I would think that with all of "tens of thousands of documented samples and proven striations........." (post #602) that you would have at least come up with something convincing by now. Still, you have failed to demonstrate that there is proof (by your own definition) for any of the events in the timeline you presented.
First, I made a mistake. I used the word striations when I meant stratigraphy. Forgive me. There are striations, and I can certainly talk about them, but it was the stratigraphy that I was referring to. But that's minor.
First you will want to read this and click on the links. It talks briefly about the age of planet, what the interior of earth looks like and discusses the atmosphere too. That's a bonus. Do tell me if this overview of the history of our planet is too much for you.http://www.astro.virginia.edu/class/oconnell/astr121/guide12-s02.html
Then read this little ditty on how the earth is dated via various radiation methods of not only earth rock but moon rock and meteorite rock as well. If that sounds crazy, keep in mind that if the earth formed out of the same material the moon and meteorites formed out of, they should be about the same age. I am also ignoring the theory that moon was formed when our planet and other collided, kicking a lot of debris out into space. Some of which coalesced and formed the moon. But that's neither here nor there. The age is the same. http://www.nature.nps.gov/geology/usgsnps/gtime/ageofearth.html
So here. Read this article and tell me how it is wrong. Look at the illustrations that show the many layers of strata in the Kansas area and tell me how it backs up anything in the bible and how it is inconsistent with crap-ass scientific theory. This is a region that scientists say was at times an inland sea and at other times dry. Over and over again. And that is the process by which the alternating layers of shale and limestone came to exist. Provide an alternative if you don't believe this one. http://www.astro.virginia.edu/class/oconnell/astr121/guide12-s02.html
By the way, these layers aren't guesses. They dug holes. People who are curious do such things.
If you don't like Kansas, how about near Dorset, England. Very nice drawing of the layers at the bottom of the page. And great photos of the very complex layering and folding of the rock in the area. All quite consistent with a planet that has been around a long time and that is very dynamic. (Dynamic means something that is characterized by constant change. Let me know if you need other words defined as well).http://www.soton.ac.uk/~imw/Stair-Hole-Lulworth.htm
Speaking of dynamic, how about continental drift, which I'll toss in as a bonus. Sadly this is a .pdf, which confuses some folks who don't believe in them since they aren't mentioned in the bible. But download and read it anyway. Look at the evidence the seems to indicate that indeed the continents used to be joined and that they have moved slowly apart. The North and South American continents are now moving to the west at about 1 cm (4/10's of an inch) per year. That doesn't sound like much, but it is impressive. And don't worry, satellite measurements have confirmed this movement. Anyway, that's a good 6 miles or so per one million years. And we've had lots of one million year periods, so we've had lots of time to get here.http://www.sci.csuhayward.edu/~lstrayer/geol2101/2101_Ch19_03.pdf
Each of the above links explains something about the science of dating the earth and such. I know there is a lot more to explain to you as per the confusing table I provided about how long ago different things happened. Go easy on yourself if you are overwhelmed by actual information. I didn't mean to toss these tiny tidbits at you too fast, but you kept insisting.
If you were in a good college, you would be spending thousands of dollars for this information and have to take tests too. I'm providing it for free. Hope you appreciate that. And, as I know you will do anyway, feel free to tell me I'm full of sh*t. That's what Jesus would do.
The research used to draw the conclusion in the above articles is the sort of thing we see as "good evidence" that these things did happen. None is treated as absolute proof, but the combination of sources that all indicate similar histories and age are a pretty good sign that we're on the right track. New discoveries might cause scientists to alter a timeline or a physical method of change, but I doubt you'll see any major changes to this overall view of our planet.