Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,808 Year: 3,065/9,624 Month: 910/1,588 Week: 93/223 Day: 4/17 Hour: 1/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Continuation of Flood Discussion
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 931 of 1304 (732729)
07-10-2014 12:41 PM
Reply to: Message 923 by Percy
07-10-2014 7:22 AM


Re: "The Flood" deposition following Walther's Law?
You attributed your own statement to Moose.
I forget who all contributed to the point, but some showed how Grand Canyon layers fit the Walther's Law model.
I don't see anything that requires a great deal of time in the model myself.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 923 by Percy, posted 07-10-2014 7:22 AM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 937 by Percy, posted 07-10-2014 2:16 PM Faith has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 932 of 1304 (732730)
07-10-2014 12:46 PM
Reply to: Message 925 by Percy
07-10-2014 8:06 AM


Re: nuts and rocks and time periods
The point I was making about the Claron had nothing to do with its elevation, the point was that it was deposited at the TOP of the stack of strata of all the "time periods" before it [--"on top of" those beneath it, even if there were once layers above it]. That was my point about the whole Geologic Column, that it IS found as a STACK, which is what makes it a model for ascending time periods and evolution of life, so that if it is now supposedly continuing to deposit at the bottom of the sea it is no longer a continuous stack, and it certainly is no longer accumulating fossils in the line of evolution.
Thanks for information about sizing the image. Also your earlier post that told me how to more easily post a reference to a message.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 925 by Percy, posted 07-10-2014 8:06 AM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 951 by Percy, posted 07-11-2014 8:03 AM Faith has replied
 Message 956 by edge, posted 07-11-2014 11:52 AM Faith has not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 933 of 1304 (732731)
07-10-2014 12:53 PM
Reply to: Message 926 by Percy
07-10-2014 8:25 AM


Re: "The Flood" deposition following Walther's Law?
I see nothing in the model that requires a great span of time. The blending of the layers on the huge scale of the geologic strata may only show up at a distance of hundreds or thousands of miles. It doesn't matter to me whether it works for the Flood or not, it just looks like it must, there being really no other model anyway for how sea water lays down layers, and Moose seems to agree.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 926 by Percy, posted 07-10-2014 8:25 AM Percy has seen this message but not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 934 of 1304 (732737)
07-10-2014 1:27 PM


Someone back there asked how I can reject the idea of stacked environments though accepting Walther's Law. All I can say is I don't see environments in the layers described by that model, just sediments that get laid down in a particular order.
ABE: "Environments" enter the picture with the fossil contents of the rock.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Replies to this message:
 Message 952 by Percy, posted 07-11-2014 8:15 AM Faith has not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 935 of 1304 (732739)
07-10-2014 1:31 PM
Reply to: Message 928 by herebedragons
07-10-2014 9:07 AM


Re: "The Flood" deposition following Walther's Law?
Her scenario assumes the sediment was all present when the water begins recession.
Not necessarily, I try to avoid making such assumptions.
I can see this type of sequence developing as the ocean levels fall.
That has occurred to me.
I don't feel a need to establish a perfect model for the Flood's deposition. Walther's Law seems to provide enough of a general model, what would be the point in trying to be exact about something there's no way to be exact about, at least in the early stages of the discussion and when there are lots of other questions to deal with as well?
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 928 by herebedragons, posted 07-10-2014 9:07 AM herebedragons has not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 936 of 1304 (732740)
07-10-2014 1:57 PM
Reply to: Message 924 by herebedragons
07-10-2014 7:42 AM


Re: "The Flood" deposition following Walther's Law?
Your posts have been heavy with jargon lately, HBD, if you want a reason why I generally don't respond to them. In this case I have to ask what is an "energy gradient?"

