Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 85 (8924 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 08-17-2019 9:22 AM
26 online now:
PaulK, Tangle (2 members, 24 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: Jedothek
Post Volume:
Total: 859,832 Year: 14,868/19,786 Month: 1,591/3,058 Week: 369/868 Day: 8/70 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
RewPrev1
...
79808182
83
84Next
Author Topic:   Did the Flood really happen?
Faith
Member
Posts: 32605
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 1231 of 1255 (860882)
08-12-2019 9:04 PM
Reply to: Message 1230 by DrJones*
08-12-2019 5:42 PM


Re: Basics Faith, basics.
02
+2
04
This message is a reply to:
 Message 1230 by DrJones*, posted 08-12-2019 5:42 PM DrJones* has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 1232 by AZPaul3, posted 08-12-2019 9:14 PM Faith has acknowledged this reply

    
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 4380
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 3.2


Message 1232 of 1255 (860883)
08-12-2019 9:14 PM
Reply to: Message 1231 by Faith
08-12-2019 9:04 PM


Re: Basics Faith, basics.
02
+2
04

Except in ternary that is 11.


Eschew obfuscation. Habituate elucidation.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1231 by Faith, posted 08-12-2019 9:04 PM Faith has acknowledged this reply

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 15315
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.6


(1)
Message 1233 of 1255 (860892)
08-13-2019 1:36 AM
Reply to: Message 1228 by Faith
08-12-2019 4:07 PM


Re: Basics Faith, basics.
quote:
Cuz the way the strata look suggests something that happened all at the same time, not separately to the separate strata, rather after all the strata were laid down, and since all the time periods are represented in both cases, or at least the overall span of them is represented, whatever happened happened globally at the same time. Didn't I already say that?

One tectonic event happening to all the strata after they were all laid down, doesn’t mean that all the tectonic events happened to all the strata after they were laid down. That is simply an assumption you make in spite of the evidence.

Moreover, given the time scales we get from the evidence you can’t even justify the assumption that it is a single global event.

quote:
I don't accept this whole theory about erosion though, but since it involves millions of years erosion would have to have leveled both areas, and not take anywhere near that amount of time to do it either.

And there is another rationalisation. You don’t know how long the rocks were exposed to erosion, or the strength of the erosional forces involved. We certainly can see that erosion happened but your idea that much more should have happened is just a baseless assumption

quote:
Even on the standard interpretation we're talking global timing right?

Wrong.

quote:
The time periods don't exist in just one part of the world separately, they exist all over the world at the same time

In the same sense that the year 2019 “exists” all over the world. Time periods are periods of time.

quote:
All the strata would have been deposited in the same time frame.

In the standard time frame - which we are discussing - the Kaibab Limestone at the Grand Canyon was not deposited at the same time as the chalk underlying the English Downs.

quote:
However, the evidence for that timing is also good evidence for a single event, i.e. the Flood.

That thinking is why you pretend to have evidence that all the tectonic events happened at the same time. When the reality is that you have to deny or explain away evidence to the contrary.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1228 by Faith, posted 08-12-2019 4:07 PM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 1234 by Faith, posted 08-13-2019 2:42 AM PaulK has responded
 Message 1236 by Minnemooseus, posted 08-13-2019 4:08 AM PaulK has not yet responded

    
Faith
Member
Posts: 32605
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 1234 of 1255 (860894)
08-13-2019 2:42 AM
Reply to: Message 1233 by PaulK
08-13-2019 1:36 AM


Re: Basics Faith, basics.
In the standard time frame - which we are discussing - the Kaibab Limestone at the Grand Canyon was not deposited at the same time as the chalk underlying the English Downs.

You've probably given the evidence for this already, but would you present it again? Thanks.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1233 by PaulK, posted 08-13-2019 1:36 AM PaulK has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 1235 by PaulK, posted 08-13-2019 3:11 AM Faith has not yet responded

    
PaulK
Member
Posts: 15315
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.6


Message 1235 of 1255 (860895)
08-13-2019 3:11 AM
Reply to: Message 1234 by Faith
08-13-2019 2:42 AM


Re: Basics Faith, basics.
The Kaibab Limestone is Permian. The chalk is visible on the cross-section of Britain - labelled Cretaceous (which shouldn’t be a surprise).

