Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
7 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 13/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Fossils, strata and the flood
edge
Member (Idle past 1706 days)
Posts: 4696
From: Colorado, USA
Joined: 01-09-2002


Message 136 of 163 (563113)
06-03-2010 10:49 AM
Reply to: Message 132 by roxrkool
06-02-2010 11:29 AM


Re:
Hey, Rox, how things going?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 132 by roxrkool, posted 06-02-2010 11:29 AM roxrkool has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 137 by roxrkool, posted 06-03-2010 2:41 PM edge has not replied

  
roxrkool
Member (Idle past 989 days)
Posts: 1497
From: Nevada
Joined: 03-23-2003


Message 137 of 163 (563145)
06-03-2010 2:41 PM
Reply to: Message 136 by edge
06-03-2010 10:49 AM


Re:
Good! Though I had to leave CO again. Gotta go where the work is -- Nevada. I'm doing porph Cu again and really enjoying it.
You?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 136 by edge, posted 06-03-2010 10:49 AM edge has not replied

  
Adminnemooseus
Administrator
Posts: 3974
Joined: 09-26-2002


Message 138 of 163 (563201)
06-03-2010 8:09 PM


Personal messages should use the personal messaging system
As much as I'd like to hear "life in the geology real world" stories, they are badly off-topic (unless you wish to start a "Coffee House" topic for such).
Adminnemooseus

  
Architect-426
Member (Idle past 4623 days)
Posts: 76
From: NC, USA
Joined: 07-16-2008


Message 139 of 163 (564061)
06-08-2010 12:44 AM
Reply to: Message 124 by roxrkool
05-31-2010 9:23 PM


Re: Oh Lord...I need forgiveness...
Hi Rox,
Glad you and Faith are working things out. My sincere apologies to you as well for my rant. By the way, from my reading of her posts, I don’t understand why she has been suspended.
It looks like everyone has veered off track a bit onto architecture perhaps we should stick to "earth" architecture and stratification during the Flood.
Just to clarify, my beef (not with geologists per se) is with the PT theory as whole in regards to continental drift (i.e. the alleged breakup of Pangea), sea floor spreading and subducting. As I mentioned before I believe that Vertical Tectonics is much more plausible (and Biblical) vs. plate tectonics.
I also believe the Great Flood was a massive volcanic event in which the scale was unprecedented. This coupled with aquatic debris flow I believe created the strata we see today.
To elaborate a bit on the British Isles; Scotland is entirely of volcanic origin no doubt with the presence of basalt, magmatic dikes, sills etc. The debate is not IF is it volcanic in origin, but when did all of this intense volcanism take place. Perhaps the culprit of this intense volcanism in Scotland can be pinpointed to a massive crater that is partially buried in the sound between the mainland and the Outer Hebrides. These islands are perhaps the remaining rim of the massive crater while land to the west experience massive liquefaction due to blast concussions and is now dissolved, while land to the east and SE was blanketed with a heavy dose of magmatic material being thrust from the crater along with rising magma in the form of dikes and sills due to the cracking of the strata during the eruption process. The dessication of this material can clearly be read in the topography of the Highlands as these mountains were formed by intense volcanism; ballistic and intrusive and are NOT a plate tectonic crumple zone. The fact that there is very little topsoil on these monoliths is evidence of a recent event.
Therefore we can conclude that volcanism on a massive scale was the culprit in the formation of these Isles (a plate tectonic plate crash had nothing to do with it). Moreover, the presence of dense, highly crystalline granites can also be evidence of a very powerful eruption process.
I believe this process took place during the Great Flood, as well as many other eruptive processes similar to this all over the globe.
Thanks

This message is a reply to:
 Message 124 by roxrkool, posted 05-31-2010 9:23 PM roxrkool has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 140 by roxrkool, posted 06-08-2010 2:24 AM Architect-426 has replied
 Message 142 by Percy, posted 06-08-2010 9:39 AM Architect-426 has not replied
 Message 143 by Coyote, posted 06-08-2010 12:07 PM Architect-426 has not replied
 Message 144 by misha, posted 06-08-2010 1:06 PM Architect-426 has not replied
 Message 148 by Kitsune, posted 06-09-2010 6:02 AM Architect-426 has replied

  
roxrkool
Member (Idle past 989 days)
Posts: 1497
From: Nevada
Joined: 03-23-2003


Message 140 of 163 (564065)
06-08-2010 2:24 AM
Reply to: Message 139 by Architect-426
06-08-2010 12:44 AM