This message is a reply to:
 Message 924 by herebedragons, posted 07-10-2014 7:42 AM herebedragons has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 940 by herebedragons, posted 07-10-2014 8:30 PM Faith has replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22389
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 937 of 1304 (732742)
07-10-2014 2:16 PM
Reply to: Message 931 by Faith
07-10-2014 12:41 PM


Re: "The Flood" deposition following Walther's Law?
Faith writes:
You attributed your own statement to Moose.
I fixed it. Thanks.
Faith writes:
I forget who all contributed to the point, but someone showed how Grand Canyon layers fit the Walther's Law model.
Yes, the Grand Canyon layers follow Walther's Law. They do not resemble flood layers at all.
I don't see anything that requires a great deal of time in the model myself.
Sand is created where water meets land. It takes time. Siltstone and shale are deposited in deeper offshore environments from terrestrial runoff. It takes time. Limestone forms from the tiny skeletons of microscopic creatures drifting down to the sea floor. It takes time. We can see these deposition processes taking place in shoreline and marine environments all around the world. Fine sediments like these cannot be deposited by active water.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 931 by Faith, posted 07-10-2014 12:41 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 938 by Faith, posted 07-10-2014 2:28 PM Percy has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 938 of 1304 (732743)
07-10-2014 2:28 PM
Reply to: Message 937 by Percy
07-10-2014 2:16 PM


Re: "The Flood" deposition following Walther's Law?
Your quote in Message 923 is still wrongly attributed to Moose. Never mind, I see you fixed it.
The deposition of any of those sediments doesn't necessarily take time although their formation may, and even there probably nowhere near as long as OE thinking assumes. Beach sand is not created on the beach, it's created by tossing in the water and then it's deposited on the beach.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 937 by Percy, posted 07-10-2014 2:16 PM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 954 by Percy, posted 07-11-2014 8:29 AM Faith has not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 939 of 1304 (732791)
07-10-2014 7:59 PM
Reply to: Message 900 by New Cat's Eye
07-09-2014 4:50 PM


animated plate tectonics
I know you put that up to demonstrate that there must have been a variety of depositional environments with all that moving around the globe, and I suppose if we're to take that animation seriously that must be true.
But I got more interested in how there's a lot of tectonic bashing going on there. Silurian, Devonian, Carboniferous particularly. And when it's not bashing it seems to be twisting and pulling and distorting a lot. Makes one wonder how any of the layers of the Geologic Column managed to survive intact at all. Just to consider the bashing wouldn't you expect the strata from the Silurian to the Carboniferous to look very much bashed around, say in the Grand Canyon? Or anywhere else of course, it's just that the GC displays the strata so well. But that block of strata doesn't look any more bashed than any of the rest of them.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 900 by New Cat's Eye, posted 07-09-2014 4:50 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 942 by herebedragons, posted 07-10-2014 9:04 PM Faith has replied
 Message 945 by New Cat's Eye, posted 07-10-2014 9:57 PM Faith has replied

  
herebedragons
Member (Idle past 857 days)
Posts: 1517
From: Michigan
Joined: 11-22-2009


Message 940 of 1304 (732792)
07-10-2014 8:30 PM
Reply to: Message 936 by Faith
07-10-2014 1:57 PM


