[deleted]

[juvenissun]

We did a series of sediment profiles in a deep colluvium fill from ~45 feet below grade. The lowest start about calibrated C14 8200 years B.P.

This is the long view.

Were you looking for gold?

 

[Dr GS Hurd]

Not in the floods we know.

Noah's Flood is not a normal flood.

Then why pretend you have any interest in actual facts? Just make up any silly fantasy story and claim it is true.

 

[Dr GS Hurd]

Were you looking for gold?

Not at all. We were recording the sedimentary sequences. In the close-up the bottom "floor" was dated to about 5000 years before present. The red lines marked the more obvious stream beds.

The goal was to match a series of geological deposits with prehistoric Native American camps. The result was in the next >few< illustrations; (I'll just use this one).

This shows the sequence in depth (in feet) below surface for 2 deep trenches. The numbers in parentheses are radiocarbon dates. (Note well that all the dates are ordered in series).

 

[juvenissun]

Then why pretend you have any interest in actual facts? Just make up any silly fantasy story and claim it is true.

I never pretend in issues related to faith. I will not cheat myself.

Noah's Flood happened only ONCE. As a geologist, I am very interested to understand the process of the Flood according to the current geological knowledge. In this matter, my learning process is just opposite to yours. I do not need evidence to believe. I believe, and try to find the evidence.

The deposition of the Grand Canyon Series may be difficult to be explained by a global flood. But if one does not know geology well enough, the arguments made against the Flood could be naive and shaky. I treat what's said in your blog page as one of them.

My only argument in this thread is: the deposition of a laminated sedimentary sequence is entirely possible by the process of the global flood. This is also the main point made by other creationists in using the example of Mt. St. Helens eruption.

 

[juvenissun]

Not at all. We were recording the sedimentary sequences. In the close-up the bottom "floor" was dated to about 5000 years before present. The red lines marked the more obvious stream beds.

The goal was to match a series of geological deposits with prehistoric Native American camps. The result was in the next >few< illustrations; (I'll just use this one).

This shows the sequence in depth (in feet) below surface for 2 deep trenches. The numbers in parentheses are radiocarbon dates. (Note well that all the dates are ordered in series).

I failed to quickly see the meaning of this figure. What does the correlation mean?
Do you have an article about this study? I am interested to read it.
My concern about this is on the landform process.

 

[florida2]

Personal attack probably won't be read either. However, I'm wondering why all their posts are deleted?
They've left and don't want any evidence of posting left behind or what?

It was not at all a personal attack - it was an honest comment on the post they made in line with expectations in similar threads.

It seems that the OP makes threads with lots of off the wall ideas. When sensible arguments against them are raised the OP deletes their posts to try and cover up their original ideas.

 

[Justatruthseeker]

Cook the oil out quickly is not the problem.
The problem is to accumulate the oil.

Although I am not a young earth supporter even a young earth belief would not preclude this - since every plant on the earth was destroyed and would provide an ample source of material.

But if you would accept a correct interpretation of scripture and if the young earth believers would accept it as well, then all could understand.

"But the earth "became- hayah" desolate and waste, and darkness {became} upon the face.....

http://biblehub.com/hebrew/1961.htm
"hayah: to fall out, come to pass, become, be"

All life that existed at that time went extinct - including the plants, except the rare case in which one or two classes such as reptile or fish that survived this cataclysm. This is why fossils of man are not found with dinosaurs. Man did not yet exist.

This is also the confusion between the order of creation in the first two chapters. The dinosaurs were the animals created in the 5th creation. Mammals are the animals created in the 6th creation along with man.

There have been 6 creation events (man being part of the 6th) and 5 destructions. The Bible then speaks of a 6th destruction to yet occur and a 7th and final creation.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extinction_event

1. Cretaceous–Paleogene extinction event
2. Triassic–Jurassic extinction event
3. Permian–Triassic extinction event
4. Late Devonian extinction
5. Ordovician–Silurian extinction event

There have been 6 creations, man is part of the 6th, and soon there will be a 6th destruction. This is the entire point of 666 in the Bible. 6 for the number of creations, 6 for man, and 6 for the coming destruction associated with Satan and not a meteor or comet as was the 5th destruction.

