I don't recognize most of what is being imputed to me about my descriptions of the Flood and I don't want to get into another endless semantic argument right now.
Re: STENO'S PRINCIPLES OF STRATIGRAPHY: ORIGINAL HORIZONTALITY, ETC
Its the Dunning-Kruger effect
That plays a part, I'm sure - from both sides (I am probably guilty of thinking I understand things I don't), but I think it is something else.
I think it could be called "Faith Science" (not named specifically for the member of the same name, but like "Faith Healing"). It's is the idea that if you just believe hard enough it has to be true.
HBD
Whoever calls me ignorant shares my own opinion. Sorrowfully and tacitly I recognize my ignorance, when I consider how much I lack of what my mind in its craving for knowledge is sighing for... I console myself with the consideration that this belongs to our common nature. - Francesco Petrarca
"Nothing is easier than to persuade people who want to be persuaded and already believe." - another Petrarca gem.
Ignorance is a most formidable opponent rivaled only by arrogance; but when the two join forces, one is all but invincible.
I don't think people are imputing to you things you haven't said. I think people are saying that your claims have certain implications that are in conflict with each other and that you're ignoring.
Let's say someone says they drove from New York City to Philadelphia in one hour, and someone else comments that they must have been going very fast, way over the limit. The person denies going fast, says there was no traffic. But the distance is around 100 miles, so covering the distance in one hour would be a speed of around a hundred miles an hour. And since some of the distance isn't on highways, sometimes they must have been going over a hundred miles an hour.
But the person says to stop badgering them with details. They drove from New York City to Philadelphia in one hour, and they never said anything about breaking the speed limit, so stop imputing to them things they never said. But everyone knows something's fishy. Either they didn't really drive from New York City to Philadelphia in an hour, or they went really, really fast. One way or another, that story is wrong.
It's the same for the scenarios you're presenting us. If the flood behaved one way then that leads to certain implications. And if the flood behaved some other way then that leads to certain other types of implications. But the flood can't behave both ways, and huge as it was it's impossible that it didn't leave behind evidence.
So it's my judgment that there's considerable ambiguity in the scenarios you've been proposing and that it's fair for people to try to fill in the missing details and appropriate for them to ask you for more clear descriptions.
I'm not sure whether this image has been presented before, but it show some of the relationships of the Tapeats to the Great Unconformity and the Precambrian rocks beneath.
Worth noting is the fact that erosion has cut across the Shinumo and Hakatai, and then the Tapeats was laid down along that surface (the Great Unconformity, which is quite irregular, by the way). This is a depiction of the flanks of one of McKee's 'monadnocks' with considerable topographic relief.
It also shows discordance of the Tapeats beddng planes with both the underlying Supergroup rocks and the overlying Muav Limestone in the distance. Also notice how the Tapeats 'pinches out' against the Shinumo 'island'.
I'm sure that, somehow, this just proves Faith's scenario.
It seems to have escaped some here that this thread is not about the Flood scenario, check out the OP. There is another thread that formed at the sam4e time for that purpose. The Flood scenario has nevertheless been discussed on this thread from time to time but more as a temporary off-topic excursion. Now for some reason some are making it THE topic and demanding that I respond.
I'm still back on the dropstones myself, trying to come up with a simple experiment I could do to show whether the strata that bend over the stones in some of the posted illustrations were already there or deposited afterward. I'm thinking I'll use a liquid flour paste for the medium, maybe coloring layers to show how the stone displaces it, in a clear glass bowl. Curved bowl, not straight sides. Drop the stone against the glass so its track will be vislble. Maybe many stones. Then I have to go find some appropriate-sized pebbles. I've thought through the whole thing but expect it to take some trial and error to get the right consistency of the "layers" and the right weight of the pebble etc.
For those who are still on the Flood mechanics, what about what I wrote on this back around Message 552 and 559? Those may be my most recent ideas about how it happened so I'd put them above other thoughts I've had on the subject. A lot of wild generalizations have been made here about how I'm supposedly contradicting myself, without quoting me.
