Flood sorting

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tranquility Base:
Most of your comments ignore the fact that our explanation will come from convoluting all three processes.

---

'Convoluting?' Interesting choice of words.

quote:

---

If you think that anyone could be expected to explain this stuff with hand waving then I suggest that you've just got yoursleves jobs replacing the supercomputers working on grand challenges worldwide.

---

So, in the absence of such a 'convolution' you still think that the flood model is superior to mainstream geology? Mainstream geology has explained virtually every aspect of the questions that we have posed to you. That is why we ask them. Please explain how your model is superior. Other than hunches, I mean.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tranquility Base:
^ Convolution is a mathematical term. Most people who analyse data and apply model dependent extraction of parameters are 'deconvoluting' the data.

---

Good. But it also seems to refer to convoluted logic.

quote:

---

The strata themselves still look far more like flood deposit than gradual sedimentary environments.

---

That's funny. The ones we see being deposited today look identical and yet they are not being deposited by flood... Why do you think that is?

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tranquility Base:
^ You really think that is true. That is where the problem lies.

---

I'm sure you would know.

quote:

---

If I were you I would want to find the answer to the paleocurrent question.

---

You have been given answers here. Geologists have been studying paleocurrents for generations.

quote:

---

Doesn't it worry you that no-one is publishing detailed comparisons of paleocurrents in modern vs ancient?

---

No. Probably because it is not necessary or was done many years ago. Check out some textbooks maybe they have your answer. I know sedimentologists and they do these things. Perhaps you are just not familiar with the literature. Maybe your subscription to Sed Pet ran out.

quote:

---

It would scare the Lyell out of me. Turbidite deposits make up half the geological column.

---

No problem, except in the minds of creationists. Well, I'm not sure about the percentage, though the number sounds inflated. But there are turbidites being deposited today. Where is the flood?[This message has been edited by edge, 08-28-2002]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tranquility Base:
^ Convolution is a mathematical term. Most people who analyse data and apply model dependent extraction of parameters are 'deconvoluting' the data.

​

The convolution of f and g (called f*g(x)) is the integral of f(u)g(x-u)du from -infinity to infinity. f and g become hopelessly entangled into f*g.

---

Thank you for the math lesson. However, it would seem to me that you should be de-convoluting rather than convoluting if you are to make a model. As I remember you said that the ultimate model would be a 'convolution of the three mechanisms.' Seems to me that you are trying to get us hopelessly entangled in infinity.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tranquility Base:
None of us here, including me, have been able to find good data comparing paleocurrents in ancient vs modern environments. I'm thinking of giving the project to my next grad student but I don't know if the head of department will go for it.

---

Probably no one has bothered looking for it since the work was done generations back. This is silly, TB. What do you think sedimentologists do? Don't you think they might have noticed that there are discrepancies between the geological column and modern sedimentation?

quote:

---

Your epeiric seas, generating most of the geological column, have the tell-tale sign of high energy flood event written in just about every layer in the form of rapid paleocurrent signatures.

---

Ah, yes. That reminds me. You never did explain what the evidence is for high energy transport in the Mancos Shale unit. Or the many coralline limestones. I would also like to know what the current directions and velocities are in such units. Maybe one of your grad students could work on this.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tranquility Base:
We all know that with simple systems one can work backwards. With messy sytems you can't.

---

And yet you adhere to Baumgardner's model? That is all that he does.

quote:

---

I am a protein folder.

---

Good for you. I'm sure this qualifies you to evaluate sedimentary models.

quote:

---

...

​

Flood sorting is no different and would have to be approached in a similar manner. There is no way one could predict the details intuitively.

---

Rrriiight! And yet what are you doing with your 'hunches' and intuition? You have given us nothing but ill-iformed guesswork with virtually no detail since joining this board. On the other hand, Joe and others here have spent careers studying this things and

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tranquility Base:
Your epeiric seas, generating most of the geological column, have the tell-tale sign of high energy flood event written in just about every layer in the form of rapid paleocurrent signatures.

---

Nope, not mine. However, I certainly would like to see your documentation of this assertion. Most of the geological column exhibits characteristics of high flow regimes?

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tranquility Base:
If you're right, post the links to the abstracts systematically comparing paleocurrents in modern vs ancient environments! I can't find them.

---

I'm not sure why I have to do your research for you. How about starting with just these few from my ancient sedimentology text:Klein, 1967, Paleocurrent analysis in relation to modern marine sedimentary environments, AAPG Bull. 51, p. 337.McGowen and Garner, 1970, Physiograhic features and stratification types of coarse-grained point bars,: Modern and ancient examples, Sedimentology, v. 14, pl 77.Pryor, 1961, Sand trends and paleoslope in the Illinois Basin and Mississippi Embayemnt, In Geometry f Sandstone Bodies, AAPG publication.Harms and others, 1965, Depositional environment of the Fox Hills Sandstones near Rock Springs, Wyoming, WY Geol. Surv. Guidebook 19th Filed convference p. 113.Now are you still saying that geologists do not apply modern environments to older rocks? If not, please just read any sedimentology textbook. That is practically all they discuss. It would be under 'facies models.'

quote:

---

It's a fantastic basic science research project akin to systematic genomics. I might even put a proposal in to ARC or NSF.

