Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 83 (8936 total)
287 online now:
AZPaul3, PaulK (2 members, 285 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: ssope
Post Volume: Total: 861,922 Year: 16,958/19,786 Month: 1,083/2,598 Week: 6/323 Day: 6/51 Hour: 2/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Motley Flood Thread (formerly Historical Science Mystification of Public)
Percy
Member
Posts: 18842
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 2.6


Message 331 of 877 (834347)
06-03-2018 8:18 PM
Reply to: Message 295 by Faith
06-03-2018 5:04 AM


Re: Video on the formation of the Grand Canyon
Faith writes:

The Colorado River's sinuous course has no relationship to cracks in any strata. That is practically the definition of a meandering stream.

No idea what you have in mind here about meanders.

There's that amnesia flaring up again. Just read the thread and refresh your memory.

And I'm not picturing a crack the whole length of the canyon, just over the Kaibab Uplift. Water does the work of carving the canyon.

I liked Edge's word of "sinuous." The canyon follows a sinuous course, including through the Kaibab Uplift, and not along anything resembling a fracture or fault.

And why are these rocks cracked anyway. I thought they were sort'a, kind'a soft, but not so much soft. Please describe the process of cracks forming in these rocks. '

Strata were laid down three miles deep or so by the Flood, two miles of it above what is now the Kaibab rim of the canyon.

You called these strata wet and malleable - why are they fracturing?

Strata are all underwater. They've been sitting there maybe a couple of months before the Flood starts to recede, but the uppermost would be soft. The uplift causes the upper ones to crack because they're soft.

So if you drop a wet and malleable blob of clay on the floor, you expect it to crack because it's soft? Not going to happen. If you really want something to crack I suggest you drop a coffee cup.

It's only about the level of the Kaibab that they are compact enough to hold together, and that's two miles beneath the uppermost layer.

You've got everything backwards. Wet and malleable things bend and flex and twist. Hard things fracture. You're imagining fractures in wet and malleable things where they're not possible, and in hard layers like the Kaibab where fractures are possible we don't see any.

The water starts at the same time the uplift is created.

You mean the water started receding at the same time that the Kaibab Uplift occurred? Since the water had to be at a height above eventual sea level to cover Mount Everest at 29,000 feet, the Kaibab Uplift at an elevation of only about 8000 feet would have had 21,000 feet of water (4 miles) above it when it began receding.

Whole stack is pushed upward...

Since the upward forces were uneven, concentrated as they were just under the Kaibab Uplift but not over the rest of the region, why is the whole stratigraphic column pushed upward instead of just some of the bottom layers tilting, like what you think happened with the Supergroup.

The uppermost strata on top of this three-mile stack are cracked by the strain of the uplift.

You're repeating yourself, so so will I. Why do you think wet and malleable strata capable of bending and flexing would experience fractures? Did you ever play with Play-Doh? How do you fracture Play-Doh?

You know, it forms a rise or a mound. That would strain the uppermost strata.

Which is wet and malleable and would just bend.

That's what causes the cracks.

That's what causes bends.

And yes I would assume those uppermost strata were pretty soft because they didn't have any weight on them to consolidate them.

If they were soft then they wouldn't fracture. And not to forget, I thought you decided the upper strata were still loose sediment.

But there would be greater and greater compaction in the layers below the uppermost ones as you go down iin the stack.

Finally, something true.

The receding of the water starts breaking it all up.

How does water break up strata that are wet and malleable?

The uppermost ones probably break up into loose sediments but the lower down the water goes the chunkier the strata will be.

Just how many fractures are we talking about here? You seem to be imagining the entire stack of layers above the Kaibab, a region of tens of thousands of square miles and a volume of rock of more than twenties of thousands of cubic miles of rock, being fractured into chucks small enough to be carried away by a thin sheet of water a few inches thick.

It may take a month or two for it to get down to the level of the canyon but the cracks would be widening in the process.

Again, the water level is dropping at the rate of 1.5 inches/minute. That's not going to generate any meaningful flow of water, especially not miles beneath the surface. Even a stratum of loose sediments wouldn't be affected. There is nothing to widen the fractures that wouldn't form anyway in wet and malleable strata.

So I guess it would be a big crack in the end at the canyon level, as you say.

Are you actually imagining that when the water level reaches the surface that there is already a canyon?

This is in the south side of the Kaibab Uplift where the canyon forms. Can't imagine that any evidence would remain of that process after four thousand years: what evidence would you be expecting to see?

Well, we certainly wouldn't expect to see any evidence of the impossible, and we don't.

And what is the standard explanation for how the Colorado River got through the barrier of the Kaibab Uplift?

This has been explained many, many, many times. Go find one of those explanations. The site is littered with them.

My scenario has the virtue of solving that problem.

You're imagining a problem that doesn't exist. Downcutting during uplift is a well understood process.