Re: Oh Lord...I need forgiveness...
I also believe the Great Flood was a massive volcanic event in which the scale was unprecedented. This coupled with aquatic debris flow I believe created the strata we see today.
How does volcanism and a debris flow deposit limestone, coal, red sandstone, white sandstone, shale, etc.?
Scotland is entirely of volcanic origin no doubt with the presence of basalt, magmatic dikes, sills etc.
Have you ever even looked at a geologic map of Scotland? Unless you can show us how volcanism can deposit clastic and marine sedimentary rocks, you need to retract this statement.
Edited by roxrkool, : Clarification

This message is a reply to:
 Message 139 by Architect-426, posted 06-08-2010 12:44 AM Architect-426 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 141 by anglagard, posted 06-08-2010 2:58 AM roxrkool has not replied
 Message 149 by Architect-426, posted 06-10-2010 12:14 PM roxrkool has replied

  
anglagard
Member (Idle past 836 days)
Posts: 2339
From: Socorro, New Mexico USA
Joined: 03-18-2006


Message 141 of 163 (564067)
06-08-2010 2:58 AM
Reply to: Message 140 by roxrkool
06-08-2010 2:24 AM


Re: Oh Lord...I need forgiveness...
roxrkool writes:
How does volcanism and a debris flow deposit limestone, coal, red sandstone, white sandstone, shale, etc.?
How does a person totally without any conception of the mechanics of any material become a supposed architect?
I suppose the answer will be limestone volcanoes, fossil volcanoes, granite volcanoes, even guano volcanoes (the last appearing most appropriate).
Somehow, I think someone is misrepresenting their credentials.
Probably because I have seen so many examples of evangelicals bearing false witness.

The idea of the sacred is quite simply one of the most conservative notions in any culture, because it seeks to turn other ideas - uncertainty, progress, change - into crimes.
Salman Rushdie
This rudderless world is not shaped by vague metaphysical forces. It is not God who kills the children. Not fate that butchers them or destiny that feeds them to the dogs. It’s us. Only us. - the character Rorschach in Watchmen

This message is a reply to:
 Message 140 by roxrkool, posted 06-08-2010 2:24 AM roxrkool has not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22392
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.3


Message 142 of 163 (564111)
06-08-2010 9:39 AM
Reply to: Message 139 by Architect-426
06-08-2010 12:44 AM


Re: Oh Lord...I need forgiveness...
Architect-426 writes:
The dessication of this material can clearly be read in the topography of the Highlands as these mountains were formed by intense volcanism; ballistic and intrusive and are NOT a plate tectonic crumple zone. The fact that there is very little topsoil on these monoliths is evidence of a recent event.
Your use of the term "monolith" makes me uncertain what you're referring to, but if you mean mountains then you do realize, I hope, that mountains are areas of net erosion, not deposition? That in general the higher you go on a mountain the less topsoil you'll find? And that the topsoil on the sides of a mountain is in the midst of a slow journey to the valley below? And that the rivers flowing through upland valleys are carrying the topsoil further downstream and eventually to the sea?
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 139 by Architect-426, posted 06-08-2010 12:44 AM Architect-426 has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 146 by ICANT, posted 06-09-2010 1:40 AM Percy has seen this message but not replied

  
Coyote
Member (Idle past 2106 days)
Posts: 6117
Joined: 01-12-2008


Message 143 of 163 (564127)
06-08-2010 12:07 PM
Reply to: Message 139 by Architect-426
06-08-2010 12:44 AM


Re: Oh Lord...I need forgiveness...
I also believe the Great Flood was a massive volcanic event in which the scale was unprecedented. This coupled with aquatic debris flow I believe created the strata we see today.
The flood supposedly took place about 4,350 years ago.
Who do we not see evidence of massive vulcanism at that time period?
Edited by Coyote, : Speeling

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 139 by Architect-426, posted 06-08-2010 12:44 AM Architect-426 has not replied

  
misha
Member (Idle past 4628 days)
Posts: 69
From: Atlanta
Joined: 02-04-2010


(1)
Message 144 of 163 (564134)
06-08-2010 1:06 PM
Reply to: Message 139 by Architect-426
06-08-2010 12:44 AM


Re: Oh Lord...I need forgiveness...
Architect-426 writes:
The fact that there is very little topsoil on these monoliths is evidence of a recent event.
I believe you are a bit ignorant of how topsoil is formed.
Top soil is typically only 2 to 8 inches. It is formed by the mixture of biodegrading organic matter with mineral sediments. The reason why topsoil layers are thin and relegated to the "top" is because that is where the majority of organisms die supplying organic matter. Also, the decay of these organisms requires consistent air supply as well as organisms to facilitate the decomposition (bacteria and fungus).
Also, topsoil layers are in constant flux due to erosion. Every time it rains in Scotland, which is about 180 inches per year in the western highlands, some of the topsoil is carried down from the mountains by gravity into the vallies. This flux keeps the topsoil layer in the highlands thin.
So, the "thinness" of the topsoil layer in Scotland is not due to recent volcanic activity but rather erosion.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 139 by Architect-426, posted 06-08-2010 12:44 AM Architect-426 has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 145 by greentwiga, posted 06-09-2010 1:03 AM misha has not replied

  
greentwiga
Member (Idle past 3427 days)
Posts: 213
From: Santa
Joined: 06-05-2009


