Polystrate fossils, paraconformities, stratigraphic leaks, and reworked specimens

[laptoppop]

Interesting article:

http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/cfol/ch3-how-fast.asp

Also, from the article:

A new concept of coal formation is being developed, thanks in part to the work of creationist geologists. One of the leaders in this field is Dr. Steven Austin. In his dissertation for the Ph.D. in coal geology from Penn State, Dr. Austin40 suggests that coal was formed from plant debris deposited under mats of vegetation floating in sea water. His model already explains many features of coal that the swamp-model cannot explain. Even more importantly, his theory—a real scientific breakthrough—is the first ever to be used to predict the location and quality of coal.

Also this article called "Polystrate Fossils Require Rapid Deposition"

http://www.creationresearch.org/crsq/articles/43/43_4/polystrate_fossils.htm

may help inform the discussion.

 

[busterdog]

Going to take a while to get through, but thanks.

 

[Mallon]

Haven't read the article yet, but if this guy's model is as good as he says it is, the coal industry will no doubt eat it up and he'll be making millions soon enough. Keep a close eye on this Austin fellow.

 

[laptoppop]

Steve Austin..... the 6 million dollar geologist? <grin>

 

[shernren]

And in real life, geologists actually have ways to detect whether or not a fossil is reworked. For example, check out this chunky paper: http://www.bioone.org/perlserv/?req....1669/0883-1351(2001)016<0255:RSIVFF>2.0.CO;2 in which a group of authors perform chemical analyses on mosasaur bones that determine that the mosasaurs were not reworked into the strata they were found in, and therefore that the position of the K-T boundary in that region may have to be adjusted. And of course, TO has lots of stuff on polystrate fossils, for example: http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/polystrate/trees.html

 

[shernren]

His paper was published in 1979. I wonder how long it's going to take the coal industry to wise up.

 

[laptoppop]

By the way, Mallon -- from the first link --
"Some geologic formations are spread out over vast areas of a whole continent. For example, there’s the Morrison Formation, famous for its dinosaur remains, that covers much of the mountainous West, and there’s the St. Peter’s Sandstone, a glass sand that stretches from Canada to Texas and from the Rockies to the Appalachians."

I'm still working through the boxes in my studio so I haven't found the book yet, but this is the kind of thing I was mentioning when I talk about large formations best explained by a global event.

 

[Mallon]

By the way, Mallon -- from the first link --
"Some geologic formations are spread out over vast areas of a whole continent. For example, there’s the Morrison Formation, famous for its dinosaur remains, that covers much of the mountainous West, and there’s the St. Peter’s Sandstone, a glass sand that stretches from Canada to Texas and from the Rockies to the Appalachians."

I'm not familiar with the St. Peter's Sandstone, pop, but the Morrison Formation is that nasty terrestrial deposit riddled with large termite mounds that you have not been able to explain away yet.

 

[Jase]

By the way, Mallon -- from the first link --
"Some geologic formations are spread out over vast areas of a whole continent. For example, there’s the Morrison Formation, famous for its dinosaur remains, that covers much of the mountainous West, and there’s the St. Peter’s Sandstone, a glass sand that stretches from Canada to Texas and from the Rockies to the Appalachians."

I'm still working through the boxes in my studio so I haven't found the book yet, but this is the kind of thing I was mentioning when I talk about large formations best explained by a global event.

You're right in that they are best explained by a global event, but they weren't formed from a flood. The Morrison formation is dated to about 150 million years ago, putting it around the time that the Laurasia supercontinent split apart. The Morrison formation is a result of the same process as the Rocky Mountains - plate tectonics.

 

[laptoppop]

I'm not familiar with the St. Peter's Sandstone, pop, but the Morrison Formation is that nasty terrestrial deposit riddled with large termite mounds that you have not been able to explain away yet.

Fair enough. You explain the size of the overall deposit and I'll keep working on understanding the termite mounds. They are fascinating - but I need to find out a lot more info, like how they are fossilized, how strong they are, etc. One reference I found referred to them being surrounded by silt -- which would totally fit a flood model. I just need to learn more (as usual <grin>).

 

[laptoppop]

Anyone want to discuss the two articles I linked to? Seems to me that they represent some serious issues for conventional geological interpretations.

