TEMPORARY: So how did the GC (Geological Column) get laid down from a mainstream POV?

quote:

---

I will transfer what TB said in the original thread:

​

Yes it does sound like everytime you show me something I say - "but what about the really big/flat formations...."

---

A creationist with a sense of humor... that alone makes this discussion worthwhile.

quote:

---

But - in the mainstream model all of the continents have spent a lot of time with large proportions under water.

---

I'm not sure this is a reasonable interpretation of the "mainstream POV"... A continental landmass could spend quite a lot of time above sea-level... maybe even 99.9% of its history... and little or no net deposition might result. Then a brief submergence, coupled with a nearby orogenic pulse, might result in a thick sequence of shallow marine sediment grading laterally into delta and fluvial deposits nearer the source of clastics.Over-broad generalizations sans evidence are usually very wrong.Similar problems arise from your other forays into unfamilar territory...

quote:

---

One can follow the flat interfaces with only very little ups and downs. Much of these beds do not look like marine habitats as supported by the mainstream comment I cited. Even the marine burrowing looks more like escape burrows becasue the sediments are not mixed throughout the regions near the burrows indicating that these burrows were created suddenly in new sediments and then it ceased (we know why).

---

You THINK you know why...
Please consider a small portion of the "mainstream POV" you are, perhaps, unfamilar with...Most net deposition in almost all sedimetary sequences - modern and ancient - occurs during the highest energy events. So storms commonly plane off the underlying sediment, mix it up, and redeposit it in a graded bed. This sequence is ubiquitous in the GC and in modern sediments. Any organisms that survive the tempest will probably have to burrow their way to the new surface through the freshly deposited sediment, where they will happily create new homes in the top layer. This layer is most likely destined to be sheared off by the next storm, so it is under-represented in the GC.Just to set the record straight, I fully agree that a large proportion of the GC on continents is epeiric in nature. This follows unavoidably from the bias towards preservation of marine sediments I mentioned in the first paragraph. Extrapolating a Noah's Flood from this fact is possible only by ignoring, or being ignorant of, a vast wealth of geologic knowledge built up over the last 200 years. Bringing you up to speed on the whole shebang is cumbersome and difficult in a BB format, but with the pleasant tone displayed by you so far, you can expect as much assistance as possible from me.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by TrueCreation:
[b]"Could you also please amplify a little more on how the canyon walls would stand if they are composed of recently (one year old) deposited sediments that are, by definition, water saturated?"
--Lithification, and pressures would have 'squeezed' water out of higher pressurizes areas of the grand canyon sediments. And they arent just one year old, they could be hundreds.[/QUOTE][/b]
Pressure acting on unlithified mud and lime... without confining pressure on all sides... would instantly turn the mud into a slurry, which would flow like... well... like a mudslide. Your understanding of lithification is lacking.

quote:

---

"Do you have examples of thousand foot cliffs composed of sand and mud anywhere in the world?"
--Forming? Nope, its kind of like the big bang, only happens once (not exactly correct but that's beside point). But yes there are ones in other places in the world. The Blue mountains of austrailia, and the Waimea Canyon may be considered. I'm not sure about Waimea Canyon though.

---

Blue Mountains:"Sydney basin rocks are the most obvious when you look at the canyons and cliff lines, and make up the majority of the rock types present in the Blue Mountains. These rocks range in age from 290 to 230 million years old. There are three main layers to the Sydney basin rocks. These include: marine shales and mud stone at the bottom, coal measures, from which oil and coal was mined during the early development of the mountains. Above the coal measure layer is the most visible rock type of all, sandstone...

​

...capped with basalt, part of an ancient lava flow which occurred 14.6 to 17.7 million years ago. These basalt caps are all that remain of a vast sheet that once covered the majority the mountains, but has now almost all been eroded away. "The question posed was... how could waterlogged sand and mud form a cliff?Well, I don't think you can argue that these sediments were waterlogged after being covered with flood basalts. Therefore the canyon was cut AFTER the sediments lithifed, and AFTER the basalts cooled. You have found an example of a canyon that water erosion alone cannot explain. Basalt is almost totally impervious to water. Chemical erosion is necessary to break down the tough igneous matrix. Plus lots of time. The best combination is a lush vegetative cover, lots or moisture, and a deep topsoil. These produce lots of humic and carbonic acid to break down the rock. In a Flood, you get plenty of water, but not the other two, thus no chemical erosion to speak of... certainly not in a year. The Flood waters would just run off.Waimea Canyon:"Formed by deep incision of the Waimea River into tholeiitic and post-shield alkalic lavas of the Waimea Canyon Basalt"
http://www.wsu.edu/~reiners/tour/wc.html "The Makaweli Member (green), at 4.16-3.92 my, fills a down-dropped fault-like feature known as the Makaweli Graben. Notice the canyon cutting into the Makaweli member visible in the cross-section at the bottom."The Makaweli and Olokele members are MOSTLY tholeiitic basalts that are thick and ponded... "I think you'd have a hard time finding a tougher, more resistant rock to carve a canyon into in a short period of time using only the erosive power of rainwater.These two examples are the exact OPPOSITE of a canyon cut into soft, unlithified sediment...

​

[This message has been edited by wehappyfew, 06-06-2002]