Quote:

---

I dont dispute that. I dispute that the particular layers form a consistent chronological geologic column.

---

And why would those layers not form a consistent chronological geologic column? We know a lot about how these layers are formed, how much time it takes and and and ... we can even 'read' the layers and say how a river originally was flowing through a landscape because of the deposition of layers.

Layers that are deeper are usually older and if they are not older, we can usually see why a layer has been turned 'up-side-down' (there are multiple natural causes that cause this) or sideways. To be honest it's not something that you can dispute, it's simply fact.
Cross-examinations together with multiple dating methods and a common sense theory have already proven the interpretation of layers is 100% correct. Even it's dating is correct, although not 100% accurate. (usually the older, the harder to get an exact date)

Layers that should have been inbetween others but are gone, as you seem to suggest, may indeed be 'washed' away because they might have had a lower resistance, less clay or things like that, however, even that process leaves it's tracks and is well known and studied. Geology really isn't wrong,

Quote:

---

An origin suggests a creator

---

Only in a biased mind perhaps.

In nature there is no 'creation' (as in the religious sense), we only see examples of reproduction(in whatever way) when it comes to life. For other things, like stones or mountains we can also see their 'circles of life', but that's no creation either,

Quote:

---

The original "magma" could turn into atoms and molecules etc
just in case a lot of parameters were set with a very narrow tollerance range

---