Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
5 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 13/17 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Polystrate Telephone Pole and Bridge Observed in Philippines
Bill Birkeland
Member (Idle past 2531 days)
Posts: 165
From: Louisiana
Joined: 01-30-2003


Message 1 of 12 (64262)
11-03-2003 10:29 PM


While taking time off from learning ARCGIS, I was browsing through a copy of "Fire and Mud, Eruptions and Lahars of Mount Pinatubo, Philippines", edited by C. G. Newhall and R. S. Punongbayan that one of the geologists at the GCAGS Meeting gave me. On page 52, Figure 18F, I found a picture that any aficionado of polystrate fossils would greatly appreciate. This figure showed a 2nd generation polystrate telephone pole. The "1st generation" 10-meter-tall telephone, which it replaced, was completely buried along with part of the town of Mancatian by a series of lahars from Mt. Pinatubo. When the original telephone pole was buried sufficiently to render it useless, a second 10-meter-tall telephone pole, the one shown in the picture, was erected. In the picture, it has been buried to the extent that less than the top two-meters of it remains protruding above the ground's surface at the time the picture was taken.
Given that both telephone poles were buried by a series of lahars over a period of time, they are entombed not by one layer (stratum) but by a series of series of layers (strata) that were deposited over an extended period of time. Thus, they are actual polystrate telephone poles, which were buried much as trees have been buried downslope of large volcanoes in the past as evidenced by polystrate trees found in older volcanic deposits of Mt. Pinatubo examined by USGS geologists and discussed elsewhere in this book. Within the vicinity of this telephone pole, there is part of a town, including a polystrate glass factory and polystrate houses, buried by the same series of volcanic mudflows (lahars). A series of pictures show the gradual buried of this town by a succession of lahars, in case, some enterprising Young Earth creationist should argue that these polystrate "fossils" weren't recently formed and in fact are direct evidence of an ancient Pre-Flood civilization. :-) :-)
Figure 14A and Figure 14B on page 42 of the above book shows before and after pictures of a house that was buried by a single lahar that dumped some 9 meters of sediment, which buried not only it but the river channel beside which it was built. Around it were a considerable number of trees, which the lahar also buried. In another case, Figures 27A and 27B, a bridge was buried, not swept away, by the accumulation of about 25 meters of lahar deposits over a period of two years within the valley of the Bucao River at the base of Mt. Pinatubo. In this case, a polystrate bridge was created while geologists watched. Thus, there is nothing extraordinary about polystrate trees, much less polystrate telephone poles, houses, and bridges being found entombed within volcanic deposits.
Having observed unconsolidated ash and weathered volcanic deposits washed off of volcanoes after eruptions bury entire towns, a geologist has to wonder why Young Earth creationists can get so excited over polystrate fossil trees. Given that in Central America, Philippines, and elsewhere. a person can find polystrate trees, houses, buildings, telephone poles, bridges, and so forth created by historic volcanic eruptions and entombed in sediments that are identical to those enclosing the Yellowstone Petrified Forests, a person has to wonder what the fuss is all about.
Also, at the GCAGS Meeting, I heard about a 4-meter-(12-foot)-tall tree that was buried upright in natural levee deposits along the Atchafalaya River in Louisiana. Archaeologists found it in a backhoe trench and a report describing it in detail will be published in 3 to 4 months. It is a true polystrate "fossil" in that it was buried between 1860 and 1960 by a series of floods that buried it in multiple layers (strata) of alternating reddish (Red River) and greyish (Mississippi River) colored silt. In this case, there is a real polystrate fossil that was created, not by a global flood, but by the Mississippi River changing its course into the Atchafalaya River and the accumulation of sediments during a series of Red River and Mississippi River floods. Also, elsewhere in the area, the archaeologists found partially bured polystrate cypress stumps still sticking up of the ground and surrounded by 1 to 2.5 meters of historic sediment. This buried polystrate tree and partially buried stumps clearly demonstrate that non-catastrophic processes under the right circumstances can create polystrate trees contrary to what is erroneously argued by some Young Earth creationists.
Yours,
Bill Birkeland
GCAGS = Gulf Coast Association of Geological Societies.
[This message has been edited by Bill Birkeland, 11-03-2003]

