Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 95 (8886 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 01-22-2019 6:44 PM
255 online now:
AZPaul3, Diomedes, DrJones*, Meddle, ooh-child, WookieeB (6 members, 249 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: WookieeB
Post Volume:
Total: 846,180 Year: 1,217/19,786 Month: 1,217/1,731 Week: 197/377 Day: 68/70 Hour: 1/3

Announcements: Switching Over to Cloud Server


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
RewPrev1
...
1314
15
1617
...
59NextFF
Author Topic:   Motley Flood Thread (formerly Historical Science Mystification of Public)
Faith
Member
Posts: 30497
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 211 of 877 (834196)
06-01-2018 1:24 AM
Reply to: Message 178 by edge
05-31-2018 12:11 AM


Re: EDGE'S OBJECTIONS

What boulders are you talking about?

The ones that occur in the Colorado River beds downstream from the GC.

Why would you assume the chunks of strata I attribute to the first statges of the receding Flood woulb be those bouldersz?

I have no idea what form the broken up chunks of strata ended up in after being washed through the canyon

I'm sure you don't.

The point is the sediments were probably too soft to form boulders at that stage.

-- but most of that would have gone over the sides lower in the canyon, not down the river from the upper part of the canyon. Why do you assume boulders?

But all of those rocks were deposited by the flood, not? Why are they so much harder than the rocks of the Grand Canyon such that they survived hundreds of miles of river transport?

I do't know where you are getting this? The earliest broken up strata were probably just loose sediments. You probably wouldn't get boulders for a few years.

But further, if the rocks of the GC were relatively soft compared to now, how did they get to be so hard just being exposed at the surface for the last 4 thousand years?

As I understand it compaction alone can make a very hard rock, but I slso think chemical lithification doesn't take anywhere near as long as is usually supposed.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 178 by edge, posted 05-31-2018 12:11 AM edge has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 266 by Percy, posted 06-02-2018 9:34 AM Faith has not yet responded

    
Faith
Member
Posts: 30497
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 212 of 877 (834197)
06-01-2018 1:33 AM
Reply to: Message 175 by edge
05-30-2018 11:20 PM


forming the meander
Why "massive?"

OKay, fine. Moving a two-mile deep body of water off the continent isn't massive. Fine with me.

But I thought we're talking about how the meander formed, and that would have happened long after the two miles of strata 9not just water) above that level had drained away, leaving the stream that became the meander.

At some point the water got down to the volume where streams running across the plateau could form a meander.

That's the point. It's not about the volume of water. It's about gradient and time to create meanders.

What point are you making here? I'm just trying to show how the recedeing Flood could have reached a level where it could have formed the meander that actually exists. I've pictured the water reduced to that level already.

We're talking about a great volume of water gradually decreasing. It's silly to think it couldn't have decreased to the point of forming a meander, given a huge flat area which is where meanders commonly form.

That isn't what we see in the real world.

Well you might have seen it if you'd been around at the time of the Flood. Sheesh.

And remember, you still don't have evidence of such a sheet flow in the first place.

I don't have to have a sheet flow, but what is this supposed evidence I'm supposedly lacking?

It figures it would decrease to a sheet before becoming separated streams, that's the only reason for including a sheet, it's the natural transitional form from a larger volume of water to the right amount and shape to make meanders.

Except that we don't have sheet flow.

And again, how do you know that?

Seems like you're arguing with a perfectly natural sequence for no good reason I can see except to find something to object to in anything I say.

Actually, it seems that I'm getting bored with your whimsical notions.

Whatever.

ABE: Overall I have the question why you keep saying my scenario lacks this or that evidence, the gravel, the turbulence, the back flooding and so on and so forth. You are imaginging the Flood being appreciably different from whatever you think formed the meander and I have no idea why. Seems to me whatever you see now could just as well be explained by the scenario of water left running across a plateau after the Flood as by water from any other source. Sheet flow isn't necessary so I can drop that but I still wonder what evidence you think would be there if it had occurred. /ABE

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 175 by edge, posted 05-30-2018 11:20 PM edge has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 268 by Percy, posted 06-02-2018 10:46 AM Faith has not yet responded

    
Minnemooseus
Member
Posts: 3689
From: Duluth, Minnesota, U.S. (West end of Lake Superior)
Joined: 11-11-2001
Member Rating: 2.7


Message 213 of 877 (834200)
06-01-2018 3:53 AM
Reply to: Message 210 by Faith
06-01-2018 1:17 AM


Lithostratigraphy and chronostratigraphy
But the fact remains that you've got a huge flat slab of rock covering a huge area where you thnk there used to be an ancient landscape with ancient forms of living things, and that is impossible.

