Jump to content


Photo

Lack Of Full Stratigraphy


  • Please log in to reply
193 replies to this topic

#141 jason777

jason777

    Moderator

  • Moderator Team
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,670 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Machining, Engine Building, Geology, Paleontology, Fishing
  • Age: 40
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Springdale,AR.

Posted 03 January 2010 - 10:42 PM

Hi Scanman,

Sorry for the misunderstanding,but I was'nt referring to strata,but layering.

Look at the "LAYERS" in the picture below and compare that to desert dunes below.The differences could'nt be more obvious.

Posted Image

Posted Image



Enjoy.

#142 Scanman

Scanman

    Member

  • Banned
  • PipPipPip
  • 641 posts
  • Age: 49
  • Christian
  • Theistic Evolutionist
  • West Virginia

Posted 04 January 2010 - 08:39 AM

Hi Scanman,

Sorry for the misunderstanding,but I was'nt referring to strata,but layering.

Look at the "LAYERS" in the picture below and compare that to desert dunes below.The differences could'nt be more obvious.

Posted Image

Posted Image
Enjoy.

View Post


Jason,

As for 'layers', there are any number of explanations...erosion and further dune deposition for one...There probably is a specific geological analysis for the formation in the Navajo sandstone that you have pictured...I have not come across it at this time.

My bet would be erosion and further dune deposition.

They actually cut a rather deep trench through the middle of a dune, 40 or 50 feet, about 4 feet wide, just to study dune formation.

Posted Image

Posted Image

The Navajo Sandstone is exactly like the dune in your picture, except that it has undergone lithification and cross sectioning/erosion over time.

If you were to slice down through the middle of that dune and lower, while maintaining a stable vertical surface, you would see very similar layers and angulations, all due to the dynamics of dune formation.

Peace

#143 Scanman

Scanman

    Member

  • Banned
  • PipPipPip
  • 641 posts
  • Age: 49
  • Christian
  • Theistic Evolutionist
  • West Virginia

Posted 04 January 2010 - 06:01 PM

Hi Scanman,

Sorry for the misunderstanding,but I was'nt referring to strata,but layering.

Look at the "LAYERS" in the picture below and compare that to desert dunes below.The differences could'nt be more obvious.

Posted Image


Jason,

Look at this cut through a non-lithified dune made during excavation for Calamus River Dam, near Burwell, Nebraska

Posted Image

Notice the Layers

Peace

#144 jason777

jason777

    Moderator

  • Moderator Team
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,670 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Machining, Engine Building, Geology, Paleontology, Fishing
  • Age: 40
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Springdale,AR.

Posted 04 January 2010 - 08:03 PM

Hi,

First of all it's not a sand dune,it's solid rock.Secondly,I see differential erosion at the top of the photograph and not a layer (or maybe an uneven cut if it's a excavation).But,if you think such things exist your more than welcome to convince yourself of it.

In fact,the largest sand dune in the world (.5 km high) is in China and it is even growing bigger because of water seeping up from the bottom,but it has no layering just a bunch of piled up sand.


Enjoy.

#145 Scanman

Scanman

    Member

  • Banned
  • PipPipPip
  • 641 posts
  • Age: 49
  • Christian
  • Theistic Evolutionist
  • West Virginia

Posted 04 January 2010 - 10:23 PM

Hi,

First of all it's not a sand dune,it's solid rock.



If you are talking about my picture...it is a sand dune, not solid rock.

Posted Image

Here is the link:

non-lithified sand dune link

Peace

#146 Scanman

Scanman

    Member

  • Banned
  • PipPipPip
  • 641 posts
  • Age: 49
  • Christian
  • Theistic Evolutionist
  • West Virginia

Posted 04 January 2010 - 10:34 PM

In fact,the largest sand dune in the world (.5 km high) is in China and it is even growing bigger because of water seeping up from the bottom,but it has no layering just a bunch of piled up sand.


Have you seen any trenching or cross-sections of the Badain Jaran dunes?

How would you know if there is no layering?

Posted Image

Please provide proof for your statement.

Peace

#147 jason777

jason777

    Moderator

  • Moderator Team
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,670 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Machining, Engine Building, Geology, Paleontology, Fishing
  • Age: 40
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Springdale,AR.

Posted 05 January 2010 - 10:20 PM

Why would I dig for them?I can look at the picture and see they are'nt there.Excavating would only produce uneven dig layers like the picture posted earlier.Do you have to disturb the Coconino or Navajo Sandstone to see layers?



Enjoy.

#148 Scanman

Scanman

    Member

  • Banned
  • PipPipPip
  • 641 posts
  • Age: 49
  • Christian
  • Theistic Evolutionist
  • West Virginia

Posted 06 January 2010 - 07:12 AM

Why would I dig for them?I can look at the picture and see they are'nt there.Excavating would only produce uneven dig layers like the picture posted earlier.Do you have to disturb the Coconino or Navajo Sandstone to see layers?
Enjoy.

View Post


Jason,

The Navajo and Coconino sandstone is already cross-sectioned by erosion for us to view.

Active sand dunes have to be trenched in order to have the same perspective.

The trenching at White Sands and Calamus allowed that same type of perspective and showed the same type of and angles of layering.

