Does a GLOBAL FLOOD truly seem like the BEST explanation for seashells on mountains?

[StormanNorman]

not a billion thats for sure.

not a million thats for sure.

I don't know if I accept the 4004BC as the exact creation, in september I believe Ussher states. I simply don't know if that exact measurement is possible. It may in fact be. (according to Bible chronology)

but I would say it's safe to bet on less than 10K years for sure.

Is that with the help of the supernatural or without, e.g., acting entirely within the laws of nature?

 

[Lucy Stulz]

but I would say it's safe to bet on less than 10K years for sure.

Then you might wish to explain (using your "single catastrophic event" model) this:

It is a classic photo of the Green River Formation, a set of varves. The little dots in the foreground are cows for scale.

Now there are millions of varves in this deposit.

But you would probably like some peer reviewed work on the Green River rhythmites.

How about this one:

Fischer, A.G., and Roberts, L.T., 1991, Cyclicity in the Green River Formation lacustrine (Eocene) of​

Wyoming: Jour. Sedimentary Petrology, v. 61, p. 1146-1154. (HERE)

So let's take some look at the details.

This article discusses not only the petrology of the varve couplets but also references studies on the mechanism for formation.

IF this were a single catastrophic event I'm curious why it would show repeated (repeated, repeated, repeated, repeated) couplets of increased organic content, lower organic content, over and over and over again.

There is a "lesson" from the University of Indiana website that discusses the "annual" nature of these varves (HERE)

Interestingly they note this:

It is of interest to note that evaporites deposited within the Green River Formation in the deeper parts of several​

basins in Utah, Colorado, and Wyoming also exhibit rhythmic sedimentation suggestive of yearly events.(ibid)

Now I really like that one because I'm assuming you know how evaporites form. They require that the concentration of the salts be high enough to overcome the solubility of that salt in the water body. So we have not only a case where the water was starting to evaporate (long enough time sitting around) but it also has "cycles" in it! Then up above we have all these zillions of annual layers.

The Green River Formation laminae are considered varves, although not formed under glacial conditions. They
consist of a thin, dark winter layer and a thicker lighter summer layer. These formed by seasonal events -
increased spring and summer productivity of algae, and accumulation of finer material in the winter. Some
geologists have had a few other ideas about the Green River Fm, but the seasonal changes accounting for the​

laminations seems secure. Thus, they are annual varves.

But again, the nature of these varves was described as long as about 1930 by Bradley:

Bradley, W.H., 1930,​

The varves and climate of the Green River Epoch: U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 158, p. 87-110.

 

[Loudmouth]

Of course. (You do realize that pole was a practical joke?)

No, it was not a practical joke. It was from a very catastropic event that killed people. Those polystrate telephone poles were created by a volcanic eruption at Mt. Pinatubo that produced devastating lahars.

Lahars of Mount Pinatubo, Philippines, Fact Sheet 114-97

 

[createdtoworship]

Then you might wish to explain (using your "single catastrophic event" model) this:

It is a classic photo of the Green River Formation, a set of varves. The little dots in the foreground are cows for scale.

Now there are millions of varves in this deposit.

But you would probably like some peer reviewed work on the Green River rhythmites.

How about this one:

Fischer, A.G., and Roberts, L.T., 1991, Cyclicity in the Green River Formation lacustrine (Eocene) of​

Wyoming: Jour. Sedimentary Petrology, v. 61, p. 1146-1154. (HERE)

So let's take some look at the details.

This article discusses not only the petrology of the varve couplets but also references studies on the mechanism for formation.

IF this were a single catastrophic event I'm curious why it would show repeated (repeated, repeated, repeated, repeated) couplets of increased organic content, lower organic content, over and over and over again.

There is a "lesson" from the University of Indiana website that discusses the "annual" nature of these varves (HERE)

Interestingly they note this:



Now I really like that one because I'm assuming you know how evaporites form. They require that the concentration of the salts be high enough to overcome the solubility of that salt in the water body. So we have not only a case where the water was starting to evaporate (long enough time sitting around) but it also has "cycles" in it! Then up above we have all these zillions of annual layers.



