Understanding through Discussion

QuickSearch

 Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ] EvC Forum active members: 56 (9054 total)
 575 online now: PaulK, Tangle (2 members, 573 visitors) Newest Member: EWolf Post Volume: Total: 888,239 Year: 5,885/14,102 Month: 33/438 Week: 77/83 Day: 0/27 Hour: 0/0

Author Topic:   Depositional Models of Sea Transgressions/Regressions - Walther's Law
Faith
Suspended Member (Idle past 508 days)
Posts: 35298
Joined: 10-06-2001

 Message 511 of 533 (730634) 06-29-2014 1:49 PM Reply to: Message 510 by Dr Adequate06-29-2014 1:45 PM

So half a million years and what I figured was 20 thousand feet in a million years so now it's down to 10 thousand feet since they were formed and they should still have eroded away to dust by that calculation.

abe: Sorry the second figure makes it a tenth of that time so 2000 feet should be gone. What does that leave?

abe: Let's see. According to Wikipedia theyre 300 to 350 feet in height, so any calculation based on Percy's rate would have them demolished long since.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

 This message is a reply to: Message 510 by Dr Adequate, posted 06-29-2014 1:45 PM Dr Adequate has responded

 Replies to this message: Message 513 by Dr Adequate, posted 06-29-2014 1:53 PM Faith has responded Message 516 by Tanypteryx, posted 06-29-2014 1:58 PM Faith has responded

Member (Idle past 115 days)
Posts: 16112
Joined: 07-20-2006

 Message 512 of 533 (730635) 06-29-2014 1:52 PM Reply to: Message 509 by Faith06-29-2014 1:44 PM

 Fine, then if they began to be cliffs when the English Channel was formed which was not millions of years ago, OK by me but I am not talking about the future only computing from what I thought the time of formation was which is usually millions of years in the past. So that's not true for Dover, so let's just drop it and go back to formations that WERE supposedly formed millions of years ago such as the hoodoos of Bryce Canyon ...

Wait. Let me stop you there. I have asked you already. Who is doing the supposing? Who, Faith, who says that any given hoodoo in Bryce Canyon is millions of years old? Do these people have names? Do they have real existence? Are they of flesh and blood, or are they ghosts and shadows that haunt the recesses of your brain?

 This message is a reply to: Message 509 by Faith, posted 06-29-2014 1:44 PM Faith has responded

 Replies to this message: Message 517 by Faith, posted 06-29-2014 2:00 PM Dr Adequate has responded

Member (Idle past 115 days)
Posts: 16112
Joined: 07-20-2006

 Message 513 of 533 (730636) 06-29-2014 1:53 PM Reply to: Message 511 by Faith06-29-2014 1:49 PM

 So half a million years and what I figured was 20 thousand feet in a million years so now it's down to 10 thousand feet since they were formed and they should still have eroded away to dust by that calculation.abe: Sorry the second figure makes it a tenth of that time so 2000 feet should be gone. What does that leave?

At its narrowest point, the Channel is twenty miles wide.

 This message is a reply to: Message 511 by Faith, posted 06-29-2014 1:49 PM Faith has responded

 Replies to this message: Message 514 by Faith, posted 06-29-2014 1:55 PM Dr Adequate has responded

Faith
Suspended Member (Idle past 508 days)
Posts: 35298
Joined: 10-06-2001

 Message 514 of 533 (730637) 06-29-2014 1:55 PM Reply to: Message 513 by Dr Adequate06-29-2014 1:53 PM

We're eroding the CLIFFS, Dr A., not the channel.

 This message is a reply to: Message 513 by Dr Adequate, posted 06-29-2014 1:53 PM Dr Adequate has responded

 Replies to this message: Message 515 by Dr Adequate, posted 06-29-2014 1:56 PM Faith has not yet responded

Member (Idle past 115 days)
Posts: 16112
Joined: 07-20-2006

 Message 515 of 533 (730638) 06-29-2014 1:56 PM Reply to: Message 514 by Faith06-29-2014 1:55 PM

 We're eroding the CLIFFS, Dr A., not the channel.

Eroding the cliffs widens the Channel, Faith.

 This message is a reply to: Message 514 by Faith, posted 06-29-2014 1:55 PM Faith has not yet responded

Tanypteryx
Member
Posts: 2622
From: Oregon, USA
Joined: 08-27-2006
Member Rating: 5.6

 Message 516 of 533 (730640) 06-29-2014 1:58 PM Reply to: Message 511 by Faith06-29-2014 1:49 PM

 Let's see. According to Wikipedia theyre 300 to 350 feet in height, so any calculation based on Percy's rate would have them demolished long since.

The erosion being discussed is not lowering the elevation. It is erosion that widens the channel, so material is being aroded from the face of the cliffs.