 

[Mallon]

Fair enough. You explain the size of the overall deposit and I'll keep working on understanding the termite mounds.

Sure. Here's what geological science has to say about the extensive formation of the Morrison Formation:
From the Wiki entry...
"The Morrison Basin, which stretched from New Mexico in the south to Saskatchewan in the north, was formed when the precursors to the Front Range of the Rocky Mountains started pushing up to the west. The deposits from their east-facing drainage basins, carried by streams and rivers from the Elko Highlands (along the borders of present-day Nevada and Utah) and deposited in swampy lowlands, lakes, river channels and floodplains, became the Morrison Formation.
In the north, the Sundance Sea, an extension of the Arctic Ocean, stretched through Canada down to the United States. Coal is found in the Morrison Formation of Montana, which means that the northern part of the formation, along the shores of the sea, was wet and swampy, with more vegetation. Eolian, or wind-deposited sandstones are found in the southwestern part, which indicates it was much more arid — a desert, with sand dunes.
In the Colorado Plateau region, the Morrison Formation is further broken into four sub-divisions, or members. From the oldest to the most recent, they are:

1. Windy Hill Member: The oldest member. At the time, the Morrison basin was characterized by shallow marine and tidal flat deposition along the southern shore of the Sundance Sea.
2. Tidwell Member: The Sundance Sea receded to Wyoming during this member and was replaced by lakes and mudflats.
3. Salt Wash Member: The first purely terrestrial member. The basin was a semi-arid alluvial plain, with seasonal mudflats.
4. Brushy Basin Member: Much finer-grained than the Salt Wash Member, the Brushy Basin Member is dominated by mudstone rich in volcanic ash. Rivers flowed from the west into a basin that contained a giant, saline alkaline lake called Lake T'oo'dichi' and extensive wetlands that were located just west of the modern Uncompaghre plateau."

 

[laptoppop]

I really want this thread to get on to discussing the issues from the articles --- but your reply raised a question for me. How are wind deposited sandstones supposed to have formed? Doesn't it require a binding agent to turn sand into rock? There are lots of sand dunes around -- and they stay sand as far as I know.

 

[Mallon]

I really want this thread to get on to discussing the issues from the articles --- but your reply raised a question for me. How are wind deposited sandstones supposed to have formed?

From http://wasg.iinet.net.au/swgeolt.html:
"This sand, over several incursions inland, blew into large dunes up to 200 metres above sea level. These dunes became stabilised by vegetation and the contemporaneous processes of soil formation, lithification and karstification began to occur. The lithification or solidification of the dunes is caused by rainwater, during the wet season, dissolving out part of the carbonate of lime which is then carried downwards to the watertable or the gneiss basement. During the dry season, reprecipitation of this carbonate of lime produced a very hard cap rock near the surface, with less well- cemented limestone below, and a leached quartz sand above. With time, the quartz sand developed into mature soils ranging from humic loams to terra rosas with ferricrete. These processes continue to the present."

Lithification does not always require burial by water. Sedimentary compaction plays a major role as well.

 

[laptoppop]

Thanks! Now back to the OP.

 

[Jadis40]

From http://wasg.iinet.net.au/swgeolt.html:
"This sand, over several incursions inland, blew into large dunes up to 200 metres above sea level. These dunes became stabilised by vegetation and the contemporaneous processes of soil formation, lithification and karstification began to occur. The lithification or solidification of the dunes is caused by rainwater, during the wet season, dissolving out part of the carbonate of lime which is then carried downwards to the watertable or the gneiss basement. During the dry season, reprecipitation of this carbonate of lime produced a very hard cap rock near the surface, with less well- cemented limestone below, and a leached quartz sand above. With time, the quartz sand developed into mature soils ranging from humic loams to terra rosas with ferricrete. These processes continue to the present."

Lithification does not always require burial by water. Sedimentary compaction plays a major role as well.

Something I might be able to add. Both the cononino sandstone in the Grand Canyon and the navajo sandstone on the plateau above were both formed by wind. Basically, both the coconino and navajo layers are petrified desert sand dunes. The coconino is, for sure.

Mallon could probably correct me if my explanation is off.

 

[shernren]

Sure. Have any coal companies actually used Steve Austin's paper to predict where to find coal? And if not, why not?