Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 65 (9073 total)
80 online now:
AZPaul3, Tanypteryx (2 members, 78 visitors)
Newest Member: MidwestPaul
Post Volume: Total: 893,345 Year: 4,457/6,534 Month: 671/900 Week: 195/182 Day: 28/47 Hour: 0/0

Announcements: Security Update Released


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Evidence that the Great Unconformity did not Form Before the Strata above it
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 684 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 1831 of 1939 (762236)
07-09-2015 6:19 PM
Reply to: Message 1830 by edge
07-09-2015 6:17 PM


Re: Images from the Experiment
I'm sure you're right about that.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1830 by edge, posted 07-09-2015 6:17 PM edge has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1832 by edge, posted 07-09-2015 6:51 PM Faith has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 684 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 1835 of 1939 (762248)
07-09-2015 10:28 PM
Reply to: Message 1833 by Minnemooseus
07-09-2015 8:05 PM


Re: It's a diagram
Of course it's a diagram. There's really no point in even mentioning the thicknesses except they've been indicated on the diagram and we're discussing whether greater thickness would be the result of deposition onto a slope. There is no indication of greater thickness on the horizontal parts of the diagram, just the small variations along the length of the layers.

Percy announced a rule. I'm announcing my own: none of the strata of the sort known in the Grand Canyon ever deposited except horizontally. Weary of the way everything I say is dealt with here.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1833 by Minnemooseus, posted 07-09-2015 8:05 PM Minnemooseus has seen this message

Replies to this message:
 Message 1838 by edge, posted 07-09-2015 10:52 PM Faith has replied
 Message 1840 by Admin, posted 07-10-2015 7:54 AM Faith has taken no action

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 684 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 1836 of 1939 (762249)
07-09-2015 10:30 PM
Reply to: Message 1832 by edge
07-09-2015 6:51 PM


Re: Images from the Experiment
I'm sure you're right about me being right.

As for your edits you added a totally incomprehensible picture of an unidentified something. Yes it's always possible to find a picture of something somewhere that supposedly contradicts any given general statement. You seem to like that method of debate.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1832 by edge, posted 07-09-2015 6:51 PM edge has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1837 by edge, posted 07-09-2015 10:45 PM Faith has taken no action

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 684 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 1839 of 1939 (762255)
07-09-2015 11:05 PM
Reply to: Message 1838 by edge
07-09-2015 10:52 PM


Re: It's a diagram
slap slap poke slap punch kick slap slap slap punch poke slap slap whack hit jab slap slap poke punch kick kick slap slap poke slap punch kick slap slap slap punch poke slap slap whack hit jab slap slap poke punch kick kick slap slap poke slap punch kick slap slap slap punch poke slap slap whack hit jab slap slap poke punch kick kick slap slap poke slap punch kick slap slap slap punch poke slap slap whack hit jab slap slap poke punch kick kick kick kick kick

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1838 by edge, posted 07-09-2015 10:52 PM edge has taken no action

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 684 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 1846 of 1939 (762340)
07-11-2015 10:42 AM
Reply to: Message 1845 by Admin
07-11-2015 8:03 AM


Re: Images from the Experiment
It wasn't identified as Magic Sand, but it was intended as decorative sand for plants among other things. D├ęcor Sand I think it was called. The label said nothing about a coating, I looked carefully after it clumped up. It was available in small bags in bright colors at the crafts store.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1845 by Admin, posted 07-11-2015 8:03 AM Admin has seen this message

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 684 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 1847 of 1939 (762351)
07-11-2015 11:47 AM
Reply to: Message 1841 by Admin
07-10-2015 11:48 AM


Re: Sedimentation on a slope, take 2
Congratulations, you did prove that it's possible to get layers on a slope, even on a deformed surface.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1841 by Admin, posted 07-10-2015 11:48 AM Admin has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1848 by Admin, posted 07-11-2015 11:59 AM Faith has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 684 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 1849 of 1939 (762353)
07-11-2015 12:05 PM
Reply to: Message 1848 by Admin
07-11-2015 11:59 AM


Re: Sedimentation on a slope, take 2
...even on a deformed surface.

... If you're saying that whatever originally caused the surface to slope is not relevant to sediments being able to accumulate on it, then yes, that's correct.

I am not getting this. What?

If you're saying something else then please explain.

