated with sequence stratigraphy has ballooned in the past decades, causing some to use the term ‘megasequence’ for the most prominent regional unconformities (Hubbard 1988). Haq et al. (1988) then used the term ‘megasequence’ to designate their First Order sequences, or their largest scale sequences, equivalent to Sloss sequences. Other secular and creation scientists have followed, Figure 2. Example stratigraphic column from the Michigan Basin, USA showing the rock types (lithology) used for classification and the megasequence boundaries, including a Pre-Sauk interval. CLAREY AND WERNER Progressive Flood model 2023 ICC 414
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTM4ODY=