Dear Edge;
You have been pretty cryptic about this but OK, so let me see if I have got this straight now, you are referring to the Entrada Formation which is a 166 million year old Jurassic sandstone formation in eastern Utah and western Colorado? You are really reaching deep into the past, couldn't you find a more recent example? And why are you bothering with the Entrada Formation when the there are far larger sandstone formations such as the Morrison Formation?
I gather, based on the line of argument you have been pursuing, that you are stating that the location and extent of this sandstone deposit is evidence of wind lofting of very large sand grains far larger than what we see today? That would be a unique view point. Due to it's great age, the area of the Entrada formation has changed greatly and elevations have shifted and topographical features and been added and removed. Normal accepted means of transporting sand and sediment are adequate to explain the size and extent of the deposit. Perhaps you should explain your argument in more detail, from what I have found so far, the evidence fails to support your line of thought. One web site stated. " Entrada Sandstone Formation: Formed in both a marine and terrestrial environment. The earthy facies were formed in a marine environment, whereas the sandy facies were formed on land in wind blown sand dunes." For this deposit to have started as a marine deposit, it had to of course be underwater which indicates a very subdued topography, even after it was uplifted this area was probably still pretty flat and covered by sand which was reworked by the wind. Additional sediment was also carried in by the rivers which had previously run into the sea. As another site noted. "Here in northeast Utah, the Entrada Formation was deposited in river channels, with many of its thick sandstone layers created by flood deposits. Following deposition, the Entrada Formation was buried, tilted and uplifted by tectonic activity." It sounds like most of the sand was carried to the area by water, not wind and was locally reworked by wind to create the dunes. I fail to see why you believe large scale transport of large sand particles by wind lofting was required, it is certainly not a mainstream view, remember I am suppose to be the one here that is off the wall.
On a side note on the Entrada sandstone formation, they ran the movie "Galaxyquest" on TV Thursday night and there as big as life in the scene with the rock monster was the deposit we have been arguing about. Apparently part of the movie was shot in Goblin Valley State Park in Utah, and since the rock monster was animated to match the background rocks, you could say he was made up of Entrada sandstone. So I got a double laugh watching the movie and thinking how you in effect are attacking me with the same monster.
You stated that you disagreed with the 57 micron limit on wind lofting, why and for what reasons and what evidence do you base this on? From what I have been able to find, 40 microns is a more reasonable limit based on the maximum size found in wind lofted deposits. I have seen nothing to support a much larger lofting limit size.
Density of diatoms and forams? Well they sink in water, which is why I used the reference to water droplet sizes, so figure a density a bit heavier than water.