Your "huge flat slab of rock covering a huge area" was deposited as sediments (or perhaps volcanics). At time of deposition it was the top of the then stratigaphy ("geologic column") at its various locations. Be it on dry land or underwater, its top surface was the "landscape" of the time. There may or may not have been things living at that surface in the various locations.

edge writes:

This is why we recognize both lithostratigraphy and chronostratigraphy in geology.

Remember out favorite "Walther's Law" diagram:

The bottom left of this diagram illustrates the difference between lithostratigraphy and chronostratigraphy. As you go right to left, the lithostratigraphy (say, the sand unit) becomes progressively younger.

And the top surface of the various sediments are the "landscape" of the time.

Moose

Edited by Minnemooseus, : Change subtitle.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 210 by Faith, posted 06-01-2018 1:17 AM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 217 by Faith, posted 06-01-2018 9:13 AM Minnemooseus has not yet responded
 Message 269 by Percy, posted 06-02-2018 11:22 AM Minnemooseus has responded

    
RAZD
Member
Posts: 19727
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 4.3


Message 214 of 877 (834202)
06-01-2018 6:02 AM
Reply to: Message 200 by Percy
05-31-2018 5:10 PM


Re: Video on the formation of the Grand Canyon
Dickinson's paper was published in 2013: Rejection of the lake spillover model for initial incision of the Grand Canyon, and discussion of alternatives. The reasons it cites for rejecting the idea were that the lake never achieved appreciable depth, the elevation isn't compatible with lake spillover, multiple river canyons are present, the timing of drainage reversal wasn't right, and a couple others.

Well, I also have trouble with the dates for that lake spill over model being ~5million years ago, as the speleothems (Age of Grand Canyon and Cave Speleothems ) show older dates for the formation at 17 million years ago, at the western end and that the upper end dates to about 800,000 years ago.

Enjoy


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAmerican☆Zen☯Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 200 by Percy, posted 05-31-2018 5:10 PM Percy has acknowledged this reply

Replies to this message:
 Message 226 by Faith, posted 06-01-2018 2:38 PM RAZD has responded

  
Faith
Member
Posts: 30497
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 215 of 877 (834205)
06-01-2018 8:34 AM
Reply to: Message 200 by Percy
05-31-2018 5:10 PM


Re: Video on the formation of the Grand Canyon
Interesting article about the Hopi Lake theory. I was particularly interested in this point Dickinson makes:

article about Dickinson research writes:

Plus, there's the problem of the Kaibab uplift, a pinch in the Colorado Plateau where the rocks swell up due to underground folding. Sitting near the head of the Grand Canyon, the Kaibab uplift is a 650-foot (250-meter) barrier that any prehistoric lake or river must have carved through before dropping down into the future gorge. The preserved lake beds show water levels were never high enough to cross the uplift, Dickinson said.

I keep trying to locate exactly where the Kaibab Uplift is because it is a big part of my own scenario. Perhaps it is the Kaibab Plateau but I haven't been able to pin it down.

Anyway as I picture it the uplift occurs at the end of the Flood when there are two miles worth of sedimentary layers on top of the Kaibab Plateau and the whole canyon area. The uplift creates strain on the upper strata as they are pushed upward, causing cracks that eventually form the canyon. The upper strata break up and wash away, some of it into the cracks which scour out the canyon area.

This scenario solves the problem of the barrier that exists today since it wouldn't have existed then. By the tine the Flood has receded the canyon is pretty well formed and deeper than the surrounding area so that water channeling through it continues to cut and scour.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 200 by Percy, posted 05-31-2018 5:10 PM Percy has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 270 by Percy, posted 06-02-2018 11:38 AM Faith has not yet responded

    
Faith
Member
Posts: 30497
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 216 of 877 (834206)
06-01-2018 8:52 AM
Reply to: Message 203 by Percy
05-31-2018 8:24 PM


Re: Faith's sheet flow to stream flow still epic fail
And yet that's exactly what the video shows, a thin sheet of water running across a flat plain.

It shows a five=foot wall of water destroying everything in its path. What planet do you live on?

Here's what I'm picturing again: By the time the water is at that stage in my scenario, which I thought I described pretty clearly so that any nonsense about a tsunami would be clearly inapplicable, the Flood is almost completely drained away. Anything like tsunami stage is long since past. I'm simply trying to picture the stages it would have gone through to supply just the right amount of water for it to meander as streams do across flat plains. I don't even care if it ever becomes a sheet, I'm just trying to picture the likely stages to get it to the meander stage and a thin sheet seemed like a likely stage, but it doesn't matter.

So in other words, you're changing your story again. Maybe there was a thin sheet of water (and who knows how thick "thin" is), maybe there wasn't, it doesn't matter.