And please explain what it means to say that isn't a mountain but badlands.

This has been explained. Read the thread.

--Percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 295 by Faith, posted 06-03-2018 5:04 AM Faith has not yet responded

    
Percy
Member
Posts: 18842
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 2.6


Message 332 of 877 (834348)
06-03-2018 8:52 PM
Reply to: Message 317 by Faith
06-03-2018 2:46 PM


Re: Video on the formation of the Grand Canyon
Faith writes:

Just came back and see this complaint by both Percy and edge about no such thing as a complete geological or stratigraphic column. I remember pretty much what I said though I'll have to reread it to be sure,...

Looks like you never went back to reread your message. The claim of complete stratigraphic columns came from your Message 284, where you claimed they existed several times:

Faith in Message 284 writes:

Yes I know there are many partial stacks in many places, that my favorite Grand Canyon / Grand Staircase is really the only area I know of where they are ALL there...Yes I know you explain this differently and my evidence is lacking because of the incomplete columns in spite of the complete ones. Smith's cross section of England is one complete one,...

So it looks like you did say what we said you said, it was incorrect, and then you compounded the error by trying to retroactively claim you were saying something different, and that it wasn't important anyway. Face it, you were wrong, then you falsely denied it.

My point doesn't need detailed perfection.

No worries, your points not only don't approach "detailed perfection," they lack evidence, rationale, coherence, consistency, and are constantly changing.

--Percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 317 by Faith, posted 06-03-2018 2:46 PM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 334 by Faith, posted 06-03-2018 9:52 PM Percy has responded

    
Faith
Member
Posts: 32956
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 333 of 877 (834349)
06-03-2018 9:48 PM
Reply to: Message 329 by Modulous
06-03-2018 6:32 PM


Re: Geo Column, Depositional Environments, etc
LOOK AT THE STRATA IN THAT PICTURE. JUST LOOK,. NO LAKE BED, NO SALT FLAT, NO FIELD, NO BEACH, IS THAT FLAT. JUST LOOK.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 329 by Modulous, posted 06-03-2018 6:32 PM Modulous has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 335 by edge, posted 06-03-2018 9:53 PM Faith has responded
 Message 340 by Modulous, posted 06-03-2018 10:41 PM Faith has responded

    
Faith
Member
Posts: 32956
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 334 of 877 (834350)
06-03-2018 9:52 PM
Reply to: Message 332 by Percy
06-03-2018 8:52 PM


Re: Video on the formation of the Grand Canyon
YOU CAN FAULT ME FOR NOT BEING CLEAR I AM ALWAYS TALKING ABOUT THE GEOLOGICAL TIME SCALE WHEN I TALK ABOUT THE GEOLOGICAL COLUMN/STRATIGRAPHIC COLUMN, BUT NO, I DO NOT CHANGE MY STORY. THE GC/GS AND THE MAP OF ENGLAND SHOW EXACTLY WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT, ALL THE TIME PERIODS ATTACHED TO THEIR RESPECTIVE SLABS OF ROCK IN PLACE FROM CAMBRIAN TO HOLOCENE, AFTER WHICH ALL THE EROSION OCCURRED AND NOT BEFORE, AFTER WHICH ALL THE TECTONIC DISTURBANCE OCCURRED AND NOT BEFORE. THAT IS EVIDE3NCE THAT THE GEO COLUMN HAS COME TO AN END, IT IS EVIDENCE OF RAPID DEPOSITION AND AGAINST THE MILLIONS OF YEARS TIME SCALE. THE EROSWION MARKS THE END, THE TECTONIC DISTURBANCE MARKS THE END. THAT DID NOT OCCUR DURING THE LAYING DOWN, IT OCCURRED AFTER IT WAS ALL LAID DOWN.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 332 by Percy, posted 06-03-2018 8:52 PM Percy has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 337 by edge, posted 06-03-2018 10:02 PM Faith has not yet responded
 Message 365 by Percy, posted 06-04-2018 8:26 PM Faith has not yet responded

    
edge
Member
Posts: 4696
From: Colorado, USA
Joined: 01-09-2002
Member Rating: 3.4


Message 335 of 877 (834351)
06-03-2018 9:53 PM
Reply to: Message 333 by Faith
06-03-2018 9:48 PM


Re: Geo Column, Depositional Environments, etc
LOOK AT THE STRATA IN THAT PICTURE. JUST LOOK,. NO LAKE BED, NO SALT FLAT, NO FIELD, NO BEACH, IS THAT FLAT. JUST LOOK.

However, they are lake bottoms

And they are flat.