Replies to this message:
 Message 2 by roxrkool, posted 11-04-2003 11:49 AM Bill Birkeland has not replied
 Message 10 by Jex, posted 06-19-2004 12:49 AM Bill Birkeland has not replied

  
roxrkool
Member (Idle past 989 days)
Posts: 1497
From: Nevada
Joined: 03-23-2003


Message 2 of 12 (64375)
11-04-2003 11:49 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by Bill Birkeland
11-03-2003 10:29 PM


Funny thing is, if you weren't involved in the creation/evolution debate, you'd never think twice about the significance of polystrate trees... or telephone poles.
Thing is, if all the scientists actually got together and took the time to methodically address all the silly creationist claims, YECism would quickly fall by the wayside, exposed as the pseudoscience it is. The number of tiny details that YECs can never address or even want to address is astounding.
By the way, I am also in the process of learning ArcGIS (for the last 4 months or so). Whoa! What a steep learning curve that requires. Good luck.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Bill Birkeland, posted 11-03-2003 10:29 PM Bill Birkeland has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 3 by IrishRockhound, posted 11-04-2003 1:42 PM roxrkool has not replied

  
IrishRockhound
Member (Idle past 4436 days)
Posts: 569
From: Ireland
Joined: 05-19-2003


Message 3 of 12 (64389)
11-04-2003 1:42 PM
Reply to: Message 2 by roxrkool
11-04-2003 11:49 AM


I've used it before - powerful tool, but a real pain in the butt to get used to.
YEC's still annoy the hell out of me. I really want someone to join in my field study thread - even an evolutionist, just anyone who might be able to pose a YEC explanation. Otherwise I'll declare that the evidence cannot be refuted and the Earth is indeed old
The Rock Hound

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2 by roxrkool, posted 11-04-2003 11:49 AM roxrkool has not replied

  
Will_Drotar
Inactive Member


Message 4 of 12 (67556)
11-18-2003 8:16 PM


What would be those non-catastrophic events that would create polystrate trees?

Replies to this message:
 Message 5 by zephyr, posted 11-18-2003 9:58 PM Will_Drotar has replied
 Message 8 by Bill Birkeland, posted 11-20-2003 2:06 PM Will_Drotar has not replied

  
zephyr
Member (Idle past 4550 days)
Posts: 821
From: FOB Taji, Iraq
Joined: 04-22-2003


Message 5 of 12 (67588)
11-18-2003 9:58 PM
Reply to: Message 4 by Will_Drotar
11-18-2003 8:16 PM


Are you kidding?
Sedimentation. Localized floods like the annual flooding of the Nile. Basically, anything that produces strata can produce polystrate trees if the trunks stand there long enough.
By the way, why do you ask and what is the relevance of the question?
Are you going to claim that conventional geology denies the rapid formation of any strata whatsoever?
This ought to be good.
**********************************
Edit:
Upon re-reading post 1, I realized I (like you, apparently) had missed where he EXPLICITLY DESCRIBED the non-catastrophic event that produced polystrate trees. I'm embarassed, as you should be.
[This message has been edited by zephyr, 11-18-2003]

This message is a reply to:
 Message 4 by Will_Drotar, posted 11-18-2003 8:16 PM Will_Drotar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 6 by Will_Drotar, posted 11-19-2003 3:26 PM zephyr has replied

  
Will_Drotar
Inactive Member


Message 6 of 12 (67761)
11-19-2003 3:26 PM
Reply to: Message 5 by zephyr
11-18-2003 9:58 PM


Besides the obvious- sedimentation. I mean, are there any other natural phenomenon of a non-catastrophic nature that might create polystrate-anything?
I just like to think ahead to see how YEC's might twist this to support their claim that just because something is found deep in geological strata doesn't evidence its old age. Chill man. TTYL Jesus loves you!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by zephyr, posted 11-18-2003 9:58 PM zephyr has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 7 by zephyr, posted 11-19-2003 3:59 PM Will_Drotar has not replied

  
zephyr
Member (Idle past 4550 days)
Posts: 821
From: FOB Taji, Iraq
Joined: 04-22-2003


Message 7 of 12 (67772)
11-19-2003 3:59 PM
Reply to: Message 6 by Will_Drotar
11-19-2003 3:26 PM


Too bad the feeling isn't mutual
I've had the teeth out a little more lately, for whatever reason. Hope you don't mind.
Well, underwater there are banks of fine sand formed entirely of the shells of tiny exoskeletal creatures. Hardly different from sedimentation. I'm drawing a blank on other causes.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 6 by Will_Drotar, posted 11-19-2003 3:26 PM Will_Drotar has not replied