The Permian would roughly correspond to the New Red label on the cross section.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1234 by Faith, posted 08-13-2019 2:42 AM Faith has not yet responded

    
Minnemooseus
Member
Posts: 3748
From: Duluth, Minnesota, U.S. (West end of Lake Superior)
Joined: 11-11-2001
Member Rating: 2.9


(1)
Message 1236 of 1255 (860898)
08-13-2019 4:08 AM
Reply to: Message 1233 by PaulK
08-13-2019 1:36 AM


Wild interpretations of simplified big picture illustrations (OSLT)
I never ceases to boggle me, about how you people can get into such discussions of details when your data source is a simplified big picture diagram. There is a lot of real world detail that is not captured by those big picture "cartoons".

quote:
Cuz the way the strata look suggests something that happened all at the same time, not separately to the separate strata, rather after all the strata were laid down, and since all the time periods are represented in both cases, or at least the overall span of them is represented, whatever happened happened globally at the same time. Didn't I already say that?

One tectonic event happening to all the strata after they were all laid down, doesn’t mean that all the tectonic events happened to all the strata after they were laid down. That is simply an assumption you make in spite of the evidence.

First of all, one shouldn't assume that deposition, deformation, and erosion are sequential processes operating independent of each other. It's not deposition, then deformation, then erosion. Deformation may well be happening while deposition is ongoing, and there certainly is going to be erosion and redeposition of the eroded material while deformation is ongoing.

PaulK's first sentence of the first paragraph really gave me a "there's some weird syntax doing on here" feeling. I repeat it:

One tectonic event happening to all the strata after they were all laid down, doesn’t mean that all the tectonic events happened to all the strata after they were laid down. That is simply an assumption you make in spite of the evidence.

Any deformation isn't going to happen to any strata before the strata was laid down. So that sentence would be better stated as:

One tectonic event happening to all the strata, doesn’t mean that all the tectonic events happened to all the strata.

At the Siccar Point angular unconformity, there was most likely erosion and redeposition while the older Silurian rocks were being folded and tilted. I don't offhand have the petrology down, but the upper Devonian rocks were at least in part derived from the erosion of the Silurian - There are clasts of the Silurian now part of the Devonian rocks.

Anyway, the deformed Silurian rocks were later further deformed at the same time the Devonian rocks were.

As a side note, a perhaps odd situation in one pre-Cambrian rock unit in northern Minnesota. There is a large unit called the Knife Lake Group (or is it Supergroup?). Anyway, a pretty thick stack of sediments. The lower part of the Knife Lake is intruded by the Saganaga "Granite" (actually a tonalite, IIRC). Anyway, a generally granitic type intrusion. The Knife Lake is contact metamorphosed by the Saganaga and both the Knife Lake and the Saganaga are deformed, with the Saganaga crystal structure showing pronounced stretching. But the kicker of this situation is that distinctive cobbles of the stretched Saganaga are found deposited in the more upper part of the Knife Lake.

So, the general sequence would be, deposition of Knife Lake sediments, then intrusion by the Saganaga while deposition of the Knife Lake continued, then deformation of the Knife Lake and the Saganaga while the deposition of the Knife Lake continued, then erosion of the Knife Lake and Saganaga in one area while the deposition of the Knife Lake continued in another area.

Nutshell - You have the same intrusion intruding and metamorphising a thick sedimentary unit, and later have that same intrusion supplying sediment to a later part of that thick sedimentary unit. Sedimentation, intrusion, metamorphism, deformation, erosion all happened while deposition was ongoing. Or something like that. I don't have time span information for how long that all took.

Critiques of my reasonings certainly welcome.

Moose

Added by edit - A couple of Saganaga Granite links:

https://www.jstor.org/stable/30056034?seq=1#page_scan_tab...
https://www.nrcresearchpress.com/...139/e71-097#.XVJwamR7nIU

Edited by Minnemooseus, : Added by edit.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1233 by PaulK, posted 08-13-2019 1:36 AM PaulK has not yet responded

    
Percy
Member
Posts: 18794
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 2.2


(3)
Message 1237 of 1255 (860902)
08-13-2019 7:13 AM
Reply to: Message 1226 by Faith
08-12-2019 3:13 PM


Re: Basics Faith, basics.
Faith writes:

It doesn't look like draping to anyone but you.

Perhaps not the best simile though they do look drapish to me. But they also look sort of like they've been blown by the wind toward the east or is it the west, to the right anyway.

