Biblical outpourings? At what rate?
Anything more than a mild to moderate influx of water would destroy the fine laminations. Then you have to explain how you get the rhythmic layering - why would clays deposit, then diatoms, then clays, then diatoms, etc. for thousands of layers? What process would be responsible for that?
My guess is that the scientists took the cores from the center of the lake because the margins of the lake would not be able to preserve the laminations due to adjacent terrestrial runoff. The center of the lake is generally the most calm and therefore the area where the fine laminations would be preserved. How is this sort of deposition possible during a catastrophic flood?
Golfer, it's obvious you don't really know what you're doing here. You're pulling explanations out of thin air because you don't have a comprehensive understanding of Lake Suigetsu. You have suggested talc should be present because YOU need if for your explanation of the Lake Suigetsu conundrum. When you finally realized talc is generally a secondary mineral and formed under non-surficial conditions, your explanation is that the seds are derived from deep in the earth.
Thing is, had you looked into the genesis of talc a little more, you'd have seen it can also occur authigenically in sedimentary deposits. It's rare, but under certain conditions it forms surficially. You don't NEED the seds to have deen metamorphosed at depth and then erupted to the surface. Besides, Golfer, if the seds were metmorphosed and derived at depth, we wouldn't see only talc, we'd see a bunch of other metamorphic minerals in addition to talc.
Why would not the clays between varves undergo a metomorphisism if the leachate contains such minerals. We really need a mineral profile of the leachate, clays, and the kerogen fossils that were dated.
Why now do you need matamorphism if the sediments in the lake are derived from deep in the earth? Obviously I'm right, you're just pulling things from thin air, flying by the seat of your pants.
There are no clays "between the varves." The varves are composed OF dark-colored clay-rich/diatom-free layers interbedded with diatom-rich/clay-bearing whitish layers. And I agree, it would be nice to see an XRD analysis of the clay mineralogy. I would think it has been done, but perhaps not published.
And again, one cannot determine what minerals are present from a leachate. All you can determine from a leachate are the element and molecular species, but not how they were arranged, and you can measure such things as pH and conductivity. Therefore, you stating the bolded portion above makes no sense to me. Perhaps you can elaborate.
In my experience, leachates are to test for the presence of minerals and/or organic material that are soluble (usually in water, I think) and to see what those mineral contain in the way of trace elements (and organic material?).
Honestly, I don't see why anyone would conduct a leachate test on water-saturated sediments in the first place, but chem/geochem is not my bag. Maybe the seds were saturated in something other than water? Acid, alcohol,...? Maybe they are looking for soluble organics?
Did I miss the link discussing Lake Suigetsu leachates?
Given the right conditions, thinly-laminated muddy sediments can and do form by rapid sedimentation. Contrary to claims by old-earth proponents, long periods of time are not demanded.
Actually, we have known that for a long time, so NO it is not contrary to claims by mainstream scientists. The significant portion of your statement is "given the right conditions."
However, 40,000+ rhythmic layers composed of diatoms and clay, which don't settle very quickly, is somewhat more difficult to explain, I would think.
This message has been edited by roxrkool, 12-23-2005 04:04 PM
™ Version 4.2