As I say in that block of posts in the 550s just referred to I'm continuing to develop the scenario. I haven't seen contradictions, just different possible ways it could have played out. But again, My mind is elsewhere right now.
This is a case where the outline obscures the relation of the different rocks to each other: The Tapeats forms a shelf overhanging the basement rocks in some pictures, can't tell if that's the case here.
The only context I recall ever mentioning a tsunami in my Flood scenario is during the receding phase when I picture tsunami-SIZED waves covering huge areas. SIZE. That's not about the mechanics of tsunamis, it's just about a very long wave due to the high level of the water over the land during the receding phase when the land has begun to be exposed again, now covered in a great depth of stacked sediments. You are making up the stuff about energy and indeed the whole tsunami scenario.
It seems to have escaped some here that this thread is not about the Flood scenario, check out the OP. There is another thread that formed at the sam4e time for that purpose. The Flood scenario has nevertheless been discussed on this thread from time to time but more as a temporary off-topic excursion. Now for some reason some are making it THE topic and demanding that I respond.
You're referring to the Origin of the Flood Layers thread. I don't see any recent posts over there, but if you think some of the diversions onto other related side-topics have become a bit too long then I think it would be fine to shift those discussions over to that thread. Whatever you decide, I don't think just terminating these discussions is appropriate.
I'm thinking I'll use a liquid flour paste for the medium, maybe coloring layers to show how the stone displaces it, in a clear glass bowl.
I thought Coragyps sent you a tank.
A couple other things to think about. Would the liquid flour paste have a problem when covered with water? I see you didn't mention water, so maybe you're planning to drop stones on the flour paste layers directly through the air. That might work, though of course without water you couldn't see how sediments would gather around it later, though I guess you could drop the sand through the air, too.
The only context I recall ever mentioning a tsunami in my Flood...
I didn't say that tsunamis were part of your scenario. I mentioned tsunamis because you said the flood didn't rush across the landscape but moved across the land was like a transgressing sea. What you've told us in the past about your transgressing sea scenario is that it followed Walther's Law, which means it eroded the land as it went and deposited the sediments offshore to produce the characteristic sequence of sedimentary layers found in the geologic record.
I presented a video of a tsunami moving across a landscape at something above 30 mph to show that it doesn't erode the land at all. This means that 30 mph is too slow for your "flood as transgressing sea" to erode the landscape, and so you need much higher velocities. And if the transgressing sea is moving at much higher velocities then it must have been rushing across the landscape just as I described, contradicting your claim in Message 1228 that because "The Flood took five months to rise to its height" that "it's not 'rushing' either."
Also contradicting your transgressing sea scenario, you've said that it was the rain that denuded the landscape. But too much rain simply swells rivers and causes water to flood the surrounding land and form huge lakes of standing water like this:
There's no erosion happening here. Erosion only happens where water can collect into channels (rivers) and move rapidly. Miles wide bodies of water do not move rapidly.
I'm not imputing to you things you didn't say or badgering you. I'm pointing out implications of your scenarios that appear to contradict reality and for which there is no evidence. Naturally explanations are called for.
You are making up the stuff about energy...
If you think anything I said about energy is untrue then you need to explain.
...and indeed the whole tsunami scenario.
I did not make up a tsunami scenario. I used a tsunami video as an example of water moving across a landscape and not doing precisely what you keep claiming it should do, namely erode the landscape.
This is a case where the outline obscures the relation of the different rocks to each other: The Tapeats forms a shelf overhanging the basement rocks in some pictures, can't tell if that's the case here.
I located the original on Wayne Ranney's website and reproduce it here with some of my own interpretation. I have changed some of the lines to dotted style so that we can see better the nature of the lower contact of the Tapeats Sandstone.
