Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
A4C said:I said semi hardened Have you ever made a mud ball and looked at it a year later ? In fact I am talking hardened due to compaction (not dryness) under many meters (or hundreds of meters) of other sediment.
Allister said:i am no geologist so i cant argue this point. unfortunatly.
Thank you for backing up my claim . So if you picked up a slab of these still soft sediments and and put pressure on one side would it not be posible to "bend" the slab so the "layers" remained together around the bend. Now this is a mini version of some rock formations at the Grand Canyon Right? Now supposing those layers were allowed to dry out (ie have the water table hundreds of meters below it ) would not pressure and time cause that to form into rock (even in the bent form)?Loke said:Fortunatly I'm a geologist, and as matter of fact, today I visited a 280 meter borehole. I'd say 280 meters is close to hundreds of meters. The sediments penetrated were not hardened but were all soft sediments - clay, silt, sand - as always, drilling through Quatenary sediments into Tertiary sediments in my country which is Denmark.
Regards
Loke
A4C said:Thank you for backing up my claim . So if you picked up a slab of these still soft sediments and and put pressure on one side would it not be posible to "bend" the slab so the "layers" remained together around the bend. Now this is a mini version of some rock formations at the Grand Canyon Right? Now supposing those layers were allowed to dry out (ie have the water table hundreds of meters below it ) would not pressure and time cause that to form into rock (even in the bent form)?
Yes Look on this link http://www.answersingenesis.org/tj/v14/i3/pipes.aspLifeToTheFullest! said:A4C, perhaps you missed the link I posted earlier. http://www.icr.org/research/sa/sa-r02.htm
Care to comment?
.notto said:Most rock can bend. This isn't evidence for your model. You are still denying the evidence that has been presented to you. Address the geology at the Canyon
Is that addressed enough for you?quote from AiG said:Many sedimentary rocks are so brittle they would break under any applied pressure, no matter how slowly applied. The fact of intense folding in some now-brittle rocks shows they were still soft when the pressure was applied. A good example is the Kaibab Upwarp in the Grand Canyon, where rock layers including the Tapeats Sandstone were uplifted by a mile, and in one place bend about 90 degrees in just over 30m. This is claimed to have been 480 million years old at the time of the warping, by which time it would have surely hardened. But if it was hard at the time of warping, we would expect to find evidence of great stress, e.g. elongated sand grains or broken crystals of cementing minerals. Yet we dont, indicating that the material was still soft while bending, showing that it could not have been laid down over millions of years but was deformed soon after deposition, thus eliminating a half billion years from the supposed geological time scale.
A4C said:Yes Look on this link http://www.answersingenesis.org/tj/v14/i3/pipes.asp
It shows the geology behind lava formation in sediment layers .notto said:What does this have to do with lava dams in the colorado river?
http://home.austarnet.com.au/stear/a_dump_on_aig's_tas_walker.htm
Another important evidence that large thicknesses of layered sedimentary rock formed and hardened more-or-less simultaneously is fluidisation pipes. This is where a hot lava flow intruded horizontally and very rapidly underneath a sedimentary deposit, boiled the water touching it, which welled up to form a vertical column above the hot spot. In this column, the unconsolidated sediment transformed into a fluid suspension, destroying the layered structure, and then hardening into a noticeable pipe structure. See Walker, T., Fluidisation pipes: evidence of large-scale watery catastrophe, CEN Tech. J. 14(3):89, 2000.
A4C said:It shows the geology behind lava formation in sediment layers .
Here is the introductory quote from AiG:
A4C said:.
OK How about this from this page :
http://www.answersingenesis.org/news/indoctrinator.asp
Is that addressed enough for you?
So what are we disagreeing on -whether lava exists in sediment layers No we agree on that. It seems like you want me to take a trip to US and study what you are talking about and give you first hand comment OK I will do that if you will provide the plane fare and accommodation and all expenses (Nothing too flashy but just make sure that there are no fleas in the bednotto said:No, it shows the geology behind 'some' lava formation in sedimentary layers. The lava dams at the grand canyon came after the erosion and are on top of the already eroded canyon, not coming from underneath it.
You seem to be taking a lot of specific examples and trying to apply them generally to an area that doesn't match them. Next you'll be telling us that the ash and mud layers near mount saint helens are like the sandstone and limestone layers of the grand canyon. You can't generalize stuff like this, you need to look at the evidence at the site we are discussing.
notto said:Safarti should talk this over with David Allen.
http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v25/i1/warped.asp
However, there are other instances where it is obvious that the folding occurred while the rock was solid. Deformation experiments have shown that such folding is possible under extreme pressure in a short time or under moderate pressure in a long time.
A4C said:
Well consider this : What do you think the GC would look like prior to the receeding of the flood waters ?LifeToTheFullest! said:Then please answer my previous question.
How do you account for either side of GC being comparatively untouched the global flood?
A4C said:Well consider this : What do you think the GC would look like prior to the receeding of the flood waters ?
Hint (it didn't exist)
LifeToTheFullest! said:Quit dodging the question, it's disengenous and irritating. You contend that GC was formed by a global flood. Please explain how either side of GC was left comparatively untouched.
A4C said:When water covered the US as a result of the global flood soils would have been washed from high mountainous areas and sedimentation would have evenly settled over lower areas including the area now covered by the Grand Canyon. As the flood waters began to receed the water would have found its way to the lower levels by a fortuitous path which would begin to be come even more eroded and form a permanent path of receeding waters. The Grand Canyon is an example of this pathway for mega cubic miles of receeding flood water and redistributed sediment. The sediment adjacent to this pathway would not necessarilly get disturbed
I hope this clarifies for you
A4C said:If my memory serves me right the "argument" was whether Noah could use pitch - well he could because you dont need fossil fuels to do it -end of "argument"
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?