Message 145 of 163 (564211)
06-09-2010 1:03 AM
Reply to: Message 144 by misha
06-08-2010 1:06 PM


Re: Oh Lord...I need forgiveness...
I think he must have been thinking of the Siberian traps, or possibly the Deccan traps, the two largest known volcanic events. They were close in time to the flood, +/- a few 100 million years. Of course there is the seafloor spreading volcanism, but that would necessitate belief in plate tectonics. I am always amazed that many Christians will believe in wild theories that deny science, rather than question their interpretations.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 144 by misha, posted 06-08-2010 1:06 PM misha has not replied

  
ICANT
Member
Posts: 6769
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007
Member Rating: 1.5


Message 146 of 163 (564214)
06-09-2010 1:40 AM
Reply to: Message 142 by Percy
06-08-2010 9:39 AM


Re: Oh Lord...I need forgiveness...
Hi Percy,
Percy writes:
Your use of the term "monolith" makes me uncertain what you're referring to, but if you mean mountains then you do realize, I hope, that mountains are areas of net erosion, not deposition? That in general the higher you go on a mountain the less topsoil you'll find? And that the topsoil on the sides of a mountain is in the midst of a slow journey to the valley below? And that the rivers flowing through upland valleys are carrying the topsoil further downstream and eventually to the sea?
Percy would the lack of topsoil the higher you go up the mountain be caused by the mountain being pushed up out of the earth by the plates of the earth diving under other plates causing the mountain to be created. As well as erosion.
Just one of my dumb questions.
God Bless,

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 142 by Percy, posted 06-08-2010 9:39 AM Percy has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 147 by Huntard, posted 06-09-2010 3:11 AM ICANT has not replied

  
Huntard
Member (Idle past 2295 days)
Posts: 2870
From: Limburg, The Netherlands
Joined: 09-02-2008


Message 147 of 163 (564220)
06-09-2010 3:11 AM
Reply to: Message 146 by ICANT
06-09-2010 1:40 AM


Re: Oh Lord...I need forgiveness...
ICANT writes:
Percy would the lack of topsoil the higher you go up the mountain be caused by the mountain being pushed up out of the earth by the plates of the earth diving under other plates causing the mountain to be created. As well as erosion.
As fare as I know, it's caused just by erosion, not by uplift. I could be wrong though.
Just one of my dumb questions.
No question is dumb.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 146 by ICANT, posted 06-09-2010 1:40 AM ICANT has not replied

  
Kitsune
Member (Idle past 4300 days)
Posts: 788
From: Leicester, UK
Joined: 09-16-2007


Message 148 of 163 (564232)
06-09-2010 6:02 AM
Reply to: Message 139 by Architect-426
06-08-2010 12:44 AM


Geology of the real world
Hi Architect,
I've taken a bit of an interest in the geology of the Scottish Highlands. Unfortunately it's clear that you haven't, and that you are making rather absurd guesses that even a quick look at Wikipedia would correct.
Perhaps the culprit of this intense volcanism in Scotland can be pinpointed to a massive crater that is partially buried in the sound between the mainland and the Outer Hebrides.
No, the Highlands were formed in the Caledonian Orogeny, which occurred 490-390 million years ago. While different areas of the Highlands have their own unique geology, I can tell you a bit about the Cairngorms specifically. During the orogeny, a large granite pluton was formed in this area, and slowly cooled underground. Uplift and erosion (most notably by glaciation) exposed the granite and created the landscape we see today. Here is a good article about this: The Cairngorm landscape that really is older than the hills.
So no "intense vulcanism," and no crater.
These islands are perhaps the remaining rim of the massive crater while land to the west experience massive liquefaction due to blast concussions and is now dissolved,
The Outer Hebrides are the eroded remains of an ancient mountain chain. Lewisian gneiss is some of the oldest rock in the world, dating to 3 billion years ago. I don't know what you're trying to make up in the quote above, you've lost me there.
ballistic and intrusive and are NOT a plate tectonic crumple zone.
The granite pluton that became the Cairngorms was indeed formed as part of a "crumple zone." The Caledonian Orogeny, as the above link explains, was a collision of tectonic plates.
The fact that there is very little topsoil on these monoliths is evidence of a recent event.
Well, Percy and others here have explained this. I would also add that glaciers tend to do a pretty good job of scouring topsoil from elevated areas.
You're welcome to try again of course, but might I suggest you find out what geologists actually know about an area first. My sister-in-law is a glaciologist who regularly does field work in Scotland and she'd be laughing her ass off at this, if she could be bothered to spend time reading it.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 139 by Architect-426, posted 06-08-2010 12:44 AM Architect-426 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 151 by Architect-426, posted 06-10-2010 12:30 PM Kitsune has replied