What you need is for the flood waters to recede and become a slow flowing low energy stream capable of meanders that can still somehow erode a canyon a mile deep and 18 miles wide in only a few months, even though the water is far too low in energy to do any meaningful erosion or to carry away that huge volume of sediment. Good luck with that. You don't need science, you need magic.

Only on your weird planet. The canyon is already mostly cut by this time. If you'd followed my scenario described so many times you'd know that. Strata about two miles deep above this area have been breaking up and washing away with the receding Flood water. By the time we're down to the level of the Kaibab Plateau tons of strata have been washed away both around the canyon area and through it. What is now happening is farther east on a flat plateau after all that has happened. There is still water draining but much much less. One stream running across a plateau starts forming the meander which eventually connects with the water running through the canyon.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 203 by Percy, posted 05-31-2018 8:24 PM Percy has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 271 by Percy, posted 06-02-2018 11:48 AM Faith has not yet responded

    
Faith
Member
Posts: 30497
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 217 of 877 (834208)
06-01-2018 9:13 AM
Reply to: Message 213 by Minnemooseus
06-01-2018 3:53 AM


Re: Lithostratigraphy and chronostratigraphy
And the top surface of the various sediments are the "landscape" of the time.

Makes zero sense to me, moose, why any landscape, meaning any current surface of the world would be sitting on a unique flat sedimentary deposit. Such as this Permian landscape:

Then there is the problem of how the landscape went away and left the slab of rock that is found in a stack of other slabs of rock all supposedly representing their own specific landscapes and time period. And as I usually also point out, nothing could have survived such a transformation if it happened so there wouldn't have been anything living to pass on its genes so evolution would come to a halt at that point anyway. No, they didn't all up and move to some other location.l This is where they're all buried. No matter how I look at it the whole thing is just absurd. It didn't haopen.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 213 by Minnemooseus, posted 06-01-2018 3:53 AM Minnemooseus has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 218 by Tangle, posted 06-01-2018 12:00 PM Faith has not yet responded
 Message 219 by dwise1, posted 06-01-2018 1:27 PM Faith has responded
 Message 273 by Percy, posted 06-02-2018 2:09 PM Faith has not yet responded

    
Tangle
Member
Posts: 6519
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 3.5


(2)
Message 218 of 877 (834217)
06-01-2018 12:00 PM
Reply to: Message 217 by Faith
06-01-2018 9:13 AM


Re: Lithostratigraphy and chronostratigraphy
^^^ Jesus H Christ, all hope is lost.

Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien. I am Mancunian. I am Brum. I am London.I am Finland. Soy Barcelona

"Life, don't talk to me about life" - Marvin the Paranoid Android

"Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."
- Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 217 by Faith, posted 06-01-2018 9:13 AM Faith has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 220 by dwise1, posted 06-01-2018 1:29 PM Tangle has not yet responded

  
dwise1
Member
Posts: 3239
Joined: 05-02-2006
Member Rating: 6.1


(2)
Message 219 of 877 (834222)
06-01-2018 1:27 PM
Reply to: Message 217 by Faith
06-01-2018 9:13 AM


Re: Lithostratigraphy and chronostratigraphy
Really? Really? After nearly two decades of so many people trying to explain the blazingly obvious facts to you, you still have absolutely no fucking clue?

Really?

Then there is the problem of how the landscape went away ...

Just what the fuck is your problem? Dead plants decay. So do dead animals. Are you really so abysmally stupid that you cannot know that? Just what the fuck is your problem?

As long as you insist on acting so abysmally stupid, you will have people lining up to tell you how abysmally stupid you are being.

If you do not want people to continually point out how abysmally stupid you are, then please stop acting so abysmally stupid.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 217 by Faith, posted 06-01-2018 9:13 AM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 222 by JonF, posted 06-01-2018 1:43 PM dwise1 has not yet responded
 Message 223 by Faith, posted 06-01-2018 2:12 PM dwise1 has not yet responded

    
dwise1
Member
Posts: 3239
Joined: 05-02-2006
Member Rating: 6.1


Message 220 of 877 (834223)
06-01-2018 1:29 PM
Reply to: Message 218 by Tangle
06-01-2018 12:00 PM


Re: Lithostratigraphy and chronostratigraphy
^^^ Jesus H Christ, all hope is lost.

BTW, I know where that "H" comes from: my page, "Jesus H. Christ": Why "H"?.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 218 by Tangle, posted 06-01-2018 12:00 PM Tangle has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 221 by jar, posted 06-01-2018 1:41 PM dwise1 has not yet responded

    
jar
Member
Posts: 30934
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 221 of 877 (834224)
06-01-2018 1:41 PM
Reply to: Message 220 by dwise1
06-01-2018 1:29 PM


Re: Lithostratigraphy and chronostratigraphy
The Haploid "H" would at least explain and clarify why A dame and Eve were hanging out together.