But again, the nature of these varves was described as long as about 1930 by Bradley:

Bradley, W.H., 1930,​

The varves and climate of the Green River Epoch: U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 158, p. 87-110.


[/FONT][/SIZE][/FONT][/SIZE][/SIZE][/FONT][/SIZE][/FONT]

where does it mention peer review in this paper on varves?

secondly, it's sort of old, but thats fine.....I will be nice.

If can provide references for it being a peer review and that being from a PHD in geology, then we may actually have some facts finally.

it is on subject, which is good.

I am fairly sure most of the peer reviews in your last post were off topic. (even a little is too much).

I mean I could provide dozens of peer reviews on the creation of the earth regarding physics, genetics, biology etc.

but this is no help to our discussion.

as far as the picture goes, all we know is that varves form. WE don't know if they are annual.

The only way to know is if you provide sources for your info.

Textbooks are outdated to easily and are to simplistic.

I could quote textbooks as well,

but all you would do is make fun of the fact that the author doesn't use His real name.


regarding your post about a book I posted about dating methods.

(woodmorappe)


so let me know when you find some facts.

Thanks for the pictures!

They are wonderful.

 

[Subduction Zone]

not a billion thats for sure.

not a million thats for sure.

I don't know if I accept the 4004BC as the exact creation, in september I believe Ussher states. I simply don't know if that exact measurement is possible. It may in fact be. (according to Bible chronology)

but I would say it's safe to bet on less than 10K years for sure.

There are countless sources that say the Earth, the Solar System, and universe are much older than that ridiculous date.

Does ice float in your world? It does in mine. What I love about ice cores is that they kill two birds with one stone. Not only do they show the Earth is unarguably much older than YEC's claim, they also show that Noah's Ark never happened. A fortuitous twofer.

An actual study of geology, which includes studying both stratigraphy and sedimentology will quickly lay any YEC claims to rest. The sediments we can observe came from several different environments. None of them were the environment of a global flood.

Even the asteroids spinning in space show that the Solar System is billions of years old. Using simple Newtonian mechanics a formula can be derived that combines rate of rotation and mass of the asteroid to show a minimum age for it if it is a tumbling asteroid. All of those ages are on the order of billions of years.

 

[Mikecpking]

where does it mention peer review in this paper on varves?

secondly, it's sort of old, but thats fine.....I will be nice.

If can provide references for it being a peer review and that being from a PHD in geology, then we may actually have some facts finally.

it is on subject, which is good.

I am fairly sure most of the peer reviews in your last post were off topic. (even a little is too much).

I mean I could provide dozens of peer reviews on the creation of the earth regarding physics, genetics, biology etc.

but this is no help to our discussion.

as far as the picture goes, all we know is that varves form. WE don't know if they are annual.

The only way to know is if you provide sources for your info.

Textbooks are outdated to easily and are to simplistic.

I could quote textbooks as well,

but all you would do is make fun of the fact that the author doesn't use His real name.


regarding your post about a book I posted about dating methods.

(woodmorappe)


so let me know when you find some facts.

Thanks for the pictures!

They are wonderful.

Nice duck. When confronted with facts, discredit at any cost.

 

[Lucy Stulz]

I am fairly sure most of the peer reviews in your last post were off topic. (even a little is too much).


it is on subject, which is good.

I apologize. You seem to be intent on insulting others. I thought perhaps you were interested in a discussion of the science.

I mean I could provide dozens of peer reviews on the creation of the earth regarding physics, genetics, biology etc.

If you would like to actually discuss the science I would be more than amenable.

I have provided a very large amount of information which is, as you can no doubt tell, something that can be checked out or debated against as you wish.

as far as the picture goes, all we know is that varves form. WE don't know if they are annual.

That is why I provided the reference from the original discussion of the varves as well as later geologic discussions of the "annual nature" of the varves. You can debate the details as you wish. Or not.

