quote:
Originally posted by Tranquility Base:
Where on earth do you get non-marine sandstone sheet depositon over such a distance under rapid flow?
Where have you shown such sandstone sheets with rapid flow? Any actual data behind all this handwaving? Can you give a specific formation?
Maybe you haven't figured out yet that not all paleocurrent indicators are caused by moving fluids. Many are due to wave and surf processes. These will orient perpendicular to shorelines without any net current at all.
quote:
You need subsidence to get a shallow lake where a slope used to be!
Exactly.
Shallow coastal lakes are common features of modern transgressive sequences and subsiding basins. Lake Ponchetrain in the Mississippi delta comes to mind. Tens of thousands of feet of subsidence are required to account for the observed sediment wedges, in both modern and ancient deltas. Can the Flood "model" explain this???
No.
[QUOTE][b]SW paleocurrents in sandstones strewn across half a continent is a large flood.[/QUOTE]
[/b]
There exists today large sheets of sand and shale half a continent wide and several hundred km broad off the coast of many passive margins. These are being formed by processes acting today - deltas, swamps, reefs, nearshore and distal sediment transport. The average current direction is downslope. Not formed by a Flood.
quote:
Why weren't the sandstones laid down by a regional flood?
Because reality doesn't have to conform to your mythology? Because the evidence shows they were formed by normal deltaic, fluvial and shoreline processes that can be observed today? Because sediment sources are absent in the Flood "model"? Because well-rounded and well-sorted quartzose sandstones require LOTS of time?
[QUOTE]
[b]But fresh water shale does sit directly on top of the sandstone![/QUOTE]
[/b]
Which is identical to any modern delta.
quote:
I propose that the majority of non-marine strata are easily reinterpreatble as regional flooding.
I propose that you actually [i][b]DO[/i][/b] that "reinterpretation".
Use actual rocks, data, and outcrops. Go ahead.
Until you do, you are blowing smoke, just like the helium-in-the-granites fantasy you repeat every few days.
Until you use evidence to "reinterpret" these strata, you have nothing except speculation, "gut-instincts", and pre-conceived fantasies from a very old book.
Can you point to a specific sandstone layer that you think is wrongly interpreted as non-marine?
™ Version 4.2