My Sister's Website: Rose Hill Studios My Website: My Website

This message is a reply to:
 Message 220 by dwise1, posted 06-01-2018 1:29 PM dwise1 has not yet responded

  
JonF
Member
Posts: 4363
Joined: 06-23-2003
Member Rating: 2.5


Message 222 of 877 (834225)
06-01-2018 1:43 PM
Reply to: Message 219 by dwise1
06-01-2018 1:27 PM


Re: Lithostratigraphy and chronostratigraphy
Everyone has difficulty grokking huge or tiny numbers. Faith has a triple dose of that difficulty.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 219 by dwise1, posted 06-01-2018 1:27 PM dwise1 has not yet responded

  
Faith
Member
Posts: 30497
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 223 of 877 (834226)
06-01-2018 2:12 PM
Reply to: Message 219 by dwise1
06-01-2018 1:27 PM


Re: Lithostratigraphy and chronostratigraphy
Then there is the problem of how the landscape went away ...

Just what the fuck is your problem? Dead plants decay. So do dead animals. Are you really so abysmally stupid that you cannot know that? Just what the fuck is your problem?

If a whole time period dies out, plants decay and the whole thing goes away so that there is nothing but a bare rock with dead things in it, that's the same as everything on Earth dying. I understand this is a difficult scenario to sort out but your abusive language is out of line, especially since I'm right and you're wrong about this.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 219 by dwise1, posted 06-01-2018 1:27 PM dwise1 has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 224 by Tangle, posted 06-01-2018 2:26 PM Faith has responded

    
Tangle
Member
Posts: 6519
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 3.5


(1)
Message 224 of 877 (834227)
06-01-2018 2:26 PM
Reply to: Message 223 by Faith
06-01-2018 2:12 PM


Re: Lithostratigraphy and chronostratigraphy
Faith writes:

especially since I'm right and you're wrong about this.

This is as wrong as you've ever been. This is so wrong it leaves normals speechless. As wrong as an enormous wrong thing. A stupendously lack of incomprehension of even the very basics.


Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien. I am Mancunian. I am Brum. I am London.I am Finland. Soy Barcelona

"Life, don't talk to me about life" - Marvin the Paranoid Android

"Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."
- Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 223 by Faith, posted 06-01-2018 2:12 PM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 227 by Faith, posted 06-01-2018 2:42 PM Tangle has not yet responded

  
Modulous
Member (Idle past 122 days)
Posts: 7789
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005


Message 225 of 877 (834228)
06-01-2018 2:37 PM
Reply to: Message 200 by Percy
05-31-2018 5:10 PM


Re: Video on the formation of the Grand Canyon
Thanks Percy. I don't have any opinion on the particulars, but I was hoping Faith would explain, in a way that she thinks these things should be explained, what problems there were with a long term river cut with the gigantic amount of water moving at a significant rate. Unfortunately it appears she suffers from the same problem of 'pontification' as the articles she wanted to critique. It appears it isn't so easy.

Dickinson's paper was published in 2013: Rejection of the lake spillover model for initial incision of the Grand Canyon, and discussion of alternatives. The reasons it cites for rejecting the idea were that the lake never achieved appreciable depth, the elevation isn't compatible with lake spillover, multiple river canyons are present, the timing of drainage reversal wasn't right, and a couple others.

But hey - it might not be easy to explain what problems there might be, you certainly found a way to approach it! I know basically nothing about geology so I thought I might be a good test audience for things and I think you did a reasonable job where Faith failed in explaining how the spillover idea has weaknesses and what you are basing those weaknesses on.

Also, the Grand Canyon is 18 miles wide at its widest point. This could only be due to a braided river spread across a plain that downcut into the plateau in at least two places and probably more, as is evident from the multiple plateaus situated in mid-canyon. Simultaneous incision by rapid flow in multiple braids seems most unlikely. I think the Dickinson paper is alluding to this issue when it mentions multiple river canyons.

Although if I'm being honest - this conclusionary paragraph seems pontifical as Faith describes it. At the very least I find myself little the wiser having read this. I could certainly run off and research it further, if I was particularly interested - but I find I can't get the motivation up to do so. Again, I think this makes me a good test subject in this thread. I'm basically 'Joe Public' when it comes to this topic.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 200 by Percy, posted 05-31-2018 5:10 PM Percy has acknowledged this reply

Replies to this message:
 Message 228 by Faith, posted 06-01-2018 2:47 PM Modulous has responded

  
RewPrev1
...
1314
15
1617
...
59NextFF
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019