The only way to know is if you provide sources for your info.

Which I have done in the extreme now.

Textbooks are outdated to easily and are to simplistic.

Again, most of this stuff is simplistic and so well established that textbooks are a major source of the information. It is often taught to freshmen geology students.

I could quote textbooks as well,

And we could discuss that if you like.

but all you would do is make fun of the fact that the author doesn't use His real name.

I didn't "make fun" of it...I found it troubling why a legitimate scientist would need to use a pseudonym.

I believe I also noted detailed counterpoints to Mr. "Woodmorappe's" science. I believe I discussed the age dating and the impact of xenoliths.

So I certainly did more than merely point out Mr. Woodmorappe is a pseudonym.

so let me know when you find some facts.

Thanks for the pictures!

They are wonderful.

I have provided you with facts. If you are unable or unwilling to discuss them in an adult manner I suppose my efforts here are pointless.

I will continue (as others have on here) to point out your scientific lapses or overgeneralizations. And I will continue to provide you with peer reviewed as well as standard text type references as I have done to wit.

But I beg of you, do not misrepresent or belittle people's efforts in providing you with information.

 

[Subduction Zone]

not a billion thats for sure.

not a million thats for sure.

I don't know if I accept the 4004BC as the exact creation, in september I believe Ussher states. I simply don't know if that exact measurement is possible. It may in fact be. (according to Bible chronology)

but I would say it's safe to bet on less than 10K years for sure.

There are countless sources that say the Earth, the Solar System, and universe are much older than that ridiculous date.

Does ice float in your world? It does in mine.

 

[Lucy Stulz]

as far as the picture goes, all we know is that varves form. WE don't know if they are annual.

Are you as good as your word? Are you really interested in peer reviewed articles? How about this one:

Fischer, A.G., Roberts, L.T., 1991, Cyclicity in the Green River Formation (lacustrine Eocene) of Wyoming, Journal of Sedimentary Petrology 61 (7) , pp. 1146-1154

Abstract
The lacustrine mode (Tipton and Laney members) accumulated mainly varved oil shale. Here annual cycles are recorded as varves. Variations in varve thickness demonstrate El Nino (ENSO)-type and sunspot cycles. Milankovitch-scale cycles are not obvious in lithic variations, but gamma ray logs record 1) precessional variations with a mean period (varve-timed) of 19.5ka, and 2) a bundling of these in the ca. 100ka eccentricity cycle. In the playa mode (Wilkins Peak Member), the lithic succession oil shale-trona-dolomitic marlstone records the precessional drying up of a lake and is again bundled in sets of five, by the 100 ka eccentricity rhythm.
-------------------------
or this one?

Tylmann, W., Szpakowska, K., Ohlendorf, C., Woszczyk, M., Zolitschka, B., 2012, Conditions for deposition of annually laminated sediments in small meromictic lakes: A case study of Lake Suminko (Northern Poland), Journal of Paleolimnology 47 (1) , pp. 55-70

----------------------------------

Or how about the "annual chronometer" in the laminations in this one?

Shanahan, T.M., Overpeck, J.T., Beck, J.W., Wheeler, C.W., Peck, J.A., King, J.W., Scholz, C.A., 2008, The formation of biogeochemical laminations in Lake Bosumtwi, Ghana, and their usefulness as indicators of past environmental changes, Journal of Paleolimnology 40 (1) , pp. 339-355
----------------------------------

Perhaps you would like the sub-annual structures in the varves studied in this study?

Chutko, K.J., Lamoureux, S.F.,2008, Identification of coherent links between interannual sedimentary structures and daily meteorological observations in Arctic proglacial lacustrine varves: Potentials and limitations, Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences 45 (1) , pp. 1-13


-----------------------------------

OOoh! Here's one with both varve counting and radiometric dating!