And why couldn't they be muds rather than salt? In fact, many are.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 333 by Faith, posted 06-03-2018 9:48 PM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 336 by Faith, posted 06-03-2018 9:58 PM edge has responded
 Message 342 by Faith, posted 06-04-2018 7:13 AM edge has responded

  
Faith
Member
Posts: 32956
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 336 of 877 (834352)
06-03-2018 9:58 PM
Reply to: Message 335 by edge
06-03-2018 9:53 PM


Re: Geo Column, Depositional Environments, etc
i WAS HOPING SOMEONE HERE MIGHT ACTUALLY BE ABLE TO SEE HOW THOSE CANNOT POSSIBLY BE LAKE BEDS. I TRIED TO AVOID ANYTHING THAT I THOUGHT MIGHT SOUND INSULTING. BUT OF COURSE THE INGRAINED HABITS WOULD PREVAIL EVEN IF THEY ARE TOTALLY WACKO. i

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 335 by edge, posted 06-03-2018 9:53 PM edge has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 338 by edge, posted 06-03-2018 10:06 PM Faith has not yet responded

    
edge
Member
Posts: 4696
From: Colorado, USA
Joined: 01-09-2002
Member Rating: 3.4


Message 337 of 877 (834353)
06-03-2018 10:02 PM
Reply to: Message 334 by Faith
06-03-2018 9:52 PM


Re: Video on the formation of the Grand Canyon
THE GC AND THE MAP OF ENGLAND SHOW EXACTMPLY WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT, ALL THE TIME PERIODS ATTACHED TO THEIR RESPECTIVE SLAPS OF ROCK IN PLACE FROM CAMBRIAN TO HOLOCENE, ...

Actually, some are missing.

... AFTER WHICH ALL THE EROSION OCCURRED AND NOT BEFORE,

Actually, incorrect. These two locations do not represent the entire world.

AFTER WHICH ALL THE TECTONIC DISTURBANCE OCCURRED AND NOT BEFORE.

Again, demonstrably wrong. Siccar Point is an example of deformation before the most recent sediments.

THAT IS EVIDE3NCE THAT THE GEO COLUMN HAS COME TO AN END.

Not really. You cannot predict what is going to happen in the future as sea level changes.

THE EROSWION MARKS THE END, THE TECTONIC DISTURBANCE MARKS THE END. THAT DID NOT OCCUR DURING THE LAYING DOWN, IT OCCURRED AFTER IT WAS ALL LAID DOWN.

Again, the process is ongoing. We only see a snapshot in human terms. Erosion is acting as it always has and tectonism is very much alive as it has been for the last half billion years.

I am surprised that you have not yet figured this out.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 334 by Faith, posted 06-03-2018 9:52 PM Faith has not yet responded

  
edge
Member
Posts: 4696
From: Colorado, USA
Joined: 01-09-2002
Member Rating: 3.4


Message 338 of 877 (834354)
06-03-2018 10:06 PM
Reply to: Message 336 by Faith
06-03-2018 9:58 PM


Re: Geo Column, Depositional Environments, etc
i WAS HOPING SOMEONE HERE MIGHT ACTUALLY BE ABLE TO SEE HOW THOSE CANNOT POSSIBLY BE LAKE BEDS.

That's pretty much what your science consists of ... hoping. Recent lake beds look exactly like the ones in your picture. The sediment cores from Lake Suigetso are also similar.

This image shows the upper layers in the upper left of the image as kind of vague and obviously of very low strength, usually uncountable. The layers seem to blend together rather than show sharp contacts.

This is similar to your image where the bedding, while flat, is still vague and gradual in some cases.

I TRIED TO AVOID ANYTHING THAT I THOUGHT MIGHT SOUND INSULTING. BUT OF COURSE THE INGRAINED HABITS WOULD PREVAIL EVEN IF THEY ARE TOTALLY WACKO. i

Irrelevant, but I understand that your habits are hard to break.

Edited by edge, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 336 by Faith, posted 06-03-2018 9:58 PM Faith has not yet responded

  
Adminnemooseus
Director
Posts: 3894
Joined: 09-26-2002


Message 339 of 877 (834355)
06-03-2018 10:09 PM


Might we eliminate the snark only messages?
Every message should have some real content. Snark messages are just topic pollution.

Adminnemooseus


    
Modulous
Member (Idle past 364 days)
Posts: 7789
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005


Message 340 of 877 (834356)
06-03-2018 10:41 PM
Reply to: Message 333 by Faith
06-03-2018 9:48 PM


Re: Geo Column, Depositional Environments, etc
LOOK AT THE STRATA IN THAT PICTURE. JUST LOOK,. NO LAKE BED, NO SALT FLAT, NO FIELD, NO BEACH, IS THAT FLAT. JUST LOOK.

How flat is that flat? Does this apply to lake beds that are squashed by millions of tonnes of material? Just looking only gets us so far, we need to apply reason and reference actual measurements. Salt flats - which are former lakebeds - certainly pass your yardstick challenge for how flat they are.