The Tapeats resides between the yellow upper contact and the (red) lower unconformity contact. The image clearly shows the Tapeats pinching out against the Shinumo and the Bright Angel sitting directly on the Shinumo on the right side of the image.
A lot of interesting things going on in this photo. It would be fantastic if we could see it in person.
I've posted pictures of mudslides caused in various places from just a few days of rain. I've even seen it personally. Rain soaks the soil, it doesn't take long, but the Flood had forty days of heavy rain working on every square inch of the planet at once. Your "implications" belong to some other scenario than the one I've had in mind
HERE, watch some mudslides on video in different parts of the world. All it takes is heavy rain, and it happens even where there are plenty of plant roots to stabilze the soil. The first one shows a forested area in British Columbia where a slide takes out trees:
A couple other things to think about. Would the liquid flour paste have a problem when covered with water? I see you didn't mention water, so maybe you're planning to drop stones on the flour paste layers directly through the air. That might work, though of course without water you couldn't see how sediments would gather around it later, though I guess you could drop the sand through the air, too.
I just want to see what happens when the pebble drops into the flour paste, I don't see that water is needed beyond the amount to create a consistency that the pebble can penetrate without dropping too far into it. There should also be no need for sand afterward. The idea is to see if the existing medium forms over it without any additions.
If all it took for soil to collapse downward was to be saturated with water then shorelines everywhere would be collapsing into rivers, lakes and oceans. A few regions around the world are vulnerable to mudslides, most are not, plus there's no evidence of worldwide mudslides from around 4300 years ago.
The issue where some clarification from you is required concerns your "flood as transgressing sea" scenario. Repeating the unanswered part of my message, what you've told us in the past about your transgressing sea scenario is that it followed Walther's Law, which means it eroded the land as it went and deposited the sediments offshore to produce the characteristic sequence of sedimentary layers found in the geologic record.
I presented a video of a tsunami moving across a landscape at something above 30 mph to show that it doesn't erode the land at all. This means that 30 mph is too slow for your "flood as transgressing sea" to erode the landscape, and so you need much higher velocities. And if the transgressing sea is moving at much higher velocities then it must have been rushing across the landscape just as I described, contradicting your claim in Message 1228 that because "The Flood took five months to rise to its height" that "it's not 'rushing' either."
Also contradicting your transgressing sea scenario, you've said that it was the rain that denuded the landscape. But too much rain simply swells rivers and causes water to flood the surrounding land and form huge lakes of standing water like this:
There's no erosion happening here. Erosion only happens where water can collect into channels (rivers) and move rapidly. Miles wide bodies of water do not move rapidly.
I'm not imputing to you things you didn't say or badgering you. I'm pointing out implications of your scenarios that appear to contradict reality and for which there is no evidence. Naturally explanations are called for.
You are making up the stuff about energy...
If you think anything I said about energy is untrue then you need to explain.
...and indeed the whole tsunami scenario.
I did not make up a tsunami scenario. I used a tsunami video as an example of water moving across a landscape and not doing precisely what you keep claiming it should do, namely erode the landscape.
My understanding of Walther's Law is that the rising sea water deposits whatever is carried in it. Limestone deposits originate in the ocean, so does sand. Since the rising water would already be full of eroded material already caused by the mudslides I don't see the need for much erosion from the sea water itself for it to be the source of deposits.
As usual you have a totally inadequate idea of what a worldwide Flood would do, based on local floods. How long is a standing lake going to stand when the rain keeps coming and the mudslides keep coming and the sea water is rising? You are demanding that I account for "contradictions" created by your own inadequate imagination, not by the scnarios I've had in mind.
I just want to see what happens when the pebble drops into the flour paste, I don't see that water is needed beyond the amount to create a consistency that the pebble can penetrate without dropping too far into it. There should also be no need for sand afterward. The idea is to see if the existing medium forms over it without any additions.
Since you can make the flour paste as watery as you like it should be easy to make it so the pebbles just plop right to the bottom, in which case you should see something like this:
™ Version 4.2