Although that can be argued several ways since the angels that fell were confined under chains of dense darkness and during Armageddon a great mountain (as it is described) will crash to earth causing the waters to become undrinkable and kill off most of the life that exists. But then all new life will again be created fully formed not seen in the previous layers - including a lion that eats straw.

 

[Justatruthseeker]

Not at all. We were recording the sedimentary sequences. In the close-up the bottom "floor" was dated to about 5000 years before present. The red lines marked the more obvious stream beds.

The goal was to match a series of geological deposits with prehistoric Native American camps. The result was in the next >few< illustrations; (I'll just use this one).

This shows the sequence in depth (in feet) below surface for 2 deep trenches. The numbers in parentheses are radiocarbon dates. (Note well that all the dates are ordered in series).

So you are saying that in 8,000 years approximately 42 feet of sediment has been deposited? Little by little year by year?

Or .0045 inches per year?

Then what about the abundance of Triassic and other fossils found on the surface itself all over the globe even in lower areas were the erosion process or natural layering should have buried them even deeper than 42 feet? So this place underwent no erosion processes while the vast majority of the earth did???

Not sure exactly what you are trying to imply???

 

[Dr GS Hurd]

So you are saying that in 8,000 years approximately 42 feet of sediment has been deposited? Little by little year by year?

The first graph showed the depth at discovery of a series of prehistoric camps recovered from two trenches excavated for a highway. This photo is what was left after a bulldozer rolls over a fire pit. We actually salvaged a lot of data even
from this one.

Here is another graph to put those data in a regional context.

Each little square represents an archaeological site. Variations in vegetation, and cultural technologies are evident in the variation in archaeological site density for different habitats. It is interesting that following a drought about 3100 years ago, there is a long term shift in vegetation, and population density. There was also a change in technology. The Late Prehistoric people from ~ 1200 years ago to the Spanish invasion in the late 1700s used bow and arrow, and extensively harvested acorns for their main starch.

You will also have noticed that there was no "flood."

 

[Justatruthseeker]

The first graph showed the depth at discovery of a series of prehistoric camps recovered from two trenches excavated for a highway. This photo is what was left after a bulldozer rolls over a fire pit. We actually salvaged a lot of data even
from this one.

Here is another graph to put those data in a regional context.

Each little square represents an archaeological site. Variations in vegetation, and cultural technologies are evident in the variation in archaeological site density for different habitats. It is interesting that following a drought about 3100 years ago, there is a long term shift in vegetation, and population density. There was also a change in technology. The Late Prehistoric people from ~ 1200 years ago to the Spanish invasion in the late 1700s used bow and arrow, and extensively harvested acorns for their main starch.

You will also have noticed that there was no "flood."

You will also notice there were no animal or human fossils because there was no flood. Which is not surprising at all since the flood occurred 4500 years ago or there about, not 1200 years ago.

 

[Dr GS Hurd]

You will also notice there were no animal or human fossils because there was no flood. Which is not surprising at all since the flood occurred 4500 years ago or there about, not 1200 years ago.

There were no permineralized fossils. There were fish and mammal bones, and marine shells of mussels, and clams from the deep canyon cuts. And the data range from over 8,000 years ago to a few hundred years ago. There is no evidence of any flood larger than the ordinary seasonal rains. We also have recovered human remains in the hundreds from well preserved burials, and cremation sites across the entire time period. Those were not people buried in floods. The ice melt that began about 11,000 years ago rose sea levels which stabilized about 6,000 years ago. There was an interesting change in sea water temperatures we can measure from the oxygen isotope ratios in sea shells from archaeological sites here in S. California. About 4,000 years ago there was an increase in coastal sea water temperatures. This shifted the O2 isotopic ratios, and it also drove the red, and white abalones to deep water. The Red, and White abalone disappeared from the Native American diet south of Point Conception.

One reason I posted these data, and the photos is to directly refute the silly idea that we are merely being fooled by anonymous "professors" somewhere. That was me. I did that work.

 

[juvenissun]

The first graph showed the depth at discovery of a series of prehistoric camps recovered from two trenches excavated for a highway.

I like to make one thing clear first.

What do you mean by "A hearth is discovered at xxx depth (e.g. 20 feet)"? Don't you discover the hearth, whatever its age, right on the surface of the ground, or very close (< 1 ft) to the surface?

 

[Dr GS Hurd]

We were working just behind dozers and scrapers as they down-cut for a highway project. This photo is when they were backfilling and compacting.