You've proved it's possible, but not that it's how any of the strata actually formed, including the sagged layer in that road cut picture. I can't prove they formed any other way, however, so there's nothing more I can say about it at this point.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1848 by Admin, posted 07-11-2015 11:59 AM Admin has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1854 by Admin, posted 07-11-2015 3:22 PM Faith has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 684 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 1851 of 1939 (762371)
07-11-2015 1:06 PM
Reply to: Message 1850 by petrophysics1
07-11-2015 12:48 PM


Re: Where does the horizontal vector come from?
The strata present as originally horizontal, and in some places as still horizontal to great depths (miles) and across huge areas of geography. Where they are deformed it is usually clear that they deformed as a block of layers that were originally horizontal. This slope idea is brand new, conjured out of thin air.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1850 by petrophysics1, posted 07-11-2015 12:48 PM petrophysics1 has taken no action

Replies to this message:
 Message 1852 by edge, posted 07-11-2015 2:24 PM Faith has taken no action

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 684 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 1855 of 1939 (762391)
07-11-2015 5:33 PM
Reply to: Message 1854 by Admin
07-11-2015 3:22 PM


Re: Sedimentation on a slope, take 2
I believe I gave other reasons to think that sagged layer was not deposited that way other than that sedimentation on a slope is impossible. Just looking at it, its form and how the whole left side of the stack tilts down to a small extent, and the rougher rock about where the sage begins, and how it the layer is narrower over the schist to the right where it must have been "pinched," tells me it sagged while still soft enough for that.

THIS IS WHAT I THINK, BUT SINCE I CAN'T PROVE IT I'M NOT ARGUING IT ANY MORE HERE.

Again my experiment did not prove what I was talking about, which was that STRATA wouldn't deposit evenly along the whole length of a layer such as that sagged layer. Yours suggests even that is possible, but mine, no. You are confining it to the slope itself, but I believe I said enough to show why I didn't accept that fact alone as a fulfillment of the experiment.

For reference, here's one of the photos snapdragon did for us:

https://onedrive.live.com/?cid=5bcf5702893756b5&id=5BCF57...

Well, not getting it to work. Maybe you can.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Edited by Admin, : Fix link.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1854 by Admin, posted 07-11-2015 3:22 PM Admin has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1856 by Tangle, posted 07-11-2015 6:09 PM Faith has taken no action
 Message 1857 by edge, posted 07-11-2015 9:35 PM Faith has taken no action
 Message 1859 by Admin, posted 07-12-2015 9:04 AM Faith has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 684 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 1862 of 1939 (762451)
07-12-2015 12:28 PM
Reply to: Message 1861 by edge
07-12-2015 11:32 AM


Re: How you figure this out
I know the thicknesses vary and I've said so many times. That doesn't stop them from being visibly straight and horizontal over huge distances, even with knife-edge tight contacts. .

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1861 by edge, posted 07-12-2015 11:32 AM edge has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1864 by edge, posted 07-12-2015 12:59 PM Faith has taken no action

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 684 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 1863 of 1939 (762452)
07-12-2015 12:37 PM
Reply to: Message 1859 by Admin
07-12-2015 9:04 AM


Re: Sedimentation on a slope, take 2
The rougher rock is a sort of hinge point where the layers start the sag to the left, the whole stack as a matter of fact, and to the right of it they are narrower, showing pinching against the basement rock.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1859 by Admin, posted 07-12-2015 9:04 AM Admin has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1865 by Admin, posted 07-12-2015 1:20 PM Faith has taken no action

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 684 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 1867 of 1939 (762478)
07-12-2015 4:12 PM


Goodbye to this utterly ridiculous thread. Good grief what nonsense you all spout. "Science?" And what an absolutely disgusting excuse for moderation on this thread. Appalling.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.


Replies to this message:
 Message 1868 by JonF, posted 07-12-2015 4:49 PM Faith has taken no action
 Message 1869 by edge, posted 07-12-2015 8:03 PM Faith has taken no action

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 684 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 1871 of 1939 (762634)
07-14-2015 9:13 AM
Reply to: Message 1870 by Admin
07-14-2015 9:03 AM


Re: Resuming Discussion
All the layers of the Grand Canyon, including missing layers that have eroded completely away, were deposited by the flood.

Except I don't accept the idea that whole layers eroded away. Itr's possible even in the Flood, but basically that's an idea necessary to the integrity of the Geologic Time Scale for which the evidence isn't exactly present.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1870 by Admin, posted 07-14-2015 9:03 AM Admin has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1872 by jar, posted 07-14-2015 9:25 AM Faith has taken no action
 Message 1873 by Admin, posted 07-14-2015 9:48 AM Faith has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 684 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 1874 of 1939 (762649)
07-14-2015 10:08 AM
Reply to: Message 1873 by Admin
07-14-2015 9:48 AM


Re: Resuming Discussion
OK, yes, I definitely have referred many times to the layers that were once above the Kaibab in the GC region, all the way to the Claron level at least, eroded away.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1873 by Admin, posted 07-14-2015 9:48 AM Admin has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1875 by Admin, posted 07-14-2015 10:52 AM Faith has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 684 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 1876 of 1939 (762666)
07-14-2015 11:26 AM
Reply to: Message 1875 by Admin
07-14-2015 10:52 AM


Re: Resuming Discussion
Yes.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1875 by Admin, posted 07-14-2015 10:52 AM Admin has seen this message

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.1
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2022