Re: "The Flood" deposition following Walther's Law?
Your posts have been heavy with jargon lately, HBD, if you want a reason why I generally don't respond to them.
Is that why you thought I was being patronizing? I really try to not purposely use terms that you wouldn't understand. If I do, you just need to ask or break out google.
In this case I have to ask what is an "energy gradient?"
Well, look at the diagram of Walther's Law again.
Where in this sequence does the water have the highest energy (from motion)? Yes, at the shore. The lowest energy region is the furthest offshore. This is why foram oozes do not form near shore, there is too much energy in the wave motion to allow such fine particles to fall out of solution. Likewise, there is not enough energy in the offshore water to keep sand particles suspended, so they fall out near shore.
An easy way to demonstrate this idea is to take a rock that is about 1/2" in diameter and one that is about 1/4" in diameter. Drop them both at the same time from about 10" from a surface top. Which one hits first? Correct, they both hit at the same time because gravity accelerates them at the same rate.
Now take those same rocks and drop them into a container of water (2 - 4 liters should do it) at the same time. Now which one hits bottom first? The larger one. Why? Has gravity changed? No, it is because the water exerts a force upon the stones. The heavier rock is able to overcome the water's resistant force faster than the smaller rock.
Now imagine (unless you have a way of actually doing this, then by all means do it) doing the same experiment in a channel of running water. Which rock will be displaced further down the current? The small one of course. Why? Because the smaller rock remains suspended for a longer time.
What does this have to do with anything? The smaller the particle, the more the water's energy is able to act upon it and the longer it will remain in suspension. That is why we have sediment grading such as depicted by Walther's Law. As the "energy gradient" shifts towards or away from shore, so does the sediment.
You will find these "energy gradients" in all kinds of depositional systems.
HBD

Whoever calls me ignorant shares my own opinion. Sorrowfully and tacitly I recognize my ignorance, when I consider how much I lack of what my mind in its craving for knowledge is sighing for... I console myself with the consideration that this belongs to our common nature. - Francesco Petrarca
"Nothing is easier than to persuade people who want to be persuaded and already believe." - another Petrarca gem.
Ignorance is a most formidable opponent rivaled only by arrogance; but when the two join forces, one is all but invincible.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 936 by Faith, posted 07-10-2014 1:57 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 941 by Faith, posted 07-10-2014 8:58 PM herebedragons has not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


(2)
Message 941 of 1304 (732793)
07-10-2014 8:58 PM
Reply to: Message 940 by herebedragons
07-10-2014 8:30 PM


Re: "The Flood" deposition following Walther's Law?
Thank you, that was very helpful. You actually explained WHY the sediments sort in the order they do.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 940 by herebedragons, posted 07-10-2014 8:30 PM herebedragons has not replied

  
herebedragons
Member (Idle past 857 days)
Posts: 1517
From: Michigan
Joined: 11-22-2009


Message 942 of 1304 (732794)
07-10-2014 9:04 PM
Reply to: Message 939 by Faith
07-10-2014 7:59 PM


Re: animated plate tectonics
But I got more interested in how there's a lot of tectonic bashing going on there. Silurian, Devonian, Carboniferous particularly. And when it's not bashing it seems to be twisting and pulling and distorting a lot. Makes one wonder how any of the layers of the Geologic Column managed to survive intact at all.
Think about that Faith! You imagine that type of tectonic movement happening 135,000 times faster (540 million years of plate motion condensed into 4,000 years). Even if you start from Pangea (around 300 mya) the rate is 75,000 times as fast. You are practically watching that video in actual speed.
HBD

Whoever calls me ignorant shares my own opinion. Sorrowfully and tacitly I recognize my ignorance, when I consider how much I lack of what my mind in its craving for knowledge is sighing for... I console myself with the consideration that this belongs to our common nature. - Francesco Petrarca
"Nothing is easier than to persuade people who want to be persuaded and already believe." - another Petrarca gem.
Ignorance is a most formidable opponent rivaled only by arrogance; but when the two join forces, one is all but invincible.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 939 by Faith, posted 07-10-2014 7:59 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 943 by Faith, posted 07-10-2014 9:10 PM herebedragons has not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 943 of 1304 (732795)
07-10-2014 9:10 PM
Reply to: Message 942 by herebedragons
07-10-2014 9:04 PM


Re: animated plate tectonics
Not sure what you are saying. I know it represents a painfully slow movement in reality, but the whole idea of tectonic effects, such as in the raising of mountains, is based on these movements, and speed doesn't seem to be a factor.
ABE: Obviously I'm still thinking about the bashing but never mind, I get that you're talking about compressing all that into the time since the Flood. But I don't. I've watched lots of these animations and many of them start just before the Atlantic ridge forms and separates the Americas from Europe and Africa. That's the movement I generally have in mind and the rest of it in this particular video seems made up to me.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 942 by herebedragons, posted 07-10-2014 9:04 PM herebedragons has not replied

