Register | Sign In

Understanding through Discussion

EvC Forum active members: 58 (9175 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: sirs
Post Volume: Total: 917,653 Year: 4,910/9,624 Month: 258/427 Week: 4/64 Day: 0/2 Hour: 0/0

Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Author Topic:   The Gulf of Mexico is Not a Sea
Member (Idle past 1493 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004

Message 10 of 15 (860513)
08-08-2019 11:01 AM
Reply to: Message 8 by Faith
08-07-2019 3:58 PM

... Yes, I've been saying that it was land when the strata were deposited and then it sank.
And I said later that it is not NOW sea floor because it sank after the strata of the geological column were in place, ...
And it wasn't eroded away, so it was and still IS part of the geological column.
There is net deposition in the Gulf.
The geological column is not over and done with.
Time to dodge again?
Like you have dodged the issue of Green River Formation -- Varves, Fossils, Time and Geological Columns

It formed in the Eocene period and is part of the geological column for that age in that area. It is adjacent to The Grand Canyon (the Green River is tributary to the Colorado River).
Yet this formation is curiously absent from the Grand Canyon stratigraphy ... how do you explain this absence when chronologically it was laid down during the formation of the Grand Canyon stratigraphy?
How do you explain the very thin varve layers, "mean thickness of a varve here is 0.18 mm," of alternating light and dark layers of very fine sediment (and we have talked about how long it takes to deposit very fine material from suspension in water)? There are over 6 million pairs of alternating light and dark layers ...
How do you explain the different rock types that are part of the formation ... and particularly the layers of volcanic ash within/between the varve layers?
How do you explain the layers of evaporite minerals within the varve layers?
Note the correspondence of layer times with radiometric dates. How do you explain this?
Note that the areas of deposition shifted over the time period of deposition in a way that corresponds with astrochronological dates. How do you explain this?
This all left a "continuous record of six million years" of evolution in this area ... how did the fossils get sorted by radiometric age? How did the radiometric isotopes get sorted with depth in the formation?
The overall deposition was so gentle (" ... The limestone matrix is so fine-grained that fossils include rare soft parts of complete insects and fallen leaves in spectacular detail ...") that these fossils were not torn up. How does this mesh with your model for the formation of the "geological column/time scale" in this area?
Answer these questions HERE
If you care.
Edited by RAZD, : clrty

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 8 by Faith, posted 08-07-2019 3:58 PM Faith 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