Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,807 Year: 3,064/9,624 Month: 909/1,588 Week: 92/223 Day: 3/17 Hour: 1/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Strata all in place before any tectonic, volcanic, erosional disturbance
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 1 of 3 (734210)
07-26-2014 8:32 PM


Since trying to prove the Geo Column has stopped growing isn't clarifying the issues I would like to clarify, I want to go back to the simpler argument that the strata built up through all the time periods as horizontal layers before all the tectonic distortion and other disturbances deformed them. This is what I've been equating with the Geo Column, but I'm more interested in getting across this picture of the strata building up and then being subjected to distorting forces. In the GC-GS area I argued that the strata look awfully placid just lying there for hundreds of millions of years between the Cambrian and the early Tertiary, which is when the Claron was deposited, all being laid down before all that massive erosion and other disturbance occurred that are so visible on the cross section of that area.
The standard answer here has been that there's nothing unusual about such quiet laying down of strata even for such a long period of time, but that while it is quiet in one place it would be active in other places. This is what I would like to prove wrong. I am sure it is wrong but finding evidence for it seemed impossible.
But I recently started finding cross sections that more or less show the same thing going on in widely distant places, strata having been laid down horizontally one after the other (according to standard OE reckoning over very long periods of time), and only then being subjected to tectonic and other disturbances that distort it, twist it, raise it, fault it, etc. So I thought what I should do is focus on that again and try to accumulate more such diagrams. They ARE evidence of what I'm talking about. It would be nice to find many from other parts of the world though, not just North America and Great Britain.
So that is what this thread is for. I’ve begun accumulating some cross sections for the purpose. There are few as clear as the GC-GS diagram of course, because there are few areas as uncomplicated as that area, but I hope I can make my case with what’s out there. I’ll begin by posting some of the diagrams already collected on previous threads.
Here's William Smith's cross section of Great Britain. Wish the time periods were indicated:
I’d say that this is one diagram where it's very clear that all the strata were laid down horizontally one after the other and then folded and eroded after all were in place.
Here’s the cross section of a part of Utah,

