Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
5 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Evolution. We Have The Fossils. We Win.
edge
Member (Idle past 1706 days)
Posts: 4696
From: Colorado, USA
Joined: 01-09-2002


(3)
Message 872 of 2887 (828847)
02-25-2018 9:57 AM
Reply to: Message 869 by Faith
02-25-2018 4:58 AM


Re: A Fair Assessment
In concert with the enormous pressure from above I'm getting more sure that that's what happened.
Of course you become more certain. That is the nature of religious belief.
I started thinking in terms of a volcano because of what I read years ago about there being a volcano there. All the granite in the area is a clue too.
So, you are going to ignore the cross-cutting relationships and age dates, along with the different compositions and stratigraphic relationships, and claim that you read about a volcano, once upon a time. This is what you provide as your evidence. Fine. I think we know where you are coming from.
Your statement that your speculation is based on evidence rings hollow.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 869 by Faith, posted 02-25-2018 4:58 AM Faith has not replied

  
edge
Member (Idle past 1706 days)
Posts: 4696
From: Colorado, USA
Joined: 01-09-2002


Message 873 of 2887 (828848)
02-25-2018 10:05 AM
Reply to: Message 864 by Faith
02-25-2018 4:13 AM


Re: A Fair Assessment
You didn't explain how the boulder broke off from the Shinumo.
I thought it was pretty obvious. The boulder was eroded from the Shinumo hills that rose high above sea level.
How does this "beach" end up in the geological column by the way?
Simple. It is buried. I thought you had a basic understanding of Walther's Law.
You didn't answer whether there is erosion.
Of course there is. That's the whole point.
Woulda coulda shoulda. The whole physical layout of the supergroup in relation to all the other features of the Grand Canyon fits my hypothesis superbly. What implies the strong force from the side is the position of the supergroup up against the Tapeats and the mounding of the strata over it. I could not care less whether some bits of it fit yours.
So, I take it that you are not going to address my evidence. I'm shocked.
Edited by edge, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 864 by Faith, posted 02-25-2018 4:13 AM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 875 by Faith, posted 02-25-2018 10:21 AM edge has replied

  
edge
Member (Idle past 1706 days)
Posts: 4696
From: Colorado, USA
Joined: 01-09-2002


(1)
Message 874 of 2887 (828849)
02-25-2018 10:19 AM
Reply to: Message 867 by Faith
02-25-2018 4:34 AM


Re: A Fair Assessment
Good grief, what is the necessity of making this ridiculously obvious pronouncement?
The point is made in the next few statements where I point out reasons why the Tapeats is not continuous across the continent.
If you can't see the flatness in the walls of the Grand Canyon you've got a BIG problem
Sure, the layers are tabular. The problem is that you extend this observation to the rest of the planet, when actually it does not go beyond the Colorado Plateau.
These 'landscapes' that you envision did not exist at the Grand Canyon. They were flat seafloors for the most part, continually taking sedimentation, even as the depositional environment was changing. Hence, there were no dinosaurs or mammals, just sea life that moved as their environment moved and left fossils when they died.
Landscapes do not become rocks. Terrestrial creatures are seldom preserved because they are not buried, but eroded away.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 867 by Faith, posted 02-25-2018 4:34 AM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 876 by Faith, posted 02-25-2018 10:41 AM edge has replied

  
edge
Member (Idle past 1706 days)
Posts: 4696
From: Colorado, USA
Joined: 01-09-2002


(2)
Message 878 of 2887 (828875)
02-25-2018 10:28 PM
Reply to: Message 876 by Faith
02-25-2018 10:41 AM


