Summations Only

I think tectonic tilting.

Mistake to say bill8ions, should have said hundreds of millions, just writing too fast.

Not as soon as deposited but as soon as exposed, and I think the receding Flood water exposed all the cliffs of the Grand Staircase, and cut the canyons there, and the Grand Canyon as well, and the buttes that became Monument Valley.ABE: If you want evidence that all this occurred at the same time I'd point to what I think is comparable amounts of scree in the erosion skirts or talus of all the formations.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

The point is that if all the strata are in place before this massive erosion occurs it means that massive erosion didn't occur at any point during their laying down. You can see nice neat strata in those hills and buttes in the movie I mentioned, forms carved out of what was of course continuous strata everywhere in between originally, just as you can see them in pictures of all these formations etc etc etc. Of course it can all be rationalized as you all do in OE terms but the simple fact I keep harping on is really very good evidence that OE timing is wrong because otherwise you WOULD have massive erosion at other points in the stack. Yes of course you can rationalize it away. Just hundreds of millions of years of no massive erosion and then suddenly ka wham huge cliffs, canyons, buttes, layers and layers of strata eroded away completely, down to scoured surfaces of Kaibab (Permian) or whatever the sandstone in Monument Valley is. Every time I notice this I'm amazed that the OE explanation continues to reign. Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

I can't look at straight flat formations like that without thinking Flood.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

It might surprise you to know that I didn't get that from any professors or even from creationist books. That's how I personally see the world. Most creationists don't attribute all the strata to the Flood.

Besides tectonic tilting I should have added that many creationists think the sea floor dropped and that's where the Flood water went.

The problem is explained well in the post you are answering.

Not identical, COMPARABLE, comparable in relation to the size of the formation, comparable in relation to the kind of rock.

It's an observational thing. I gave the pertinent information. You can SEE that it didn't happen before. That's my point.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

If all you're talking about is the Precambrian rocks that doesn't say anything about the hundreds of millions of years from there up through the Tertiary where no massive erosion had occurred and only began at that point. But if you want to insist on the Precambrian I still claim that that was formed at the same time as the massive erosion in general, displacing the rocks beneath the Cambrian, including volcanic effects and so on. It's something for future testing.

Small local erosion is not the massive erosion I was pointing out.

I never said that drying alone creates a hard rock. What I said was that COMPACTION hardens the sediments enough for them to be carved without slumping.

You keep insisting on talking about everything but the point I was originally making in Message 448 about the MASSIVE EROSION, you know, the erosion, or washing away, of all the sediment in Monument Valley around the monuments, that left a huge plain in the area. That's a LOT of erosion, massive erosion; and the erosion of the Grand Staircase and Grand Canyon area, cutting all those cliffs and those canyons down to the Kaibab which is another huge plain. That's MASSIVE erosion. A huge block of strata above the formations was washed away and then the formations were carved out of remaining strata down to the Kaibab in the GC area. My claim is that all this was the work of the receding Flood waters, and that the sediments were quite hard from compaction so that the cutting was possible. I am not talking about the Precambrian rocks of the GC. I'll let you know when I want to address those. Meanwhile the point I made in Message 448 still stands as evidence against the OE. I know you can't see it, professional blindess I guess, but maybe some day.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Adminnemooseus, : Fix link (looked like a copy/paste typo).

I can say it again and you won't get it again.The reason the massive erosion is an issue is that it only happened since all the strata were in place. This struck me again as I saw the formations in the film "Thelma and Louise" which are somehow a lot more real than in a flat photograph for some reason. The strata were in place to a depth of something like three miles, which can be inferred from the existing strata in Monument Valley and the Grand Staircase/Grand Canyon area. If it only happened after all were in place, in "recent time" that is, then nothing like that happened ever before during the laying down of all those strata, and that can be seen in the walls of the GC at least. Certainly back to the tapeats/Cambrian. That's a few hundred million years when no such massive erosion occurred, and by massive erosion what I mean is no canyon cutting, no cliffs as in the Staircase area, no monuments as in Monument Valley, and there would have been about a mile's depth of strata that just washed away in those areas too, leaving those formations. I guess that's OK with all of you though, we simply live in a time of active erosion that never happened before. Perfectly sensible, takes care of that. End of subject.Then there are the Precambrian rocks which also keep being brought up. Seems to me that the hundreds of millions of years that occurred "since" then ought to call the OE into question all by itself, but obviously it doesn't. Of course you all know how those rocks were formed, by the usual interpretive method, which, although it is nothing more than hypothesis-formation, is somehow capable of arriving at incontrovertible knowledge just as the real scientific method is. I have my guess about the angular unconformity of course, that it occurred at the same time as all the other massive erosion whose results are seen mostly higher up, and that leads me to think the other events having to do with the Vishnu and the Chuar and all that, also occurred in the same time frame, but I can't prove any of it, so your interpretive conclusions have to stand for now.ABE: So what really happened? The Flood laid down all the strata as per Walther's Law I assume, then as the Flood water drained it broke up some of the higher strata, then started carving out forms and leaving chunks of it in place which became Buttes, Monuments, Cliffs and Canyons. The forms that got left were just hard enough from compaction not to get washed away with the rest of it above. There was probably some help with breaking up the strata provided by tectonic disturbance, which also formed the Great Unconformity. After the water had drained away then the forms settled down to lithify and get eroded by normal weathering.I knew you'd want to know. /ABEI know it seems cheeky of me to think the Flood trumps Geology. But it does. Eventually we'll get it figured out how.Oh and I also still like my post which was basically on this same subject, way back there in Message 328. HBD didn't like it but what does he know? Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.