  
Bill Birkeland
Member (Idle past 2531 days)
Posts: 165
From: Louisiana
Joined: 01-30-2003


Message 8 of 12 (68020)
11-20-2003 2:06 PM
Reply to: Message 4 by Will_Drotar
11-18-2003 8:16 PM


On Nov.18, 2003, Will_Drotar wrote:
"What would be those non-catastrophic
events that would create polystrate trees?"
In case of the Philippines, not only are polystrate trees, which in time will become polystrate fossils, being formed, but also polystrate telephone poles, polystrate glass factories, other polystrate buildings, and so forth. That geologists can watch all manner of polystrate features being formed by burial in real time alone refutes the Young Earth creationist argument that only a massive global catastrophe can create polystrate fossils.
A picture of the polystrate telephone pole can be seen in "Photographic Record of Rapid Geomorphic Change at Mount Pinatubo", 1991-94 by Raymundo S. Punongbayan, Christopher G. Newhall, and Richard P. Hoblitt at:
http://pubs.usgs.gov/pinatubo/punong1/index.html
specifically at:
http://pubs.usgs.gov/pinatubo/punong1/fig18f.jpg
"A second-generation, 10-m-tall buried
telephone pole (the first generation was
completely buried). Remains of the glass
factory are in the background. The budding
scientist in the photograph was spray
painting marks at 2-m elevations on
third-generation posts, such as that in
the background. (C.G. Newhall, August 13,
1994)"
The non-catastrophic process creating this polystrate telephone pole consist simply of torrential tropical rains eroding the enormous amount of loose volcanic material that accumulated on the slopes of Mount Pinatubo beacause of a massive eruption. Each of a series of torrential rains eroded these volcanic sediments with each creating a volcanic mud flow (lahar) that moved down stream / river. As each lahar flowed downriver, it filled valleys and buried the landscape adjacent to the river with an additional layer of sediment. In many places in valleys and along to rivers and streams, the accumulation of sediment was thick enough over a period of weeks to years to bury trees, telephone poles, houses, and other tall objects.
In another example, non-catastorphic processes completely and deeply buried the "bridge to Poonbato, Botolan, Zambales, across the Bucao River" under volcanic mud flow (lahar) deposits. Because the deposits accumulated as the result of multiple lahars, the bridge is buried, not by a single layer of volcanic sediments, but multiple layers resulting in the formation of a polystrate bridge.
The before picture can be seen in figure 27A at:
http://pubs.usgs.gov/pinatubo/punong1/fig27a.jpg
The after picture can be seen in figure 27B at:
http://pubs.usgs.gov/pinatubo/punong1/fig27b.jpg
"Poonbato bridge was buried (but not swept
away) by lahars of 1991 and 1992. Deposits
are approximately 25 m thick. Barangay
Poonbato (immediately to the right of the
field of view) was buried. View is to the
east, upstream. (R.S. Punongbayan, May 16,
1994)"
The processes creating the polystrate trees, telephone poles, and so forth are documented in great detail by various papers in:
Newhall, C. G., and Punongbayan, R. S.,
eds., 1996, Fire and Mud - Eruptions and
Lahars of Mount Pinatubo, Philippines.
Philippine Institute of Volcanology and
Seismology and the University of
Washington Press, 1126p.
Fire and Mud - Eruptions and Lahars of Mount Pinatubo, Philippines
http://vulcan.wr.usgs.gov/Volcanoes/Philippines/Pinatubo 1st link
http://vulcan.wr.usgs.gov/Volcanoes/Philippines/Pinatubo 2nd link
http://pubs.usgs.gov/pinatubo/contents.html
In case of the Louisiana polystrate trees, they were buried by the piracy of the flow of the Mississippi River by the Atchafalaya River. When the flow of the Mississippi River, was diverted down the Atchafalaya River, the amount of sediment of sediment flowing down the Atchafalaya River increased tremendously. Because of this, there was a rapid increase in the sedimentation occurring during floods, of increasing magnitude, on the backswamp bordering the river causing its natural levees built up by 4 to 5 meters. The dumping of sediment also compacted backswamp clays underlying the natural levees causing the land to subside and providing more vertical space in which sediment sediments could accumulate. Historical maps and records for the Atchafalaya River demonstrate beyond any doubt that the burial of these trees occurred between 1870s, when the piracy of Mississippi River waters by the Atchafalaya River started, and 1960, when the construction of artificial levees prevented direct flooding of the location where the polystrate tree was found.
The polystrate trees in Louisiana are being dated by a number of means, in addition to historical records. According to the people I met at the GCAGS meeting, a detailed scientific report will be published about them in four to six months. When my sources tell me where it can be ordered, I will post that information to this list.
Some Background References
Fisk, H. N., 1944, Geological investigation of
the Alluvial Valley of the Lower Mississippi
River: US Army Corps of Engineers, Mississippi
River Commission, Vicksburg, Mississippi.
Fisk, H.,N., 1952, Geological investigation of
the Atchafalaya Basin and problems of
Mississippi River diversion, Vol. I and II:
US Army Corps of Engineers, Mississippi River
Commission, Vicksburg, Mississippi.
Another references that I came across was:
Heinrich, P., 2002, Buried forests could provide
clues to the past. Louisiana Geological Survey
News. vol. 12, no. 2, p. 1 (December 2002)
Louisiana Geological Survey, Louisiana State
University, Baton Rouge, LA.
This article discusses other polystrate trees that have been found beneath the modern surface of the flood and delta plains of the Mississippi River. Polystrate trees are repeatedly found by burrow pits, bridge and canal construction, and in engineering borings beneath larges parts of the surface of the flood and delta plains of the Mississippi River.
Yours,
Bill Birkeland
edited links to fix page width - The Queen
[This message has been edited by AdminAsgara, 11-20-2003]