Re: A Fair Assessment
Of course landscapes become rocks.
The way I define a landscape sure. And they do exists. However, the way you define landscape, no, they cannot be preserved as you insist.
They have to if your idiotic time periods explanation makes any sense at all. Fossils in the rocks are supposedly the remains of what actually lived on that spot, -
Or maybe they are not included. You seem to insist the the rock be a snapshot of the actual environment.
-abe: DON'T YOU DARE DENY THIS AFTER SO MANY HAVE SAID SO FOR THREAD AFTER THREAD /abe
I will say as I please. Your notion of 'landscapes' is not what most people think. And the fact is that the Paleozoic formations at the GC had no landscape to preserve. It was a seafloor.
-- so show how they got there from their original habitat, or, how the habitat itself got there.
This question makes no sense. The habitat is whatever the depth of water and source of sediment required.
The same processes must describe the marine layers too of course.
I am discussing the GC formations. There was no 'landscape' to be preserved.
You continue to confuse the issue by going back and forth between marine and terrestrial environments. They are different.
So what? The task I described can still be done with the Triassic period which is one of those amply illustrated at Google image with loads of foliage and Animalia. It is that sort of landscape that has been addressed too, such as by Modulus. Why don't you address it? Describe how the Triassic landscape became the Triassic rocks.
The Triassic terrestrial deposits that you mention are lowland deposits. As Percy has mentioned, higher elevations were more subject to erosion and not well preserved. That is why we see rivers and swamps and in the CP area, along with some great ergs.
Besides, this is NOT the problem since you've done nothing but deny and deny and deny that there is any flatness or tabularity at all. I can't even make a simple obvious point about flatness without being told I'm wrong even about that. This kind of futility nobody should ever have to endure. It's a form of abuse.
This is patently wrong. I mentioned the tabular nature of the Grand Canyon section in the very post you are responding to. I said, "Sure, the layers are tabular." My position has always been that the Colorado Plateau and the Grand Canyon do not represent the whole world.
In terrestrial rocks, Percy's description holds. You can have deposition but it frequently fills in topography and is not laterally extensive. Even the great Jurassic sandstone formations of the Colorado Plateau do not extend far east into Colorado.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 876 by Faith, posted 02-25-2018 10:41 AM Faith has not replied

  
edge
Member (Idle past 1706 days)
Posts: 4696
From: Colorado, USA
Joined: 01-09-2002


(1)
Message 879 of 2887 (828876)
02-25-2018 10:34 PM
Reply to: Message 875 by Faith
02-25-2018 10:21 AM


Re: A Fair Assessment
Hills indeed. The Shinumo was never anything but a layer in the basement rocks beneath the Grand Canyon, from which a piece thrust into the upper strata when the tectonic upheaval that split the continents moved all those rocks horizontally.
There is no evidence for thrusting.
How does a boulder of quartzite with a diameter of fifteen feet get "eroded" from anything anyway?
It's called gravity.
This idea that beaches can become rocks in a stack of rocks, or any other landscape for that matter, is just way too bizarre for me. The efforts to show how it could have happened are imaginative but impossible.
Once again, I thought you had a rudimentary understanding of Walther's Law. What happened?
Great. So I'll stop describing the contact between the Supergroup and the Tapeats as "abraded" and say it's eroded. As long as there is evidence of disturbance at the contact it fits my hypothesis well enough.
Now I'm not sure you understand what erosion is. There is no fault, no thrust and no abrasion. It is an erosional unconformity.
I guesws so. At some point the futility of having my arguments unfairly trashed over and over does get to me and it's just time to stop.
If you can't handle the disagreement, then you are probably frustrated due to your lack of experience and knowledge. That is not the fault of anyone but you.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 875 by Faith, posted 02-25-2018 10:21 AM Faith has not replied

  
edge
Member (Idle past 1706 days)
Posts: 4696
From: Colorado, USA
Joined: 01-09-2002


Message 901 of 2887 (828945)
02-27-2018 5:04 PM
Reply to: Message 894 by Faith
02-27-2018 3:58 AM


Re: A Fair Assessment
The tons of rock did not disappear, it's all there in the Vishnu schist. Yes I've finally become convinced of that after suspecting it for a long time. The material was available and so was the pressure and heat.
So, why were the Supergroup rocks not affected by the 'pressure and heat'?
Edited by edge, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 894 by Faith, posted 02-27-2018 3:58 AM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 902 by Faith, posted 02-27-2018 5:09 PM edge has replied

  
edge
Member (Idle past 1706 days)
Posts: 4696
From: Colorado, USA
Joined: 01-09-2002


(3)
Message 905 of 2887 (828949)
02-27-2018 5:21 PM
Reply to: Message 900 by Faith
02-27-2018 5:04 PM