This seems to me to be another clear case of where the layers stacked up one on top of another very neatly and horizontally for some time -- LOTS of layers over a LONG time by OE reckoning -- then they all got buckled and broken and eroded in a block after all were laid down.
And here’s the famous cross section of the Grand Canyon-Grand Staircase area in Arizona and Utah:
And here’s the cross section of the layers beneath the Gulf that Percy posted —
Percy writes:
A fine example is where the layers beneath Texas extend out into the Gulf of Mexico. The border between Oklahoma and Texas is on the left, the Gulf of Mexico coastline is on the right. The layers become more and more deeply buried as one moves toward and into the Gulf of Mexico. Sediments are being deposited today atop the layers already present in the Gulf of Mexico
:
Percy wanted to show sediments being deposited on this formation although I don’t really see that going on here. I think it does make for an example of layers being in place before being deformed though.
Almost any cross section would do because they all show a block of strata being deformed after being laid down as a block, but some show more layers than others and some give the time periods and some don't and some are so complexly deformed that it’s not clear if the whole stack is deformed as a block or not, even where I think it most likely was. So those don't make good examples though I may have to make do with some of them anyway.
Here are a couple that I posted in Message 169 of the Growing the Geologic Column thread, that are pretty ambiguous but HBD already started a discussion about them so they should be continued here:
An area in England. Another example of intrusive magma that is not a layer too:
And one of Manhattan and the Bronx. Also has a sill that is quite thick and looks like a layer, though it's not a layer, it's an intrusion, a sill: in the upper left:
I'll quote some of the discussion about these in the next post.
Here are some I just found recently:
This one only goes up to the Cretaceous only but that's not bad:
Here's another one, but this one only goes up to the Pennsylvanian, although there is a piece of a Pleistocene layer there too. This one is like the Gulf cross section Percy posted, has an evaporate layer deep down that explains the sagging hammock-like deformation:
This next one seemed too distorted at first and it doesn't show early strata, but it certainly shows very thick strata and over a very large area as well:
Here’s an old cross section of England from Snowden to Harwich (about 200 miles) from Cambrian to Cretaceous
=====================
And I think I’ll post again the following sequence of edits I did back on a previous thread to the GS-GC cross section because it aims to prove this point about how the layers were all laid down before tectonic and other forces affected them to any great extent, such as the Massive Erosion shown on the diagram.
.Message 328 of the Continuation of flood discussion thread. Message 328
All these events occurred after all the strata were in place, which is evidenced by the features I've circled on the cross section:
NO TECTONIC OR VOLCANIC DISTURBANCE UNTIL ALL STRATA IN PLACE
Here you see that the fault lines and the magma dike go up through all the strata to the very top of the entire stack that represents in conventional geological time hundreds of millions of years called the Phanerozoic Eon, from the Tapeats sandstone at the bottom of the Grand Canyon to the top of the Claron formation at the top of the Grand Staircase.
I've also circled the rise up and over the Grand Canyon because that shows that the strata all remained parallel to each other over that rise, not butting into the rise which would have happened if the rise had occurred before they were all laid down. So this is another piece of evidence that the strata were all in place before any serious disturbances occurred to them,
But of course you all object that each layer shows erosion and other evidences of disturbance.
NO SERIOUS EROSION UNTIL ALL STRATA IN PLACE
So first of all here's what REAL erosion looks like, the real erosion that did occur in that area:
Broken-off strata, canyons and cliffs. Now THAT is erosion.
(As for the erosion at separate layers you all keep trying to turn into some kind of big deal, none of that can compare, and there is good reason to think most of it occurred after the stack was all in place too. Disturbances between layers don't need any more explanation than the effect of water runoff between the layers, and I would have to expect that the Temple Butte intrusion into the Muav occurred after the layers were in place also. In any case the overall picture I'm presenting here is overwhelming by comparison with all these small exceptions.)
MAINTENANCE OF PARALLEL SHOWS MALLEABILITY AND NO UPLIFTS UNTIL ALL STRATA IN PLACE
This last version of the diagram is meant to emphasize just how parallel all the strata are through the entire stack from bottom to top and how consistently parallel they remain where the land curves, which it does up and over the Grand Canyon and also quite sharply at the far north end of the Grand Staircase. This emphasizes my claim that tectonic disturbances happened only after they were all completely in place, but also suggests that the strata were still malleable and not lithified when the land rose, which of course also suggests that they were all laid down in a fairly short time period and certainly not over millions of years.
I'd say this all adds up at least to strong evidence against the conventional interpretation of millions of years for the formation from the Tapeats on up. We can argue the rest at some other time.
And to confirm the claim I keep making that there really isn’t much of any real erosion between layers, and where there is it doesn’t usually amount to anything that would have occurred when the layer was exposed at the surface:
IMAGES OF STRAIGHT TIGHT STRATA:
Image of Grand Canyon shows amazing horizontality and tightness of contacts of layers.
http://www.sean-crist.com/professional/human_language/sedimentary_rock.jpg [/img]-->
Yet people would keep saying no they aren't horizontal and straight.
And you’d think a master mason built this wall in Oman the strata are so straight and the contacts so tight:
Ottowa Canada I think:
So all this is to begin the discussion. All the examples are intended to make the same basic point but I suppose it would be good if we tried to focus on one at a time.
I will be continuing to collect examples because to make this case requires me to make it for many places in the world. The objections to this point have been along the lines of claiming that just because the strata were not disturbed in one place doesn’t mean they weren’t in many others. I think the facts should show that the strata were laid down first everywhere and only then disturbed. I know there are going to be some ambiguous cases but I hope I can make my case in most of them.
Could I also please ask that only the people who really want to get into this subject and stick with it post on this thread? (I can really only think of three who might fit this description: Percy, edge and HBD). It’s hard enough keeping track of the serious posts of a few people without having to deal with the occasional posts of others who haven’t really been following the argument, and please please please could we avoid all personal comments, all analysis of personal motives, all references to religion that have nothing to do with the topic, and that sort of thing? When threads get out of control in these ways I can’t keep up and I stop reading posts that make personal comments.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Replies to this message:
 Message 2 by Admin, posted 07-26-2014 10:41 PM Faith has replied

  
Admin
Director
Posts: 12995
From: EvC Forum
Joined: 06-14-2002
Member Rating: 2.3


(1)
Message 2 of 3 (734229)
07-26-2014 10:41 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Faith
07-26-2014 8:32 PM


Hi Faith,
This is a rather long for an opening post. I can promote it as is if that's what you really want, but you're likely to get several even longer replies. What do you think about paring it down and saving some of your ammunition for later? It takes a great deal of time to display anyway, because of all the images.
Also, about this:
Faith writes:
Could I also please ask that only the people who really want to get into this subject and stick with it post on this thread? (I can really only think of three who might fit this description: Percy, edge and HBD). It’s hard enough keeping track of the serious posts of a few people without having to deal with the occasional posts of others who haven’t really been following the argument, and please please please could we avoid all personal comments, all analysis of personal motives, all references to religion that have nothing to do with the topic, and that sort of thing? When threads get out of control in these ways I can’t keep up and I stop reading posts that make personal comments.
Will you be accepting any responsibility for helping the thread stay on track? Maybe stop inventing your own definitions? Maybe start reading all the replies to you? Maybe refrain from displaying fits of pique, such as deleting the content of messages people have replied to? Maybe keep your focus as strictly on the topic as you're demanding of everyone else?

--Percy
EvC Forum Director

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Faith, posted 07-26-2014 8:32 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 3 by Faith, posted 07-27-2014 1:40 AM Admin has seen this message but not replied

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


Message 3 of 3 (734237)
07-27-2014 1:40 AM
Reply to: Message 2 by Admin
07-26-2014 10:41 PM


I'm sure you are right about needing to pare it down so I'm thinking about how to do that. And thinking about the rest of what you said as well.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2 by Admin, posted 07-26-2014 10:41 PM Admin has seen this message but 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