West is to the left, east is to the right, like on any map since forever.

They look like they fell beneath the sea level line...

Why do you think they "fell"? Strata are rock all the way down to basement rock which is just more rock all the way down to where it melts. There is no hole or depression or whatever for the strata to fall into. We need to understand why you keep describing them as falling, because without that explanation all we can answer is that we see nothing that indicates falling.

... and got misshapen in the process.

Until we know why you think the strata fell it isn't possible to respond to this.

There's no expectation that the American west and the UK should be equally smooth. They're hugely distant from each other and have experienced completely different geologic histories.

It seems to me that if erosion is going to smooth out a rough surface in the same span of time in two different parts of the world-- and it IS the same span of time -- you can tell by how it's all the same time periods in both places --, anyway, it does seem to me that the time factor should smooth out both surfaces just because we're talking millions of years.

Again, the two widely separated regions experienced different geologic histories. For example, when one was above sea level and experiencing erosion the other might have been below sea level and experiencing deposition.

My theory of course is that the Flood covered the whole planet, it laid down sedimentary strata all over that planet all in the same time period,...

Contradicted by radiometric dating.

Also contradicted by strata not being ordered by size/density of sediments.

Also contradicted by the fact that there are many, many strata in any local geologic column, instead of all sand settling into one layer, all mudstone/clay into another, all limestone into another, and all pelagic sediments into another.

Also contradicted by the many layers of strata that are in an order consistent with Walther's Law.

Also contradicted by the many unconformities.

Also contradicted by the way fossil types appear in specific strata instead of scattered across all strata.

Also contradicted by the increasing difference of fossils from modern forms with increasing depth.

...and at the end of the Flood there was a massive tectonic upheaval...

"Massive tectonic upheaval" is vague, and no evidence for it is identified.

...that may have caused the receding of the Flood,...

Seas will recede from uplifted land, but that doesn't cause the water that is claimed to have been added to the Earth by rain and by the fountains of the deep (for which there is also no evidence) to go away.

...and all the deformities we see of all the strata everywhere on earth, AND the angular unconformities, particularly the Great Unconformity, were the result of that one great event,...

Unconformities, angular or otherwise, cannot be created in buried strata. They must be exposed first.

...and it also was connected with the beginning of volcanic activity as the tectonic plates began to move and separate the continents.

Contradicted by dating of volcanic activity and deposits.

Also contradicted by the history of tectonic plate movements.

And I'd say there is some evidence for such a chain of events in the fact that those strata on the surface of the UK island don't look like they underwent tectonic upheavals in separate time periods millions of years apart,...

Contradicted by the details in the UK cross section itself, in particular the unconformities.

...they look too similar to each other across the surface of the island,...

So vague as to be content free.

...same tilt etc....

Contradicted by details in the diagram showing different tilts, for example strata bent nearly 45° from a descending slant to an ascending slant, and ending in an unconformity:





And also contradicted another example of opposite tilt:





...suggesting whatever happened to them happened to all of them all at once.

Everything in the UK cross sections suggests the opposite: multiple episodes of uplift, subsidence, sea level rise, sea level fall, deposition and erosion.

--Percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1226 by Faith, posted 08-12-2019 3:13 PM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 1238 by Faith, posted 08-13-2019 11:11 AM Percy has not yet responded
 Message 1239 by Faith, posted 08-13-2019 11:33 AM Percy has not yet responded
 Message 1248 by Faith, posted 08-14-2019 1:05 PM Percy has not yet responded

    
Faith
Member
Posts: 32605
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 1238 of 1255 (860917)
08-13-2019 11:11 AM
Reply to: Message 1237 by Percy
08-13-2019 7:13 AM


Re: Basics Faith, basics.
They look like they "fell" --- or perhaps' "sank" would say it better? -- because originally they had to have been deposited as all the geological column are normally deposited, as horizontal layers stacked vertically. I realize this has been disputed here but you know I'm not going to go with that. Anyway, since I'm thinking of that as their original position, which I see as having been stacked on top of the island, it just looks like they "fell" from that position to their current position beneath the island, especially considering the great degree of deformation they exhibit. I assume they weren't yet rock when the shift in position occurred, and I can't say it's easy to understand how it could have happened anyway: it merely LOOKS like that's what had to happen. There's no way to make sense of the idea that they were deposited as we see them now. Big eyeroll from me if that's what you are all saying.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1237 by Percy, posted 08-13-2019 7:13 AM Percy has not yet responded

    
Faith
Member
Posts: 32605
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 1239 of 1255 (860918)
08-13-2019 11:33 AM
Reply to: Message 1237 by Percy
08-13-2019 7:13 AM


Re: Basics Faith, basics.
Again, the two widely separated regions experienced different geologic histories. For example, when one was above sea level and experiencing erosion the other might have been below sea level and experiencing deposition.