Re: A Fair Assessment
Sea bottoms are not as flat as the geological column strata.
Where do you think the GC strata were deposited?
We have shown you plenty of cases where strata contacts are not 'straight and flat'.
It's some kind of strange delusion that you'd ever get the stratigraphic column from a sea bottom.
Why is that?
You can get layers of sediments in many ways, but not as flat and straight as the geo column.
I'm sorry, but as the column you have been shown shows, there are plenty of irregular contacts.
And of course the fact that the column is up on the continents is a clue that it wasn't formed on a sea bottom.
Or it could be that there are pelagic sediments and terrigenous sediments. But why couldn't you have seas on the continents?
Here are some definitions from MWonline and Dictionary.com. Please explain why they do not specify 'straight and flat' formations and that they are only found 'on the continents'.
quote:
Strata: a layer or a series of layers of rock in the ground.
Geological Column: 1 : a columnar diagram that shows the rock formations of a locality or region and that is arranged to indicate their relations to the subdivisions of geologic time. 2 : the sequence of rock formations in a geologic column.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 900 by Faith, posted 02-27-2018 5:04 PM Faith has not replied

  
edge
Member (Idle past 1706 days)
Posts: 4696
From: Colorado, USA
Joined: 01-09-2002


(1)
Message 906 of 2887 (828950)
02-27-2018 5:33 PM
Reply to: Message 902 by Faith
02-27-2018 5:09 PM


Re: A Fair Assessment
Well, the upper part of the Supergroup was. The lower part was probably just not subjected to the pressure as the upper part was. The movement stopped short of affecting it. Something like that.
Please present some evidence to that effect. I have never heard of anything like that.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 902 by Faith, posted 02-27-2018 5:09 PM Faith has not replied

  
edge
Member (Idle past 1706 days)
Posts: 4696
From: Colorado, USA
Joined: 01-09-2002


(2)
Message 907 of 2887 (828951)
02-27-2018 5:42 PM
Reply to: Message 894 by Faith
02-27-2018 3:58 AM


Re: A Fair Assessment
The tons of rock did not disappear, it's all there in the Vishnu schist.
Or it could have been eroded away.
That's far less complex than moving parts of the Supergroup downward into the Vishnu and converting it to a metavolcanic rock.
Yes I've finally become convinced of that after suspecting it for a long time. The material was available and so was the pressure and heat.
Well, one of the advantageous of religion over science is that you have certainty.
And I merely failed to mention the quartzite penetrating into the upper strata because I was making a point about the curve and what caused it.
But you always fail to mention how this penetration occurred without any evidence of shearing.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 894 by Faith, posted 02-27-2018 3:58 AM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 909 by Faith, posted 02-27-2018 6:31 PM edge has replied

  
edge
Member (Idle past 1706 days)
Posts: 4696
From: Colorado, USA
Joined: 01-09-2002


(1)
Message 908 of 2887 (828953)
02-27-2018 6:29 PM
Reply to: Message 904 by Taq
02-27-2018 5:12 PM


Re: A Fair Assessment
Yeah, just like there is way more pressure when you are 1 foot under water and way less pressure when you are 5 miles under water. Yeah, that makes sense.
That's one of the funny things about ad hoc explanations.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 904 by Taq, posted 02-27-2018 5:12 PM Taq has not replied

  
edge
Member (Idle past 1706 days)
Posts: 4696
From: Colorado, USA
Joined: 01-09-2002


(2)
Message 910 of 2887 (828955)
02-27-2018 6:56 PM
Reply to: Message 909 by Faith
02-27-2018 6:31 PM


Re: A Fair Assessment
Well it pretty much was eroded away only "away" into the basement area as rubble that became schist. Something like that.
Please show us a picture of how this happened. How do you get SuperGroup rubble from above the SG into the schist below the SG?
And no, your process should not be confused with the erosion of rocks by weathering and breakdown and transport of minerals.
But it's just all that stuff everybody's been complaining I didn't take into account so what's the problem? I'm now taking it into account by hypothesizing that it became the Vishnu schist, rubbed to rubble by the contact with the Tapeats and scattered hither and thither beneath the Tapeats. Lots and lots of rubble. Lots and lots of Vishnu schist that's sort of a hardened rubble. Works for me.
But your explanation does not make sense.
And it is not just under the Tapeats. It is under the supergroup.
And the rock fabric in the Vishnu has no releationship to the Great Unconformity.
And there is no cataclasis of due to faulting along the Great Unconformity.
But then, that would work ... for you.
The only certainty I have is about God, certainly not science. But I did become convinced because it fits so well with the whole scenario.
So, as I said, you have certainty. This is a characteristic of religion.
The quartzite wouldn't have sheared the Tapeats because it went THROUGH it, so maybe it would have dug a trough in it as the Supergroup moved along under it.
That would include shearing.
A trough I figure would have closed up when the movement stopped because it's still all soaking wet.
In that case there should be no primary textural elements in the Tapeats. And yet we see bedding.
Why is that?
You said that the entire section to the Fort Union was deposited prior to deformation. Do you really think that the Tapeats was still waterlogged at that point? Why do we see evidence of brittle deformation in some of the GC rocks?
(After considering various possibilities on the timing I've pretty much decided the whole upheaval starting with the splitting of the continents was the point at which the Flood began receding. Volcanism certainly got started then, and the sea floor must have been affected in some way that made room for the Flood waters.
Well, if you've decided all of this, that settle it for me ...