---

You mean, based on your research so far?

quote:

---

And I never said that every bed demonstrates rapid currents. About half do ...

---

Hmm, earlier you said 'most' do. But never mind, I'd still like to see the reference on this.

quote:

---

...with the rest due to gentle settling afterward - but gentle settling today vs gentle settling after a catastropghic surge which would have suspended enormous quantities of debris are two different things.

---

So how many settling events do you see? Seems like you are pretty much constrained to one or several. Unfortunately there are thousands and most of them are millimeter scale. Hardly the stuff of global floods.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tranquility Base:
^ I read in a mainstream source that turbidite deposits make up half of the geo-column.

---

Please document. We have seen you misunderstand your own sources before. I would like to see the original study on this.

quote:

---

Huge sand waves and rapid correlated paleocurrents are the norm in the Paleozoic for example.

---

Please give us an example. Where do these huge sand waves occur. If there are so many this should be a piece of cake for you.

quote:

---

Lyell was wrong about most of the geo-column.

---

A vague generalization. Please give examples. Show us where Lyell was wrong a significan number of times.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tranquility Base:
For marine organisms we would argue that the aproximate (anti)correlation of first appearence stratigraphic level with extantness makes sense due to flood survivability.

---

I can see you've got this all figured out. Then tell us why there are no modern pelecypods in the early Paleozoic. Do you really think they were that much faster (or maybe intelligent) than the brachiopods that were so common then? Then perhaps you could get back to the flowering plants problem... I'm still waiting for your explanation their appearance in the GC.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tranquility Base:
The flood occurred in surges based on geo-data ...

---

What data is this? How long were your surges? How many were there?

quote:

---

...(if there was a flood) so that is why it is not as simple as you are suggesting. Show me the links to the tank data. The amount of work done in this area would be incredibly minimal.

---

You mean based on the research you've done so far? I wonder why there are all of those flumes in the basements of Geo Departments all over the world. I don't suppose anyone ever used them.You and wmscott seem to have the same affliction: an aversion to actual data. I hope you can overcome this, because you really don't have anythig to support what you've been asserting all along.

Earlier, TB complained that:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tranquility Base:
If you're right, post the links to the abstracts systematically comparing paleocurrents in modern vs ancient environments! I can't find them.

---

Perhaps you are too focussed on the paleocurrent part. The point is that if the current indicators were significantly different, it would have been noticed by someone, sometime, but it hasn't. This is my beef with your point. If there were some significant difference, then there would probably be precisely the study that you want. That is the nature of sedimentology. And certainly there are plenty of references regarding comparisons of modern environments and those recorded in the geologic record. Actually, there are probably too many of these to count.Here are a few examples of courses and studies comparing modern and ancient depositional environments and some short quotes. I wonder why none of them have noticed the great discrepancy between modern and ancient that your intuition tells you is true. Could it be that you are asking for something that does not exist, for the simple fact that there is no such phenomenon?http://aapg.confex.com/...ro2002/techprogram/paper_66399.htm"The sedimentary facies models of the Silurian sequences correspond to: of shore shales, progradational wave and tide dominated ramps, braided, straight and meandering fluvial systems and tidal complexes."(Nothing about high velocities indicating flood deposits in this part of the record. I mean, hey, the flood should be in full force during the Silurian)Page Not Found - Institute for Tropical Ecology and Conservation"The ITEC field station at Boca del Drago, Panama, provides a truly outstanding location for the study of both ancient and modern marine carbonates and carbonate environments. The site, within a sheltered archipelago in Chiriqui Lagoon on the Caribbean coast of Panama, offers students exceptional access to the many subenvironments of a highly productive modern 'carbonate factory'."(Hmm, carbonates seem to correlate well across the ages)Page not found | UBC Science - Faculty of Science at the University of British Columbia"Recognition of sedimentary facies and thus interpretation of sedimentary environments is critical for:
a. understanding earth history
b. predicting the geometry and characteristics of lithologic units
c. resource exploration and development" (Well, it seems that there is a bottom line here. Modern facies must correlate with ancient ones. Now, where is that pesky flood that is so obvious to TB?)http://www.science.mcmaster.ca/...ses/thirdyear/geo3e03.html"Students will be exposed to a number of modern and ancient examples of sedimentary successions formed in each of these environments."(Obviously they are brainwashing students here into believing the uniformitarian conspiracy. They are looking at both modern and ancient environments and must be overlooking the lack of comparison between the two. They really run a risk here of some student outsmarting the the professors someday!)For my next post I will look at paleocurrents directly and see what happens. If I don't find anything I won't post and the flood will be proven.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tranquility Base:
I read in a mainstream source that turbidite deposits make up half of the geo-column.

---

So, have you found this reference yet? I'd really be interested in seeing the data.

quote:

---

Huge sand waves and rapid correlated paleocurrents are the norm in the Paleozoic for example.

---

I also question whether 'huge sand waves' are the norm for the Paleozoic. Could you give us some kind of evidence to this effect?

quote:

---

Lyell was wrong about most of the geo-column.

---

Well, perhaps in some of the details, but heck, that was hundreds of years ago. Kind of a cheap shot to sit here with that much research behind you and criticize someone who really had little to go on but some observations and common sense.