They LOOK LIKE they experienced very similar geological histories. That is, the strata WERE all laid down first, BEFORE the tectonic force deformed them, left the tilted ends above the island and the rest of their length beneath it so very deformed as we see it. The Grand Canyon and Grand Staircase strata were all laid down before the tectonic upheaval that tilted the Supergroup and cut the canyon s well as Zion Canyon and the cliffs of the staircase to the north, and the receding Flood water scoured off the Kaibab plateau and the Coconino plateau etc. First the stacking, then the deformation.

You say you don't see a massive upheaval in that UK cross section despite the massive deformation of the strata which certainly would not have been deposited in that condition.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1237 by Percy, posted 08-13-2019 7:13 AM Percy has not yet responded

    
Percy
Member
Posts: 18794
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 1240 of 1255 (860934)
08-13-2019 7:16 PM
Reply to: Message 1229 by Faith
08-12-2019 4:26 PM


Re: How Geologic Processes Create a Horizontal Sequence on the Surface
Faith writes:

If that is supposed to be your illustration of my vision it's not what I have in mind. The strata should be pushed up as a tent, both sides tilted to either side of the mountain, no horizontal parts left on each side.

Yes, I know, that's why I asked for a description of where the horizontal parts go, but you didn't tell me.

This will eventually be a sequence of diagrams, but all I've been showing is the first two because you objected to the horizontal parts in the second diagram, which shows the strata just as the granite has thrust up into it on the extreme west end of the island. The rest of what you described about falling and broken upper parts and spreading out on the surface and falling beneath the surface and distorting will all come later.

So let me try asking again. We start with this:


G ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > G
F ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------> F
E ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------> E
D ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------> D
C ------------------------------------------------------------------ CURRENT SEA LEVEL -----> C
B ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------> B
A ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------> A

Then granite thrusts up into the strata like this:


/|_ _|\
/ / |__ __| \ \
/ / / / |__ __| \ \ \ \
/ / / / / / /\ \ \ \ \ \ \
/ / / / / / / \ \ \ \ \ \ \
/ / / / / / / \ \ \ \ \ \ \
/ / / / / / / \ \ \ \ \ \ \
/ / / / / / / \ \ \ \ \ \ \
/ / / / / / / \ \ \ \ \ \ \
/ / / / / / / \ \ \ \ \ \ \
/ / / / / / / \ \ \ \ \ \ \
/ / / / / / / \ \ \ \ \ \ \
/ / / / / / / G R A N I T E \ \ \ \ \ \ \
/ / / / / / / \ \ \ \ \ \ \
/ / / / / / / \ \ \ \ \ \ \
G -------------- / / / / / / \ \ \ \ \ \ --------------------------- > G
F --------------- / / / / / \ \ \ \ \ -----------------------------> F
E ---------------- / / / / \ \ \ \ ------------------------------> E
D ----------------- / / / \ \ \ -------------------------------> D
C ------------------ / / \ \ -------- CURRENT SEA LEVEL -----> C
B ------------------- / \ ---------------------------------> B
A -------------------- ----------------------------------> A

But you don't think the horizontal strata should be there, so we need a diagram between these two showing where the horizontal strata go. If you just tell me I'll diagram it.

Please just reply to the paragraph above. We'll get to all the falling and so forth later.

--Percy

Edited by Percy, : Improve 2nd diagram.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1229 by Faith, posted 08-12-2019 4:26 PM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 1241 by Faith, posted 08-13-2019 7:25 PM Percy has responded

    
Faith
Member
Posts: 32605
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 1241 of 1255 (860935)
08-13-2019 7:25 PM
Reply to: Message 1240 by Percy
08-13-2019 7:16 PM


Re: How Geologic Processes Create a Horizontal Sequence on the Surface
I thought I explained: the sides slope out like the sides of a tent. They don't bend as you have them. Farther out to the side they may become horizontal again but without a bend.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 1240 by Percy, posted 08-13-2019 7:16 PM Percy has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 1242 by Percy, posted 08-13-2019 9:19 PM Faith has responded

    
Percy
Member
Posts: 18794
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 1242 of 1255 (860936)
08-13-2019 9:19 PM
Reply to: Message 1241 by Faith
08-13-2019 7:25 PM


Re: How Geologic Processes Create a Horizontal Sequence on the Surface
Faith writes:

I thought I explained: the sides slope out like the sides of a tent.