This message is a reply to:
 Message 909 by Faith, posted 02-27-2018 6:31 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 913 by Faith, posted 02-27-2018 7:16 PM edge has replied

  
edge
Member (Idle past 1706 days)
Posts: 4696
From: Colorado, USA
Joined: 01-09-2002


Message 912 of 2887 (828958)
02-27-2018 7:09 PM
Reply to: Message 911 by Faith
02-27-2018 6:56 PM


Re: A Fair Assessment
The pressure would have come from the weight of the strata above as the Supergroup pushed up into the Tapeats and the heat was caused by that action, so when the movement stopped that also stopped. That's my guess.
Your record at guessing is not very convincing.
Could you tell us why the foliation of the Vishnu schist does not bear any geometric relationship to the Great Unconformity?
If either the weight of rock or movement along a fault were responsible for the pressure and temperature, then there should be some kind of evidence that they are related.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 911 by Faith, posted 02-27-2018 6:56 PM Faith has not replied

  
edge
Member (Idle past 1706 days)
Posts: 4696
From: Colorado, USA
Joined: 01-09-2002


Message 914 of 2887 (828960)
02-27-2018 7:36 PM
Reply to: Message 913 by Faith
02-27-2018 7:16 PM


Re: A Fair Assessment
I'm convinced but that doesn't mean I couldn't become unconvinced if I had really good reason too, and that's not the kind of certainty I have about God.
For some reason I doubt this.
The schist also occurs directly under the Tapeats so it could have been moved horizontally from the Supergroup.
That's what I said.
Depends on where you see the bedding.
Anywhere. Just give us an example.
Wouldn't brittle deformation be a later event?
Okay, describe the later event.
You have never mentioned this before, AFAIK.
And remember, your tectonism that occurred while the whole stack of sediments was water soaked had to be strong enough to show no deformation due to all of the commotion of the Supergroup being forced upward into the Paleozoic section. How doe that work?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 913 by Faith, posted 02-27-2018 7:16 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 915 by Faith, posted 02-27-2018 7:56 PM edge has not replied

  
edge
Member (Idle past 1706 days)
Posts: 4696
From: Colorado, USA
Joined: 01-09-2002


Message 918 of 2887 (828969)
02-27-2018 10:06 PM
Reply to: Message 917 by Percy
02-27-2018 9:16 PM


Re: A Fair Assessment
Question for Edge: How did it happen that layers on opposite sides of the Hurricane Fault are tilted in opposite directions?
Not quite what one would expect, yes?
Well, I'm not sure, but here is an idea.
The upthrust side, which should have drag faulting downward to the west is actually opposite because of some original tilt in the strata. In other words, they are tilted to the east because of an earlier uplift event and then faulting has chopped them off. Possibly the drag faulted part has eroded away where exposed. I do not think it wouldn't be a very thick zone.
On the other hand (the downfaulted hand), the drag folds are preserved because they do not erode away so rapidly.
This kind of fits what we know about rifting. Usually, uplift occurs before a rift valley forms. In this case the uplfted area would be somewhere to the west of the Hurricane Fault. A modern example would be the East African Rift zone, which, interestingly enough, brings us back to human evolution. I believe there may be a connection...
That's about the only thing I can think of. Possibly it has something to do with isostatic rebound as material is eroded away. But I haven't made up a story about that yet.
Edited by edge, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 917 by Percy, posted 02-27-2018 9:16 PM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 938 by Percy, posted 02-28-2018 2:36 PM edge has replied

  
edge
Member (Idle past 1706 days)
Posts: 4696
From: Colorado, USA
Joined: 01-09-2002


(2)
Message 920 of 2887 (828971)
02-27-2018 10:36 PM


Here is a better copy of the geo column that Faith was referring to.
http://www.kgs.ku.edu/...eldtrips/guidebooks/NEKS/NEKS2.html
The point here is the number of channels cut into the different parts of the formation. These are clearly terrestrial deposits in the late Paleozoic in Kansas.

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024