What if Eleanor Roosevelt had wings? -- Monty Python

One important characteristic of a theory is that is has survived repeated attempts to falsify it. Contrary to your understanding, all available evidence confirms it. --Subbie

If evolution is shown to be false, it will be at the hands of things that are true, not made up. --percy

 This message is a reply to: Message 511 by Faith, posted 06-29-2014 1:49 PM Faith has responded

 Replies to this message: Message 518 by Faith, posted 06-29-2014 2:16 PM Tanypteryx has responded

Faith
Suspended Member (Idle past 508 days)
Posts: 35298
Joined: 10-06-2001

 Message 517 of 533 (730641) 06-29-2014 2:00 PM Reply to: Message 512 by Dr Adequate06-29-2014 1:52 PM

 Wait. Let me stop you there. I have asked you already. Who is doing the supposing? Who, Faith, who says that any given hoodoo in Bryce Canyon is millions of years old? Do these people have names? Do they have real existence? Are they of flesh and blood, or are they ghosts and shadows that haunt the recesses of your brain?

40 to 60 million years is the age given for the rock from which the hoodoos were carved, by the Old Earthers who wrote the article for the National Park Service, whom I suppose to be real people, but maybe they are really robots programmed to spout OE stuff.

HERE.

Do you have some reason to suppose that the hoodoos didn't start eroding at that point?

abe: Seems to me if we accept the rate given by Percy in 481, about a cm or 2 inches per hundred years, which would come to 20,000 inches or 1666 feet of erosion in a million years, you'd have to figure the erosion started AWFULLY recently to have left such tall formations still standing.

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 512 by Dr Adequate, posted 06-29-2014 1:52 PM Dr Adequate has responded

 Replies to this message: Message 519 by Dr Adequate, posted 06-29-2014 2:22 PM Faith has responded

Faith
Suspended Member (Idle past 508 days)
Posts: 35298
Joined: 10-06-2001

 Message 518 of 533 (730642) 06-29-2014 2:16 PM Reply to: Message 516 by Tanypteryx06-29-2014 1:58 PM

 The erosion being discussed is not lowering the elevation. It is erosion that widens the channel, so material is being aroded from the face of the cliffs.

Sigh. OK. So it's 450 thousand down to 180 thousand years old, so that means that at the rate given by Percy if they are half a million years old they'd have added ten thousand feet to the English Channel, or at the lower age about 2000 feet since they were formed. Is that feasible?

Let's get back to the hoodoos and the monuments.

 This message is a reply to: Message 516 by Tanypteryx, posted 06-29-2014 1:58 PM Tanypteryx has responded

 Replies to this message: Message 520 by Dr Adequate, posted 06-29-2014 2:24 PM Faith has not yet responded Message 522 by Tanypteryx, posted 06-29-2014 2:33 PM Faith has not yet responded

Member (Idle past 115 days)
Posts: 16112
Joined: 07-20-2006

 Message 519 of 533 (730643) 06-29-2014 2:22 PM Reply to: Message 517 by Faith06-29-2014 2:00 PM

 40 to 60 million years is the age given for the rock from which the hoodoos were carved, by the Old Earthers who wrote the article for the National Park Service, whom I suppose to be real people, but I suppose they could be robots programmed to spout OE stuff.

And the age of the rock is different from the age of the hoodoos. This is why I asked you for an instance of someone giving an erroneous date for any given hoodoo, rather that of someone giving an accurate date for the rock.

 Do you have some reason to suppose that the hoodoos didn't start eroding at that point?

Yes. For starters, if the hoodoos we have now had started being formed then, they wouldn't still be here.

The hoodoos have limited life-spans. What you see toward the top of the image is remnants of hoodoos, now transformed into the rounded hill erosions one would expect if normal arroyo wash processes had been dominant throughout. As Sprinkel et al. observe, the rim of Bryce Canyon is a passive topographic feature that retreats backward, estimated at about 4 feet per century, which would add up to 12 miles in a million years....

 This message is a reply to: Message 517 by Faith, posted 06-29-2014 2:00 PM Faith has responded

 Replies to this message: Message 521 by Faith, posted 06-29-2014 2:30 PM Dr Adequate has responded

Member (Idle past 115 days)
Posts: 16112
Joined: 07-20-2006

 Message 520 of 533 (730644) 06-29-2014 2:24 PM Reply to: Message 518 by Faith06-29-2014 2:16 PM

 Sigh. OK. So it's 450 thousand down to 180 thousand years old, so that means that at the rate given by Percy if they are half a million years old they'd have added ten thousand feet to the English Channel, or at the lower age about 2000 feet since they were formed. Is that feasible?

Yes. Because of the channel being twenty miles wide at its narrowest point, and a mile being 5280 feet.

 This message is a reply to: Message 518 by Faith, posted 06-29-2014 2:16 PM Faith has not yet responded

Faith
Suspended Member (Idle past 508 days)
Posts: 35298
Joined: 10-06-2001

 Message 521 of 533 (730646) 06-29-2014 2:30 PM Reply to: Message 519 by Dr Adequate06-29-2014 2:22 PM

But there is no reason whatever to suppose the erosion started recently enough for that to be the case. The fact that they wouldn't be here if it started when of course it did start, right after the cliffs were formed from which they were carved, simply proves that the OE figures are wrong.