Migowski, C., Agnon, A., Bookman, R., Negendank, J.F.W., Stein, M., 2004, Recurrence pattern of Holocene earthquakes along the Dead Sea transform revealed by varve-counting and radiocarbon dating of lacustrine sediments, Earth and Planetary Science Letters 222 (1) , pp. 301-314

of particular note is this bit from the abstract:

"...Radiocarbon dating and annual laminae counting yield excellent agreement between disturbed sedimentary structures (identified as seismites) and the historical earthquake record..."

-------------------------------

so let me know when you find some facts.

Let us all know when you are willing to talk about some science.

 

[Lucy Stulz]

Does ice float in your world? It does in mine.

Do you have "peer reviewed" resources on that?

(Remember, it has to be from a "PHD" (sic), so if you can find a "PHD" ice-scientist who wrote a peer reviewed publication about ice and how it floats, then you might have a point for Gradyll).

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Then you might wish to explain (using your "single catastrophic event" model) this:

It actually looks like a flood event to me (not the formation of sediments but the fact that they have been washed away so dramatically). Even the river that was formed still remains. The vertical cliffs and flat riverbed are characteristic of powerful flooding.

 

[StormanNorman]

Are you as good as your word? Are you really interested in peer reviewed articles? How about this one:

Fischer, A.G., Roberts, L.T., 1991, Cyclicity in the Green River Formation (lacustrine Eocene) of Wyoming, Journal of Sedimentary Petrology 61 (7) , pp. 1146-1154

Abstract
The lacustrine mode (Tipton and Laney members) accumulated mainly varved oil shale. Here annual cycles are recorded as varves. Variations in varve thickness demonstrate El Nino (ENSO)-type and sunspot cycles. Milankovitch-scale cycles are not obvious in lithic variations, but gamma ray logs record 1) precessional variations with a mean period (varve-timed) of 19.5ka, and 2) a bundling of these in the ca. 100ka eccentricity cycle. In the playa mode (Wilkins Peak Member), the lithic succession oil shale-trona-dolomitic marlstone records the precessional drying up of a lake and is again bundled in sets of five, by the 100 ka eccentricity rhythm.
-------------------------
or this one?

Tylmann, W., Szpakowska, K., Ohlendorf, C., Woszczyk, M., Zolitschka, B., 2012, Conditions for deposition of annually laminated sediments in small meromictic lakes: A case study of Lake Suminko (Northern Poland), Journal of Paleolimnology 47 (1) , pp. 55-70

----------------------------------

Or how about the "annual chronometer" in the laminations in this one?

Shanahan, T.M., Overpeck, J.T., Beck, J.W., Wheeler, C.W., Peck, J.A., King, J.W., Scholz, C.A., 2008, The formation of biogeochemical laminations in Lake Bosumtwi, Ghana, and their usefulness as indicators of past environmental changes, Journal of Paleolimnology 40 (1) , pp. 339-355
----------------------------------

Perhaps you would like the sub-annual structures in the varves studied in this study?

Chutko, K.J., Lamoureux, S.F.,2008, Identification of coherent links between interannual sedimentary structures and daily meteorological observations in Arctic proglacial lacustrine varves: Potentials and limitations, Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences 45 (1) , pp. 1-13


-----------------------------------

OOoh! Here's one with both varve counting and radiometric dating!

Migowski, C., Agnon, A., Bookman, R., Negendank, J.F.W., Stein, M., 2004, Recurrence pattern of Holocene earthquakes along the Dead Sea transform revealed by varve-counting and radiocarbon dating of lacustrine sediments, Earth and Planetary Science Letters 222 (1) , pp. 301-314

of particular note is this bit from the abstract:

"...Radiocarbon dating and annual laminae counting yield excellent agreement between disturbed sedimentary structures (identified as seismites) and the historical earthquake record..."

-------------------------------




Let us all know when you are willing to talk about some science.

I think this more or less closes the door on this one; it's been a fun read ...thanks.

 

[Lucy Stulz]

It actually looks like a flood event to me (not the formation of sediments but the fact that they have been washed away so dramatically). Even the river that was formed still remains. The vertical cliffs and flat riverbed are characteristic of powerful flooding.