  
Architect-426
Member (Idle past 4623 days)
Posts: 76
From: NC, USA
Joined: 07-16-2008


Message 149 of 163 (564424)
06-10-2010 12:14 PM
Reply to: Message 140 by roxrkool
06-08-2010 2:24 AM


Re: Strata & Volcanoes
Hi Rox,
+++How does volcanism and a debris flow deposit limestone, coal, red sandstone, white sandstone, shale, etc.?+++
Deposition of any material needs an ‘engine’ to do so right? That engine has to be intense heat causing massive circulation of debris saturated water. If there is an opening of a massive cauldron in any given region, then you certainly have the needed heat and circulation for the transport and deposition of the material. In my readings through modern geological publications, no one has given any plausible answers to the production or formation of sedimentary stones, so I suppose the ‘ol Arch here has to offer one
Fact: Magma often explodes into fine sand particles when it comes into contact with water. So if you have a very large eruptive process taking place under water, then you have the ingredients and dynamics needed for transport and solidification. This process could have been taking place underwater with rising magma issuing through many fissures, exploding within the water (or ballistically ejected), and then being moved and deposited by the waters. After this mechanical process takes place breaking down the magma into sand particles, then ‘curing’ mechanisms take over with massive contraction and even sorting of material into layers. Of course the scale of this process had to be enormous in any given region. The fallacy of orthodox geology is the reading of the strata as long periods of epochs when in the stratification is most likely due to thermal dynamics on a massive scale.
Santorini is of course volcanic and is as stripped as a zebra. Also the Waimea Canyon on Kauai is stratified, thus the conclusion of the stratification phenomenon lies in massive volcanic processes taking place during a giant flood.
Regardless of the type of sediments (minus alluvial deposits), I don’t see why volcanic action cannot be a direct or indirect method of deposition of material. In fact, is has to be the only natural process as plate tectonic movement of pathetic 2.5 cm/yr does not have any dynamical capabilities whatsoever. I’m always amazed (and entertained) by this comical theory being the default explanation to every geological phenomenon. Evidently, it’s plate tectonic ‘Tinker Bell’ magic that stacked and solidified those rocks
+++Have you ever even looked at a geologic map of Scotland? Unless you can show us how volcanism can deposit clastic and marine sedimentary rocks, you need to retract this statement.+++
Si. I’ve looked any many geological maps. The fallacy is they are typically 2-D and thus will not give a complete nor true picture of the composition of any given region beyond a very general rendition. It is no different than me issuing a contractor a set of plans only of a building and tell him to go build it without any vertical information or details. I also find it fascinating that in these geology maps (which are colored by numbers), you inevitably have billion year old rocks parked right beside million year old rocks but ZERO explanation of the deposition process. I suppose no one wants to be hanging around when rocks are being deposited in massive layers anyway, thus science has to dance around the true processes big-time.
Also, please see my reply below regarding volcanism in Scotland.
Thanks

This message is a reply to:
 Message 140 by roxrkool, posted 06-08-2010 2:24 AM roxrkool has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 150 by Coyote, posted 06-10-2010 12:24 PM Architect-426 has not replied
 Message 161 by roxrkool, posted 06-14-2010 11:45 AM Architect-426 has not replied

  
Coyote
Member (Idle past 2106 days)
Posts: 6117
Joined: 01-12-2008


Message 150 of 163 (564425)
06-10-2010 12:24 PM
Reply to: Message 149 by Architect-426
06-10-2010 12:14 PM


Re: Strata & Volcanoes
Also the Waimea Canyon on Kauai is stratified, thus the conclusion of the stratification phenomenon lies in massive volcanic processes taking place during a giant flood.
Sorry, that conclusion does not follow from the data.
If fact, that conclusion is contradicted by the data for any number of reasons.
Those various strata can be dated. They do not fall within a one year period, nor to they cluster around 4,350 years ago.
Epic fail!

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 149 by Architect-426, posted 06-10-2010 12:14 PM Architect-426 has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024