Summations Only

I was never talking about parallel top and bottom of each layer, that's your own daydream. I was always talking about a whole block of parallel layers which my drawing illustrates just fine.

Wow, what obfuscation!

I got the description from geology websites, I didn't make it up. It ought to be obvious that I said "root of a mountain range" not root of "an eroded package of rocks" as the usual interpretation I've encountered is that this tilted block of layers was the foundation of such a mountain range. I believe you might even find roxrkool saying so somewhere on this very forum.And I was not generalizing when I said it was eroded nearly flat, that too is a description of the one and only Great Unconformity as I've many times found it in Geology sources.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

What I would point out is that the whole area rose at that point, was lifted up. The pushing up of the pieces of strata plus the intrusion of magma are part of that scenario. if the strata buckled and then broke at this location, it should have continued to the north and south of it unbroken, though the diagram doesn't show anything at that level. The rubble from the breaking and sliding could be quite some distance from this location too, or spread out along the distance, as well as part of the rock over which the strata above was uplifted, and I still think much of it is what ended up as Vishnu schist,.ABE: Also, please remember that I think ALL the strata were laid down in the Flood, which means that all of them would still have been wet -- at least "damp" though highly compacted -- so that detaching them shouldn't have been as big a problem as if they were lithified rock, and I also figure that between the layers, due to the different textures of the different kinds of sediments, there should be a slippage factor that would facilitate the sliding I keep mentioning.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : last paragraphEdited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Edge -- No, I guess it was NoNukes, or maybe both, or maybe everybody for that matter -- wanted to know if I know the meaning of the word "parallel" so I thought I'd illustrate that for him/them too: Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Oohh, BR-U-U-U-U-U-U-THER.Obviously the plan here is just to garble up EVERYTHING. Wow.

Yes, of course that's what I'm saying, that's been my point all along but since there's so much pedantic nitpicking around here I felt forced to illustrate the point. Which of course still brings out the pedantic nitpickers.I wonder if there are any courageous EvCers here, who know that what I've illustrated is in fact a solid definition of "parallel," who would step out of the shadows and say so.The actual strata illustrated on the GS-GC cross section are in fact much more neatly parallel overall than my drawings anyway, with nice tight contact lines and all the rest. But even if they were as lumpy as my illustration they would illustrate the point I've been trying to make forever against the stubborn pedantic nitpickery of EvC.What they prove is that tectonic disturbance did not occur during their laying down at all, but did in fact occur after they were all laid down from at least Tapeats to Claron and I think probably both higher and lower, at which time, at the end of what was no hundreds of millions of years, something pretty drastic happened to shake up the land.You can see this in the rise and fall of the surfaces of the land, the "contour" of the land as I've often referred to it, as well as in the tremendous erosion that broke off chunks of strata leaving the cliffs and canyons of the Grand Staircase. This erosion also scoured the surface of the Kaibab plateau and broke open the Grand Canyon while the extra mile of sediments above the Kaibab was still there. The upheaval was accompanied by volcanic activity beneath both the GC and the GS, and earthquakes at fault lines which caused the angular conformity at the far north of the GS and the displaced strata at other points, and now I think also, thanks to edge's pointing out the fault indicated on the diagram at the base of the Grand Canyon, was most likely the main cause of the cracking of the upper strata at the Claron/Tertiary level or higher, that formed the GC itself.All that occurred after all the strata were stacked, which is evidenced by their parallel form which follows the rising and falling of the land.I think it is plain perverse of anyone to pretend not to see this or deny it once they've seen it.

Unbelievable. Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

I've already answered this. The block of strata broke off as it was pushed up against the Tapeats, and the erosion caused by the abrasion between it and the Tapeats collected along the contact line as it slid for some distance, but also collected beneath the block itself. The whole area is raised up, so there is room there for it to collect where the strata block was and get metamorphosed into Vishnu schist. The rest of the length of the strata from which the tilted block broke off has to be where it always was, it's just not shown on the diagrams.I just answered this AGAIN in a recent post, why do you keep harping on it? There isn't as much eroded material there in my scenario as you think there should be. Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : change a few words

Surely you don't have to talk Geologese ALL the time do you? You DO speak plain English in most of your life I would assume. I cannot picture what you are describing here. Yes I know what the word "truncated" means but WHAT "units" are you talking about that are truncated "at the Great Unconformity. I can't respond if I don't understand what you are talking about and I'm tired of getting told my lack of understanding is my fault when most of it is yours. It's hard to talk to someone whose methods are devious.So WHAT is it you think I don't recognize? Speak English.And what do you mean about my supposedly WANTING something or other to "be a tectonic contact?" For crying out loud I can SEE that the Supergroup is tilted and truncated, I've been talking about it for years already.Actually the problem isn't English is it? It's that you don't know how to put a picture into words so that someone else can understand you. AND you have such contempt for creationists you don't want me to understand anyway, you'd rather keep insulting me for not understanding your gobbledygook.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Well, there's an original thought. I don't think so either though, I think it just contributed to the Vishnu schist.

I haven't spent a lot of time thinking about this particular aspect of the situation, so any part of it could be wrong, but the diagram shows contact. But the idea I have in mind is that the Vishnu schist is metamorphosed eroded rock, or sedimentary rubble, so it looks like a very likely candidate for where much of the rubble from the eroded Supergroup would have gone that everybody keeps objecting is this enormous amount I haven't accounted for. Edge did say that the composition of the Vishnu doesn't fit my scenario but unfortunately edge seems to enjoy saying things in a way that confuses rather than enlightens. Perhaps you could act as translator. Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

The zone of erosion between the Supergroup and the Tapeats IS pretty thick, which can be seen in the video of the UK Creationist Paul Garner I posted way back somewhere. I can dig it up again. A fifteen foot diameter quartzite boulder is embedded IN the Tapeats above the contact line.Percy seems to think that the whole length of strata from which the Supergroup broke off should be rubble but I don't see why. The part that was subjected to tectonic and volcanic disturbance is right beneath the Grand Canyon itself, which is where the Great Unconformity formed and the Zoroaster granite and the metamorphosed rock that is the Vishnu, all products of tectonic pressure and volcanic magma heat. There is no reason the strata to the north and south would have been crushed.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Yes that is an idea I've had and said somewhere recently and you said it well. The idea that there wouldn't be enough room is answered to my mind by the fact that the forces that all came together in that region beneath the GC were powerful enough to lift the whole stack of strata above. The Supergroup tilted right up into that uplift, almost appearing to be part of the cause of the uplift. The question I'd have first of all is whether any rubble that did backfill beneath the Supergroup is Vishnu schist or un-metamorphosed rubble, or just what it is.

At any angular unconformity Geology says there is a zone of erosion between the upper and lower sections, which you appear to be denying based on the photographs you posted of the Great Unconformity.But apart from that I think those photos are interesting because they show a section of the contact between the two levels that did get exposed in the canyon, and the Tapeats appears as a broken shelf overlying the Supergroup. I could read that as supporting my scenario in that the forces that tilted the Supergroup also broke up the Tapeats in that area along with a lot of other sedimentary rock both above and in the foreground below the Tapeats. I do interpret the canyon itself as a product of this event too you know. All of it is the sort of thing, in other words, that would have happened AFTER all the strata were in place.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.