You are going to have to explain the implications of your quote.

 This message is a reply to: Message 519 by Dr Adequate, posted 06-29-2014 2:22 PM Dr Adequate has responded

 Replies to this message: Message 523 by Dr Adequate, posted 06-29-2014 2:39 PM Faith has responded

Tanypteryx
Member
Posts: 2622
From: Oregon, USA
Joined: 08-27-2006
Member Rating: 5.6

 Message 522 of 533 (730647) 06-29-2014 2:33 PM Reply to: Message 518 by Faith06-29-2014 2:16 PM

 Let's get back to the hoodoos and the monuments.

The surrounding material began eroding millions of years after it was deposited.

The individual hoodoos are not very old or long lasting. Many, many, many hoodoos were formed (by erosion of surrounding material) and eroded away since Bryce Canyon began eroding.

The towers in Monument Valley are the few remnants that are left after millions of years of erosion of the surrounding materials. There are mounds (rounded buttes} thoughout the valley that are the remains of towers that are in a more eroded state than the towers that are still standing.

There is no evidence of your biblical flood in Monument Valley, or Bryce Canyon, or anywhere else, either in the deposition of material or the subsequent erosion. All the evidence is of vast amounts of time for these processes to occur.

What if Eleanor Roosevelt had wings? -- Monty Python

One important characteristic of a theory is that is has survived repeated attempts to falsify it. Contrary to your understanding, all available evidence confirms it. --Subbie

If evolution is shown to be false, it will be at the hands of things that are true, not made up. --percy

 This message is a reply to: Message 518 by Faith, posted 06-29-2014 2:16 PM Faith has not yet responded

Member (Idle past 115 days)
Posts: 16112
Joined: 07-20-2006

 Message 523 of 533 (730650) 06-29-2014 2:39 PM Reply to: Message 521 by Faith06-29-2014 2:30 PM

 But there is no reason whatever to suppose the erosion started recently enough for that to be the case.

Since no Bryce Canyon hoodoo could last for millions of years, we may conclude that no given hoodoo in Bryce Canyon has been there for millions of years. That was your argument. That bit was correct. Where you went wrong was that you pretended that geologists claim that the present Bryce Canyon hoodoos are millions of years old, which they aren't. But you were right to say that they can't be.

 The fact that they wouldn't be here if it started when of course it did start, right after the cliffs were formed ...

* sigh *

When were the cliffs formed?

Note that the cliffs are different from the rocks and the time since there was a cliff face is different from the time that any given presently existing hoodoo was carved.

Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.

 This message is a reply to: Message 521 by Faith, posted 06-29-2014 2:30 PM Faith has responded

 Replies to this message: Message 524 by Faith, posted 06-29-2014 2:47 PM Dr Adequate has responded

Faith
Suspended Member (Idle past 508 days)
Posts: 35298
Joined: 10-06-2001

 Message 524 of 533 (730651) 06-29-2014 2:47 PM Reply to: Message 523 by Dr Adequate06-29-2014 2:39 PM

 When were the cliffs formed?

When the Flood waters receded. That's what formed the cliffs of the Grand Staircase, which include the cliffs from which the hoodoos were shaped.

 Note that the cliffs are different from the rocks and the time since there was a cliff face is different from the time that any given presently existing hoodoo was carved.

Uh huh, but on Flood timing the time is quite short. The layers were laid down by the Flood waters. As the waters receded they broke up a lot of the upper strata leaving all kinds of interesting formations in the Southwest.

So you've explained away the hoodoos (maybe) and Dover. How are you going to explain away the rate of erosion of the monuments in Monument Valley? I can hardly wait.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

 This message is a reply to: Message 523 by Dr Adequate, posted 06-29-2014 2:39 PM Dr Adequate has responded

 Replies to this message: Message 525 by Dr Adequate, posted 06-29-2014 2:51 PM Faith has responded

Member (Idle past 115 days)
Posts: 16112
Joined: 07-20-2006

 Message 525 of 533 (730652) 06-29-2014 2:51 PM Reply to: Message 524 by Faith06-29-2014 2:47 PM

 So you've explained away the hoodoos and Dover. How are you going to explain away the rate of erosion of the monuments in Monument Valley? I can hardly wait.

What is it you don't understand about Monument Valley? I shall be happy to explain it, or as you would apparently phrase it, I shall be happy to explain away it.

But perhaps now that you've seen how simple and obvious it is to understand erosion you could have a go at this one yourself.

 This message is a reply to: Message 524 by Faith, posted 06-29-2014 2:47 PM Faith has responded

 Replies to this message: Message 526 by Faith, posted 06-29-2014 3:20 PM Dr Adequate has not yet responded

 Date format: mm-dd-yyyy Timezone: ET (US)