This message is a reply to:
 Message 4 by Will_Drotar, posted 11-18-2003 8:16 PM Will_Drotar has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 9 by Coragyps, posted 11-20-2003 2:18 PM Bill Birkeland has not replied

  
Coragyps
Member (Idle past 734 days)
Posts: 5553
From: Snyder, Texas, USA
Joined: 11-12-2002


Message 9 of 12 (68024)
11-20-2003 2:18 PM
Reply to: Message 8 by Bill Birkeland
11-20-2003 2:06 PM


and in engineering borings beneath larges parts of the surface of the flood and delta plains of the Mississippi River.
I was involved in one of those - a 54-inch hole for a 36-inch pipeline across the Atchafalaya near Melville, LA. The drill bir kept getting fouled on cypress stumps maybe 50 feet subsurface and outside the modern levees - whether they were polystrate, I have not a clue.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 8 by Bill Birkeland, posted 11-20-2003 2:06 PM Bill Birkeland has not replied

  
Jex
Inactive Member


Message 10 of 12 (116612)
06-19-2004 12:49 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by Bill Birkeland
11-03-2003 10:29 PM


Out of interest, how is it possible to tell that the telephone pole is polystrate without a cross section? Core sections, perhaps? Would be glad if you could clear this up for me.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Bill Birkeland, posted 11-03-2003 10:29 PM Bill Birkeland has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 11 by edge, posted 06-19-2004 4:07 PM Jex has not replied

  
edge
Member (Idle past 1706 days)
Posts: 4696
From: Colorado, USA
Joined: 01-09-2002


Message 11 of 12 (116687)
06-19-2004 4:07 PM
Reply to: Message 10 by Jex
06-19-2004 12:49 AM


quote:
Out of interest, how is it possible to tell that the telephone pole is polystrate without a cross section? Core sections, perhaps? Would be glad if you could clear this up for me.
Just read a little more closely.
Bill writes:
quote:
Given that both telephone poles were buried by a series of lahars over a period of time, they are entombed not by one layer (stratum) but by a series of series of layers (strata) that were deposited over an extended period of time.
(emphasis added)
In fact, it appears that we can see these processes happening. It might also be inferred that it could happen since a lahar might incase the lower part of a pole or tree, leaving the upper reaches waiting for the next deposit.
You might also imagine the erosion of an unconsolidated pyroclastic deposit exposing several events and an entombed telephone pole. Remember, YECs tell us that such erosional events happen all the time creating a vast number of grand canyon type features in a very short period.
Perhaps I don't really understand your question. The answer seems kind of obvious...

This message is a reply to:
 Message 10 by Jex, posted 06-19-2004 12:49 AM Jex has not replied

  
Jex
Inactive Member


Message 12 of 12 (116699)
06-19-2004 6:12 PM


Hmm. Can't have been thinking properly. Still, I understand now.
Thanks for the clarification, and Sorry to bother you.

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024