  
Minnemooseus
Member
Posts: 3941
From: Duluth, Minnesota, U.S. (West end of Lake Superior)
Joined: 11-11-2001
Member Rating: 10.0


(1)
Message 944 of 1304 (732798)
07-10-2014 9:54 PM
Reply to: Message 926 by Percy
07-10-2014 8:25 AM


Massive errosion and massive delata formation
Percy writes:
Another aspect of Walther's Law is that long time periods are required to produce the sand, mud, silt, clay and limestone sediments that comprise the majority of sedimentary layers.
It's not so much that Walther's Law requires long time periods. It's more a matter that big picture geological reality requires long periods of time. "The Flood" is dis-reality.
Looking at the "if the Biblical story was true perspective", the Earth's pre-Flood geological nature is an unknown. But let us suppose a Biblical type flood started tomorrow. What would happen?
I'll give you my image of what "The Flood" results would look like, and then give a link to an old topic that went into this subject.
  • The "Big Rain" affect would erode pretty much everything that wasn't solid rock, and the sediment would head to lower elevations. Sediment size would range from clay size to huge boulders.
  • Rivers would be huge, and where they met the sea, huge deltas would be deposited (including boulder sizes outside of real world reality).
  • If the delta deposition buildup exceeded the sea level rise rate, the delta environment would advance seaward. If the sea level rise rate was greater, the delta environment would regress shoreward. If you had these depositional environment movements, you would get sediment patterns that fit into Walther's Law. Of course, you would have decreasing amounts of sediment available as time goes by.
  • When all the land is completely water covered, you would have a very turbid ocean, and maybe a little fine grained material would have time to settle out. But I suspect that would be wiped out by post-Flood erosion.
  • As the water receded, down that mysterious drain to oblivion, rivers would cut back down through their previous deposits and the delta environment would migrate seaward.
End result - A land surface that is largely barren rock. Deep river valleys and huge deltas with sediments ranging from huge boulders to fine clay (arranged per Walther's Law). Nothing like what we see today.
Now, the old topic - Big-Sediment vs. Little-Sediment Flood Geology? (2003). Started by lpetrich, 2nd and 4th messages by roxrkool, 6th message by Minnemooseus (more or less saying what I said above), and beyond.
Moose

Professor, geology, Whatsamatta U
Evolution - Changes in the environment, caused by the interactions of the components of the environment.
"Do not meddle in the affairs of cats, for they are subtle and will piss on your computer." - Bruce Graham
"The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness." - John Kenneth Galbraith
"Yesterday on Fox News, commentator Glenn Beck said that he believes President Obama is a racist. To be fair, every time you watch Glenn Beck, it does get a little easier to hate white people." - Conan O'Brien
"I know a little about a lot of things, and a lot about a few things, but I'm highly ignorant about everything." - Moose

This message is a reply to:
 Message 926 by Percy, posted 07-10-2014 8:25 AM Percy has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 948 by Faith, posted 07-11-2014 12:19 AM Minnemooseus has replied

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 945 of 1304 (732800)
07-10-2014 9:57 PM
Reply to: Message 939 by Faith
07-10-2014 7:59 PM


Re: animated plate tectonics
I know you put that up to demonstrate that there must have been a variety of depositional environments with all that moving around the globe, and I suppose if we're to take that animation seriously that must be true.
Right, that's why the layers are different. Different environments.
But I got more interested in how there's a lot of tectonic bashing going on there.
Bashing is totally the wrong word. Its a slow gentle unyielding gnudging.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 939 by Faith, posted 07-10-2014 7:59 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 947 by Faith, posted 07-10-2014 10:15 PM New Cat's Eye has replied
 Message 961 by Faith, posted 07-11-2014 3:18 PM New Cat's Eye has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024