We were those little guys working on the side wall.

 

[Loudmouth]

Although I am not a young earth supporter even a young earth belief would not preclude this - since every plant on the earth was destroyed and would provide an ample source of material.

That would only produce a thin layer, not the hundreds of feet of coal seen in these mines.

 

[Justatruthseeker]

That would only produce a thin layer, not the hundreds of feet of coal seen in these mines.

Sure it would, just like you still believe it would take millions of years for oil to form, even if laboratory evidence shows you are most likely mistaken. You simply choose to fit the data to your pre-concieved beliefs instead of fitting your beliefs to the data.

 

[Justatruthseeker]

There were no permineralized fossils. There were fish and mammal bones, and marine shells of mussels, and clams from the deep canyon cuts. And the data range from over 8,000 years ago to a few hundred years ago. There is no evidence of any flood larger than the ordinary seasonal rains. We also have recovered human remains in the hundreds from well preserved burials, and cremation sites across the entire time period. Those were not people buried in floods. The ice melt that began about 11,000 years ago rose sea levels which stabilized about 6,000 years ago. There was an interesting change in sea water temperatures we can measure from the oxygen isotope ratios in sea shells from archaeological sites here in S. California. About 4,000 years ago there was an increase in coastal sea water temperatures. This shifted the O2 isotopic ratios, and it also drove the red, and white abalones to deep water. The Red, and White abalone disappeared from the Native American diet south of Point Conception.

One reason I posted these data, and the photos is to directly refute the silly idea that we are merely being fooled by anonymous "professors" somewhere. That was me. I did that work.

Bones are not fossilized and are you making the claim that those fragments of bones were in the process of beginning fossilization?

So the disappearance of abalone from the Native American diet caused all humans to become prolific in production, even those inland that were not dependent on coastal fishing?????

I thought it was industrialization producing CO2 that caused warming? At least if we listen to the global warming theorists. That warming you talk of has been going on for 25,000 years and 4,000 years ago was so minor as to be non-existent in world climate.

I'd suggest it was more likely the cooling which happened afterwards.

Let's put that warming 4000 years ago into perspective.

Funny how the warming 10,000 years ago and 7,500 years ago didn't seem to affect the human population increase at all.

 

[Loudmouth]

Sure it would, just like you still believe it would take millions of years for oil to form, even if laboratory evidence shows you are most likely mistaken. You simply choose to fit the data to your pre-concieved beliefs instead of fitting your beliefs to the data.

Please explain how a single flood can produce a coal deposit hundreds of feet thick.

As to oil, we can find the source rocks for the oil. We know it comes from marine deposits. It's like saying that a house can be built in 3 months, therefore all houses are 3 months old and no house is over 3 months old. Do you see the flaw in your logic? We don't date oil by how long it takes to make it. That doesn't even mention the biomass you would need to make that much oil.

 

[Loudmouth]

I thought it was industrialization producing CO2 that caused warming? At least if we listen to the global warming theorists. That warming you talk of has been going on for 25,000 years and 4,000 years ago was so minor as to be non-existent in world climate.

People have been dying of cancer since the dawn of time. Does that mean that cigarette smoking does not cause cancer because people were getting cancer before cigarette smoking was popular?

You really need to work on your critical thinking skills.

 

[Dr GS Hurd]

Bones are not fossilized and are you making the claim that those fragments of bones were in the process of beginning fossilization?

Actually, most were in the process of decomposing all together. I have had to work recovering bone that was reduced to paper-towel strength. And the cheap paper-towels at that. An interesting observation made decades ago was that a sick animal often seeks out water both to drink, but to also cool their fever. If they die, they are already in the best place to fossilize- an oxygen depleted mud.

Johannes Weigelt
1929 "Recent Vertebrate Carcasses and their Paleobiological Implications" The University of Chicago Press.

So the disappearance of abalone from the Native American diet caused all humans to become prolific in production, even those inland that were not dependent on coastal fishing?????

You have some serious reading problems. There were two cold water species which Southern California N.A.s south of Point Conception after ~2000 BCE stopped harvesting. That was just the coastal people (obviously). They switched to a more intensive harvest of the warm water Black abalone.

The global temperature data you posted was interesting. I am not energetic enough today to explain it to you.