Evidence that the Great Unconformity did not Form Before the Strata above it

You have missed the point completely. I was showing you that planes need not be flat.ABE: If it was not your intent to deny that a deformed plane is not a plane, please explain. Edited by edge, : No reason given.

Then why did you write this? ABE: I interpreted this to mean that you think the lower sediments are/were softer than the ones higher in the roadcut. Is that what you meant?Edited by edge, : No reason given.

Only if you accept a weird interpretation of the Great Unconformity and various other unconformities and faulting events.ABE: For instance, we have faults that are truncated by the Great Unconformity. That means that there was a tectonic event before the GU. Please explain.ABE: We also have gross difference in metamorphic grade across the unconformity. Please explain.Yes, you provide evidence, but then you ignore huge tracts of other evidence against your position. Edited by edge, : No reason given.

I won't be able to catch up today with the sudden volume of posts, it'll have to wait until tomorrow, but in a brief scan I've seen enough to issue this warning: if I see any posts after this one that include comments about and/or criticisms of other participants then I will be issuing suspensions in the morning. Use the "Edit" button as necessary.

Unbelievable. Somebody shoot me. A thousand or more posts on this subject and now you think I'd imply a completely different scenario. The lower space was created when the gneiss was disturbed tectonically, which I figure had to have happened while the strata were already in place because they too were disturbed, and the layers on the left dropped because of the space on the left. Perhaps that side of the gneiss didn't drop, it was more that the rising of the gneiss on the right pushed the whole stack upward, but the gneiss on the left for some reason wasn't pushed up so there was a pinching of that "sagged" layer over the gneiss on the right at the same time gravity pulled it down on the left.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

That's an irrelevant pedantic semantic point when the argument is about whether layers deposit horizontally or not. You were arguing that the "bedding plane" of that orange-lined layer had been deposited that way -- ON the slight tilt, so I pointed out that a PLANE can't include a tilt. It can tilt after it's deposited, yes. I just want to keep the arguments clear.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

/Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

I was just about to sign off for the night when I saw there were a few more messages. I'll also be issuing suspensions to those posting messages that have no content other than complaining, criticizing or expressing frustration. Please constructively address the topic or risk being suspended tomorrow. Use your "Edit" button now.

I couldn't possibly have meant such a thing. Good grief. I merely meant that OBVIOUSLY the lower is more deformed, and when you asked what I meant I said BECAUSE IT HAD FARTHER TO FALL. Good grief. It's CLEARLY more deformed. If I have to explain why it can only be because there was this big hole for it to fall into. Perhaps it took days for it to fall into it, I don't know HOW soft it was. soft enough to fall that far in whatever time it took while the ones above had more support and only tilted slightly.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

I HAVE explained this. Those occur where the GU is an ANGULAR unconformity and there was sliding beneath the Tapeats which truncated the fault that formed in the tilted strata.

This I'm not sure how to explain. That doesn't mean I'm ignoring it. The fact that I can explain as much as I do just means that will be explained eventually also and your demanding that I give an alternative explanation for absolutely everything before you'll acknowledge anything is unreasonable.But I'd postulate that the tectonic force itself had something to do with the formation of the gneiss just as it would have for the schist where that is the basement rock in the GU, that pressure, plus volcanism where that was also present, which it was in many of the GU rocks, evidenced by the presence of granite. I also postulate a point where the pressure and heat from below are resisted by the weight of the strata above, that being where the unconformity occurs.

It's really hard to say for sure, but my impression is the the sediments are shallow dipping into the face (dipping away from the road).Also, is there a subtle bend in the rock face and road at the center of the photo??? Are we seeing a apparent dip change where there is no real dip change???Third, you realize that the left side of the rock face is significantly closer to the camera than the right side of the face. This, in itself, would cause the left side bedding to appear to be thicker.In all, I think a lot of grand observations and interpretations are being done on a photo. If you were actually there looking at the rocks, would it be discovered that the dips and thicknesses are actually much more uniform???Moose

I wasn't. Can't imagine how anyone would see a jog there. I could have told you that much without the street view.

I believe that is correct. That is one of my concerns in the interpretation of this roadcut. If we were there, it would be more obvious. Also, thought of that. Since we are across the highway, that should be minimized, but it's a real possibility that we are getting a distorted idea of the thickness. As I mentioned in one of my earlier posts, I don't really want to get into the geometry of the roadcut too much. I am, however, impressed by the continuity of the bedding plane I outlined in orange, vis a vis the possibility of deformation in the sequence.

Except that there is no evidence of shearing.ABE: With all of the evidence for irregular surfaces in the 'monadnocks', etc., how do you create shearing along the unconformity only a short distance away? It would be like sliding a sheet of plywood over another, when there are a few nails holding them together. Edited by edge, : No reason given.