Okay. I need to understand how what you describe differs from what the diagram shows now. Right now the diagram shows the granite pushing up into the strata to create an inverted "V" shape, which is the shape of a pup tent or a teepee. What kind of tent shape would you like to see instead, keeping in mind that this is character graphics, not a freehand drawing?

They don't bend as you have them. Farther out to the side they may become horizontal again but without a bend.

Are you saying the sides should descend in a curve that gradually becomes horizontal? If so then again, character graphics, and I think what is shown is fine. People will understand that there's only so much you can do with character graphics.

--Percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1241 by Faith, posted 08-13-2019 7:25 PM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 1243 by Faith, posted 08-13-2019 11:17 PM Percy has not yet responded

    
Faith
Member
Posts: 32605
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 1243 of 1255 (860939)
08-13-2019 11:17 PM
Reply to: Message 1242 by Percy
08-13-2019 9:19 PM


Re: How Geologic Processes Create a Horizontal Sequence on the Surface
Not a curve, just a sloped or slanted line.

The broken-off tops of the right side strata as you've drawn them have to end up as the tilted upper parts of the strata that we see along the surface of the island, with the rest of their lengths beneath the island. With that sharp bend in it at the base of your upside down V I don't see how it's going to work.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1242 by Percy, posted 08-13-2019 9:19 PM Percy has not yet responded

    
RAZD
Member
Posts: 20028
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 2.9


(1)
Message 1244 of 1255 (860949)
08-14-2019 12:25 PM
Reply to: Message 1047 by Faith
08-05-2019 12:08 PM


Green River Varve timing -- update
Faith, I am updating information on the timing of the Green River Varves in comparison to the Grand Canyon.

They are an Eocene epoch formation, the Eocene is part of the Cenozoic era. Geological Time Scale (wiki).

The existing layers of the Grand Canyon were laid down prior to this, during the Paleozoic and Mesozoic eras, and the erosion of the plateau, and then the carving of the Grand Canyon occurred in the Cenozoic era.

There is a very interesting and information filled pdf graphic at Geologic Time Line of the Grand Canyon:

This graphic shows information on paleogeography, sea levels, rocks, tectonism, magmatism, and life. +There is a geological column in the center with additional detail v other columns that have been posted.

What this shows is the order that everything occurred in the Grand Canyon area (including the staircase).

There is also a lot of back-up text there too, from the U of Arizona. The second page has a cross section of the Canyon.

What this means for the Green River Formation is that it (deposition of fine sediment varves of alternating color, over 6 million pairs) occurred while the Grand Canyon was being formed (eroded).

Enjoy

Edited by RAZD, : +

Edited by RAZD, : test signature


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel•American•Zen•Deist
... 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 1047 by Faith, posted 08-05-2019 12:08 PM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 1245 by Faith, posted 08-14-2019 12:34 PM RAZD has responded

  
Faith
Member
Posts: 32605
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 1245 of 1255 (860951)
08-14-2019 12:34 PM
Reply to: Message 1244 by RAZD
08-14-2019 12:25 PM


Re: Green River Varve timing -- update
I know this always sounds like a vapid excuse but I can't read that bright white chart. I also should add I suppose that I'm so allergic to the standard interpretation of these things I just get motivated to shore up the Flood interpretation against it all anyway. And I DO think it makes a lot more sense Razzyman, despite the timing problems. It's ONLY the timing problems that are the problem.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 1244 by RAZD, posted 08-14-2019 12:25 PM RAZD has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 1246 by jar, posted 08-14-2019 12:45 PM Faith has not yet responded
 Message 1247 by JonF, posted 08-14-2019 1:01 PM Faith has responded
 Message 1250 by RAZD, posted 08-14-2019 1:32 PM Faith has not yet responded
 Message 1252 by JonF, posted 08-14-2019 2:13 PM Faith has responded

    
RewPrev1
...
79808182
83
84Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019