Then how do you explain the "couplets"? This "powerful flood" must have been pretty quiet and for whatever reason it showed cycles of higher and lower organic productivity resulting in light and dark bands in repeating cycles.

Here's what some Green River Fm varves look like up close:

The darker band is more rich in organics (such as one would find during the summer or times of higher biological productivity) whereas the lighter ones are less organic rich.

Interestingly enough, within these layers are "ashfalls" from nearby volcanoes in what is now Yellowstone. These can be radiometrically dated. They have been dated to about 50 million years ago and span a time of a few million years. (HERE).

You can read more about the age of parts of the Green River Fm here:

Smith, M.E., Singer, B., Carroll, A., 2003, 40Ar/39Ar geochronology of the Eocene Green River Formation, Wyoming, Bulletin of the Geological Society of America 115 (5) , pp. 549-565

 

[OldWiseGuy]

No, it was not a practical joke. It was from a very catastropic event that killed people. Those polystrate telephone poles were created by a volcanic eruption at Mt. Pinatubo that produced devastating lahars.

Lahars of Mount Pinatubo, Philippines, Fact Sheet 114-97

If they were buried by a single event they wouldn't be imbedded in a 'polystrate' formation, unless lahars do accomplish depositional 'sorting' thus forming distinctive layers.

 

[Split Rock]

Then you might wish to explain (using your "single catastrophic event" model) this:

It actually looks like a flood event to me (not the formation of sediments but the fact that they have been washed away so dramatically). Even the river that was formed still remains. The vertical cliffs and flat riverbed are characteristic of powerful flooding.

Its funny to me how everything looks like "the result of a flood event" to you guys. Doesn't matter how angular the formation, or serpentine, or the type of rocks, its all "flood" to you guys.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Then how do you explain the "couplets"? This "powerful flood" must have been pretty quiet and for whatever reason it showed cycles of higher and lower organic productivity resulting in light and dark bands in repeating cycles.

Here's what some Green River Fm varves look like up close:

The darker band is more rich in organics (such as one would find during the summer or times of higher biological productivity) whereas the lighter ones are less organic rich.

Interestingly enough, within these layers are "ashfalls" from nearby volcanoes in what is now Yellowstone. These can be radiometrically dated. They have been dated to about 50 million years ago and span a time of a few million years. (HERE).

You can read more about the age of parts of the Green River Fm here:

Smith, M.E., Singer, B., Carroll, A., 2003, 40Ar/39Ar geochronology of the Eocene Green River Formation, Wyoming, Bulletin of the Geological Society of America 115 (5) , pp. 549-565

I have no problem with varves forming over millions of years as I am an OEC. But couldn't a massive flood, like the lake suddenly emptying for some reason (or Noah's flood), have caused the obvious erosion? It is clear that varve formation ceased at that time. Do you know when this occurred? It seems to me that the formation of varves and the destruction of the containment region are two distinct events: ancient deposition, recent massive flooding.

 

[Loudmouth]

If they were buried by a single event they wouldn't be imbedded in a 'polystrate' formation, unless lahars do accomplish depositional 'sorting' thus forming distinctive layers.

The bottom of the pole is in a different layer.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Its funny to me how everything looks like "the result of a flood event" to you guys. Doesn't matter how angular the formation, or serpentine, or the type of rocks, its all "flood" to you guys.

Flooding is a fact of geology.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

The bottom of the pole is in a different layer.

Ok, ya got me.

 

[Loudmouth]

This picture has a nice contrast between varves and flood deposits. In the middle of this picture are fine grained sediments with alternating light and dark bands consistent with biannual seasonal fluctations. Above and below the varves are coarse grained flood deposits:

The flood deposits above and below the varves were produced by flooding from glacial Lake Missoula. These floods produced the Western Channeled Scablands. You can see more here:

Channeled Scablands: Overview

So as you can see, it is extremely easy to determine the evidence between flood and non-flood environments.