Crand Canyon Tracks Were Not Formed During a Worldwide Flood

I don't wish to get into this discussion, especially while in the "Admin" mode, but... It seems that the confussion between Edge and TB is from TB's using the term "trench" when the appropriate term would be the "rift valley" of the mid-ocean ridge. The term "trench" is used for the deep basins found at subduction zones.Now, the real "Admin" comments:
Are not these plate tectonic discussions rather far off the topic of this thread. Maybe there's a better place for it.AdminnemooseusAdded by edit: The page cited by TB is a nice little diagram.------------------
{mnmoose@lakenet.com}[This message has been edited by Adminnemooseus, 10-20-2002]

I'm making a big exception to my general frowning on the quoting of entire messages. I'm doing such here, because the quoted is the most recent message that is really on topic for this topic string. And note, I did do away with all the "bold" of the text - Adminnemooseus

quote:

---

Originally posted by Randy:
I have been away and some other have answered JediKnight well but I thought I should answer since the post was addressed to me.

​

quote:

---

JediKnight wrote
I know I'm a newcomer here, but there's one thing I've noticed. You, Randy, have a propensity to point out the flaws in other people's theories, while ignoring attacks on your own. For example: as you so deftly pointed out many times, sand is transported from one location to another quite readily, by either water or wind. How would sand become hardened if it was not above water, or another layer of sediments? Wouldn't it just blow away? No tracks would remain, if they were made above water! On the other hand, water pressure pressing directly down on sediments the size of sand could compress them in a very short amount of time, leaving tracks.

---

​

So you are new. Did you read the original posts on this thread? The famous flood geologists Snelling and Austin are claiming that the sandstones were laid down by moving water 300 feet deep that was spreading the sand into waves and overwhelmed the animals. How does anything make tracks in that? I have pointed out that their theory is total nonsense because it is total nonsense.

​

While sand can be transported by water I really don't think it makes sense that 300 foot deep water moving at a walking pace could carry 10,000 cubic miles of sand for 200-300 miles without dumping it and then spread it over 200,000 square miles in waves that just happen to look like wind formed dunes, let alone the impossiblity of animals making tracks that were preserved during this process.

​

quote:

---

There is also something else I would like to point out. When you make a footprint in sand, it looks roughly like a footprint, right? Look at it again when it's exposed to a moderate wind for even a few minutes. It doesn't look anything like it did before, does it? Couldn't we be mistaking these footprints of spiders, etc. for tracks of other animals, or even plant fossils? I hate to say it (well, actually, I'm rather enjoying it), but those spider tracks could be nothing more than the tiny imprints left by the sori on the underside of a fern frond!

---

​

Not likely. And if you did look at the web site then you should know that it does postulate mechanisms for preserving the tracks. Unlike, the YEC mechanisms they are not impossible.

​

http://www.psiaz.com/Schur/azpaleo/cocotr.html

​

Now TB and some other creationists are claiming that the Coconinos were deposited in surges and that the animal tracks which are distributed throughout the lower 2/3 of the formation were made by animals that came in from some high ground somewhere between surges. Maybe you can explain to us where the animals and insects that made the tracks in the Coconino sandstones were hiding out while the Tapeats Sandstone, Bright Angel Shale, Muav Limestone, Grand Wash Dolomites, Temple Butte Limestone, Redwall Limestone, Surprise Canyon Formation, Supai Group and the Hermit Shale were deposited and while the 300 foot deep water brought in successive waves of sand to supposedly form the Coconinos. TB has totally failed to do so. Perhaps the task is impossible because the scenario is absurd.

​

It seems to me that Steve Austin(aka Stewart Nevins) who is one of the authors of the AiG web page wrote a book that claims that the area of the grand canyon was a shallow sea before the thousands of feet of sediment were deposited. So where was the high ground in a shallow sea?
Randy

---

I had noticed that Adminquility (which kinda sounds like a bureaucratic porcupine) had two messages on record, but only one message to be found. So I went to search the location of TB's next later post, to see if there was a message gap nearby. And there it is, at number 78 of this topic!See what sometimes happens when you have two modes available, to operate under? Sometimes something in the system will try to switch you to the one other that what you wanted.I bet what happened at message 78, is that the TB name was all set to post the message, and did a preview. When he did the preview, the system reset his identity back to Adminquility, because that was used in his previous posting. Thus, Adminquility did the posting, realized what had happened, and deleted the message.I think I've had that happen at least a couple of times, except that it was that minnemooseus ended up posting an admin type message.TB, just wait. The system will also do the switch-o-roo (not to be confused with the Kang-o-roo) to you when your trying to do an admin thing.Adminnemooseus (big clumsy looking bureaucratic deer)------------------
{mnmoose@lakenet.com}