Summations Only

Audrey seems to have misidentified the coal seam as igneous rock. Look at the examples of coal I linked. That's what they look like.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

No Nukes took back his error, time for you to do so also.And that is a coal seam. Look at the examples I linked.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Don't you think it is more likely that the person there who took the picture has it right? And it looks at least as much like lava as anything else. How can you possibly think you have it right??ABE: and it is on Ascension Island - an island arising from the Atlantic rift. There can not be any coal there! GeezEdited by NosyNed, : Added stuff

After you. But its lava flow and not a coal seam. Yes, some coal seams do look like lava flow.But that doesn't make lava flow be a coal seam.

Let's be careful. My error was assuming that you were an idiot. Your point was that the picture showed coal. If that's true, then you had a legitimate argument and at least the form of your argument was correct even if there is a factual mistake.But of course, if the picture is not coal, you simply made a mistake. That still means you are not an idiot. I made an error regardless of whether that formation is coal or cooled lava.But don't compound that error as you are doing now. You'd better be sure who has made an error. The picture was taken on a volcanic island. It seems way more likely that you are in error.Besides that, I've given you some other layers to deal with.Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

What I've been calling the Geologic Column is called at Wikipedia the
Stratigraphic Column. Clearly it is what I mean and if that is the term everybody recognizes then I'll start using it instead. VERTICAL. SEQUENCE OF SEDIMENTARY ROCKS. VERTICAL.The article goes on to point out that the stack may have been deformed in various ways which make it hard to identify.There is no mention of the column being anything other than a vertical stack of sedimentary rocks.Then you want to know if I consider igneous rocks to be a layer in the column or not, and although there are places where they appear as layers they are nevertheless still intrusives into the column, which means they weren't laid down along with the rest of the rocks but pushed up through the stack and spread out between layers, in some cases having a comparable thickness and extent and looking very much like layers. But they are younger than the other rocks because they are intrusives. They are sills, not layers even if they look like layers. The first article you linked said they are found worldwide in the form of layers but they are nevertheless rare.On the definition of the Geologic Column you quote a Britannica article which says what I've been saying, as does the Wikipedia stub quoted above. Sedimentary, vertical, bottom to top. Layered sedimentary series.Mentions unconsolidated sediments on ocean floor but doesn't identify them as Geologic Column, is merely demonstrating the extent of sedimentary deposits starting with 75% of the surface area of the continents.And like the Wikipedia article it goes on to mention that the stack may be deformed and hard to identify.So far the official definitions confine the column to the recognizable vertical stack, as I have been doing.

It looks IDENTICAL to that coal seam I linked, I mean identical, and it doesn't look like the lava layers NoNukes linked. However, if it is CERTAIN that it's lava OK, I'll certainly accept that, but just because somebody says it's lava doesn't convince me because it looks so exactly like the coal seams I linked.

Given the circumstances, namely the location on Ascension Island, do you think the material in question is likely to be coal?

Yes there is.

quote:

---

In areas that are more geologically complex, such as those that contain intrusive rocks, faults, and/or metamorphism, stratigraphic columns can still indicate the relative locations of these units with respect to one another.

---

ABE:I want to expand on my point above. In the stratigraphic column, the presence of igneous rock is ignored because the column is telling the story of the sedimentary layers which are the ones for which we can determine geological and chronological ages. The stratigraphic column is a vertical representation. I'm not the first person to post that today.And what is the angle in the picture of the Grand Canyon Supergroup rocks. Are they vertical or horizontal?Finally, when you read the word "representation" and you then read the following, what did you make of the description of a "time column" in which the layers are stacked on top of each other despite the fact that they were not found that way in the field.

quote:

---

However, in these cases, the stratigraphic column must either be a structural column, in which the units are stacked with respect to how they are observed in the field to have been moved by the faults, or a time column, in which the units are stacked in the order in which they were formed. they also show the lithology of the rock units.

---

Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

Not coal seam!

Of course that is not a coal seam, but there is also no indication that it relates to what you posted earlier either and in any case it is not a layer in the stratigraphic column so what is your point?

If it's on Ascension Island it would have to be lava and not coal, for sure.But let's review the sequence of posts here.In Message 1255 I said If that is lava that Coyote posted in Message 1261 and it's on Ascension Island, where the Stratigraphic Column would not exist because it's all volcanic, then that is not the Stratigraphic Column depicted in that photo anyway. Perhaps it's layers of lava but it isn't the Stratigraphic (or Geologic) Column.When lava IS found as a layer in the Stratigraphic Column it is nevertheless an intrusive sill, a younger rock, and not a layer like the sedimentary layers that are the main identifiers of the Column and form the basis of the Geologic Time Scale.I nevertheless recognize that it is certainly a thick flat layer of lava if that is what it is -- or, to be more precise, I suppose it was originally flat and horizontal. (On the other hand, being lava, maybe it wasn't).Again, it looks identical to the coal seam I posted in Message 1263 so I am still wondering about its exact identity.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

I posted lava earlier, and without a shred of evidence you determined it was a coal seam.As I have stated many times already, you have no business even thinking about science. You are simply not qualified.You have accepted a belief system that requires you to be wrong on just about everything that relies on evidence from the natural world. Why should anyone take anything you say as being accurate?Were you to say that the sun rises in the east, I would check it out for myself.And how you expect anyone anywhere to respect your religious beliefs based on your dismal record in these posts is astounding. More likely you are driving people away from religion in droves.St. Augustine was right.

You are WAY out of line Mister. What you posted LOOKS like a coal seam, like the one I showed you next. NOW you are posting a sea of lava overflowing a road and you have the unmitigated gall, the nerve, to say I'm wrong that THAT is not a coal seam? And now you are bringing religious belief into a discussion of physical facts? You deserve a smack into the next millennium.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This topic turned into a discussion of many things geology and there have been quite a few good messages.There has also been quite a few bad messages.Faith has been getting dog-piled A LOT - I find it remarkable that she has kept up as well as she has.Let's wrap this one up and try to get some better focus into one or more new topics. I think one or more Faith vs (?) might be a good thing.Adminnemooseus