I'm afraid yelling at me isn't persuasive. I thought you were protesting "a flat {haha, a retrospective pun - mod} assertion of what purports to be fact" but here you are making 'pontifical declaration of dogma.'

So if it wasn't caused by a large pool of water slowly draining or evaporating away, and then being buried under tonnes of rock - since that would not cause it to be that flat (although you don't seem to want to explain how you know this nor do you seem willing to provide measurements for how flat it is)...what was it that caused it?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 333 by Faith, posted 06-03-2018 9:48 PM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 341 by Faith, posted 06-04-2018 7:09 AM Modulous has responded

  
Faith
Member
Posts: 32956
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 341 of 877 (834357)
06-04-2018 7:09 AM
Reply to: Message 340 by Modulous
06-03-2018 10:41 PM


Re: Geo Column, Depositional Environments, etc
Where do all the tons come from, what are they made of, where do they go when the rock is a layer in that hill? Which it won't be in any case because edge said those layers are limestone and volcanic ash. And yes I don't see how it's going to make anything as flat as the strata in that hill. And no, I have no evidence. And neither do you or anybody else.

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 340 by Modulous, posted 06-03-2018 10:41 PM Modulous has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 351 by Modulous, posted 06-04-2018 9:41 AM Faith has not yet responded

    
Faith
Member
Posts: 32956
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 342 of 877 (834358)
06-04-2018 7:13 AM
Reply to: Message 335 by edge
06-03-2018 9:53 PM


Re: Geo Column, Depositional Environments, etc
However, they are lake bottoms
And they are flat.
And why couldn't they be muds rather than salt? In fact, many are.

You said the layers in the hill are limestone and volcanic ash.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 335 by edge, posted 06-03-2018 9:53 PM edge has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 366 by edge, posted 06-04-2018 8:42 PM Faith has not yet responded
 Message 367 by Percy, posted 06-04-2018 9:06 PM Faith has not yet responded

    
Faith
Member
Posts: 32956
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 343 of 877 (834359)
06-04-2018 7:16 AM
Reply to: Message 321 by Tangle
06-03-2018 4:46 PM


Re: Geo Column, Depositional Environments, etc
Fiath, if you put a heavy iron on a creased and crumpled towel what happens?

You get pressed-in creases and crumples.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 321 by Tangle, posted 06-03-2018 4:46 PM Tangle has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 347 by Tangle, posted 06-04-2018 8:00 AM Faith has responded

    
Faith
Member
Posts: 32956
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 344 of 877 (834360)
06-04-2018 7:27 AM
Reply to: Message 329 by Modulous
06-03-2018 6:32 PM


Re: Geo Column, Depositional Environments, etc
They are so flat you can travel 400 mph in a land vehicle across them. Visible ups and downs over a few yards would make this impossible.

OK, conceded. So any ups and downs would occur over greater distances.

Is the strtigraphy considerably flatter than this? Do you have measurements?

Yes it is considerably flatter, you can see it with your eyes.

You are engaged in mystification through pontification here.

Actually not. You are just doing the usual tit for tat that is so popular here without bothering to understand what I meant when I used those terms.

But you tell me - what happens when you squash something?
a) it gets flatter
b) it gets less flat

Depends on what's being squashed and what's doing the squashing. FlattER, but not necessarily really flat.

What would be the effect of piling rock and earth onto something so it squashes it so much it becomes rock?
a) it gets flatter
b) it gets less flat
c) no impact

Depends on the distribution of weight. It could make depressions and lumps rather than flatness, highly compacted no doubt, quite hard, but not necessarily straight and flat, no..

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 329 by Modulous, posted 06-03-2018 6:32 PM Modulous has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 354 by Modulous, posted 06-04-2018 9:52 AM Faith has not yet responded
 Message 371 by Percy, posted 06-05-2018 12:31 PM Faith has responded

    
Faith
Member
Posts: 32956
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 345 of 877 (834361)
06-04-2018 7:39 AM
Reply to: Message 329 by Modulous
06-03-2018 6:32 PM


Re: Geo Column, Depositional Environments, etc
But we're talking about lakebeds which sometimes dry out to leave a salt flat or alkali flat.

No, we are talking about that colorfully stratified hill and edge said they were limestone and volcanic ash.

Flat is quite common with these in any case - in contrast to your statement that lakebeds aren't all that flat. How many strata are all that flat?

Most of them.

May I ask about Valles Marineris? It's a much bigger canyon than the Grand Canyon. Was this caused by a divine flood too?

To say the GC was "caused by a divine flood" is to miss everything I've said about it. As for Valles Marineris the latest theory is that it was caused by tectonic movement.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 329 by Modulous, posted 06-03-2018 6:32 PM Modulous has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 355 by Modulous, posted 06-04-2018 9:55 AM Faith has not yet responded

    
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019