All of these questions have been addressed already, but I'll throw in my two cents' worth:
otseng wrote:Why are there distinct lines between the sedimentary layers?
As has been said, conditions changed. This doesn't mean that they changed in some regular way, though sometimes this seems to have happened. Some layers are very thick, others are quite thin. The Mancos Shale is 1000 feet thick in Black Mesa, near Chilchinbito, AZ. By contrast, the Moenkopi has lots of interleaved layers of sandstone and shale. Sandstone and shale are deposited under different conditions--think of fine sediment forming shale, and, well, sand forming sandstone.
otseng wrote:Why are they parallel to each other?
Why wouldn't they be, if they are deposited by sedimentation? We'd expect just what the Flood Geologists say, that they'd form horizontally under the force of gravity. The only difference is that Flood Geology posits that it happened suddenly, while traditional geology suggests that it took a very long time.
otseng wrote:How did the stratas get formed?
Where did all the material come from to form the stratas?
I'll lump these together. When mountains erode, the sediment is washed downhill. If it goes into lakes or oceans, it settles out, forming layers. Rivers also form strata, but they are much less extensive and much less uniform. Rivers tend to wander as they erode their banks, so fossil rivers (if that's what you want to call them) show up as braided sediments within other types of sediment. The example I think of is a river deposit at Hell Creek, MT, in the otherwise-volcanic ash sediment.
otseng wrote:Where do we see evidence of stratas being formed now?
As has been said, just about anyplace. Cores of lake sediment show layers of different types of material. If you fly over the southwest desert mountains, you can see very clearly the alluvial fans of erosional deposits at the mouths of the canyons. Glaciers have terminal morraines, which look a lot like the hills just south of Indianapolis.
otseng wrote:Why do the majority of faults split through multiple layers?
Again, as has been said, when faults slip, they break the rock above them, even if it is many layers thick.
otseng wrote:Why do sedimentary stratas generally start in the Cambrian layer? Why are there none before that?
This is a misconception promulgated by the Flood Geology of the Grand Canyon. As
I posted recently, , it's pretty easy to see the layers even in the Vishnu Schist, the supposed "basement rocks" from before the flood. There are many other examples that can be found just noodling around on the web.
otseng wrote:Do sedimentary layers exist older than 500 MYA?
As noted above, yes. However, as previously mentioned, they are often referred to as metamorphic rock, rather than sedimentary, because of the time and pressure that has enabled them to metamorphose--from shale to slate, from limestone to marble, etc. The layers are still there, even if the crystal structure of the rock has been changed by compression.
otseng wrote:Why are there little to none sedimentary stratas on top of shields (exposed cratons)?
I picture this as the continental plates being, well, plates floating on the mantle. The plates are bouyant. They can tilt to one side or the other, but it's really hard to submerse them completely. Therefore, if a plate dips to the right, then the right side can get covered with sediment. If it dips to the left, then the left side can get covered with sediment. But, it's hard to cover the middle of the plate. Hence, we get sediments from which to build the Appalachians and the Rockies, but not much in Minnesota. [West of the Rockies it gets complicated, due to the various other, smaller plates crashing into the North American plate, and the stretching that formed the basin and range.]
otseng wrote:Why are there relatively little sediments on the ocean floors near the ridges?
The ridges are cracks in the ocean floor where molten material oozes out. This pushes the ocean floors outward, away from the cracks. The way the material oozes out, it forms ridges. As it pushes the ocean floor outward, it also pushes the continental plates along. Or, if the continental plate is being pushed on from both sides, the ocean floor may get forced down under the continental plate, producing the ocean trenches and the volcanism we see in places like the "ring of fire" around the Pacific.
The ocean floor near the ridges is very young, so it has had relatively little time to accumulate sediment.
otseng wrote:Why are there gaps in time in the stratas?
If those layers got eroded away, how did it happen?
The "how did it happen" part seems straightforward to me--just like erosion today. But, part of the story is lack of deposition, as well. If you think about where you live, you'll notice that you are above sea level, and you aren't getting buried in sediment every day. Where I live, the rocks on the surface are Mississippian rocks. A while back, they were formed underwater, but then they were lifted up above sea level. There has been no deposition on top of them since; instead, we see erosion. What would happen if this part of the North American plate tilted enough to put this region under water again? There would be renewed deposition of sediment, and future geologists would see an "unconformity" where the newer rock lies on top of Mississippian rock.