You cannot look at an active sand dune formation like Badain Jaran , just from the surface and assume that you know what it looks like underneath....well actually, most geologist can, because they understand sand dune formation.

Peace

#149 jason777

jason777

    Moderator

  • Moderator Team
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,670 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Machining, Engine Building, Geology, Paleontology, Fishing
  • Age: 40
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Springdale,AR.

Posted 06 January 2010 - 04:54 PM

Geologists and everybody knows how wind blown dunes form and yes we dont need a cross-section or uneven trenching marks to know that they don't form layers "only cross beddind".

Posted Image



Enjoy.

#150 Scanman

Scanman

    Member

  • Banned
  • PipPipPip
  • 641 posts
  • Age: 49
  • Christian
  • Theistic Evolutionist
  • West Virginia

Posted 06 January 2010 - 06:48 PM

Geologists and everybody knows how wind blown dunes form and yes we dont need a cross-section or uneven trenching marks to know that they don't form layers "only cross beddind".

Posted Image
Enjoy.

View Post


Jason,

But they do, the trenching and cross-sections show that.

After a little research, the 'layers in the original image that you gave, are an example of first order bounding planes between different crossbeds.

Posted Image
Sedimentary Structures 2nd Edition (Collinson & Thompson)

Posted Image

Peace

#151 AFJ

AFJ

    AFJ

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,625 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Baton Rouge, LA
  • Interests:Bible, molecular biology, chemistry, mineralogy, geology, eschatology, history, family
  • Age: 51
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Baton Rouge, LA

Posted 07 January 2010 - 08:31 PM

The whole formation [the wave] was formed primarily by eolian scouring processes involving saltating sand and rain on calcified compacted ancient sanddunes from the Jurassic age (Navajo sandstone)...very well documented.

View Post

Again it is assumed to be wind origin. But you are arguing this when it's sitting in a topographical basin full of massive water drainage evidence. Please consider the alternative catastrophic model for a minute in your mind. Mainly because we have all heard the standard model since we were in grade school. A true scientist can explore.

1. The wave is part of the Colorado Plateau (misleading), which is actually a basin. It was originally named "The Colorado Plateaus" by it's explorer John Wesley Powell. (1)

2. The numerous slot canyons that I showed you and "the wave" are also a part of the same basin--the Colorado Plateau.

3. Keep in mind the Grand Canyon is in the extreme southwest of the "plateau." The basin's rivers feed into the Colorado River which runs through the GC.

Posted Image

Posted Image
Mancos Shale badlands and Mt. Ellen in the proposed Henry Mountains Wilderness, southern Utah.

Looks like lots of shale. Must have been a very large lake.



Posted Image
North Caineville "Reef" is a classic "hogsback", where flat sedimentary rock formations have been tilted strongly, and the top part of a fold has been eroded away.

Yes, as you might know, a hogsback is an anticline that has been eroded in the middle. But what eroded it in this picture? It was water. Notice the rather steep dunes in the basin of the channel. And this is in the large basin of the Colorado plateau.



Finally, the wave is meta-sedimentary. That is it has undergone interesting diagenetic processes.

UNIQUE GEOLOGIC CHARACTERISTICS OF “THE WAVE” IN JURASSIC NAVAJO SANDSTONE, VERMILION CLIFFS NATIONAL MONUMENT, ARIZONA
SEILER, Winston M., Geology and Geophysics, University of Utah

2. Stunning sandstone coloration in a wide range of red, orange, yellow, white,
and purple hues is largely controlled by iron oxide mineralogies that document diagenetic fluid flow and chemical reaction fronts in Navajo Sandstone. There are at least four distinct coloration events: an initial reddening by syndepositional to early diagenetic grain-coatings of iron oxides (e.g., hematite); a bleaching event by reducing fluids; a secondary introduction of Fe evidenced by dark, black to purple liesegang rings; and a final overprinting of a yellow liesegang-type banding.


1. "...diagenetic fluid flow and chemical reaction fronts...."
This sandstone has undergone diagenetic or chemical processes in the crystallization process. It is not just cemented together--it is bonded molecularly through chemical and metamorphic processes.

2. "...diagenetic grain-coatings of iron oxides (e.g., hematite)...." Notice the grains are "coated" with hematite (an iron ore which in this case has oxidized) as much of the southwest U.S. topography is stained with hematite. WIND DID NOT COAT THE ROCK AND GRAINS OF SAND WITH HEMATITE. IT WAS CAUSED BY WATER.

Posted Image
Sand from Coral Pink Sand Dunes State Park, Utah [Navajo Sandstone--and the park is part of the Colorado Plateau]. These are grains of quartz with a hematite coating providing the orange color.
Wiki-"sandstone"



3. "...black to purple liesegang rings; and a final overprinting of a yellow liesegang-type banding...."

What are liesegang rings?

Posted Image

Liesegang rings are a phenomenon seen in many, if not most, chemical systems undergoing a precipitation reaction, under certain conditions of concentration and in the absence of convection....The phenomenon was first noted over one hundred years ago (in 1896) by the German chemist Raphael E. Liesegang, and has aroused the curiosity of chemists for many years. It was first noted when he dropped a solution of silver nitrate on to a thin layer of gel containing potassium dichromate. After a few hours, sharp concentric rings of insoluble silver dichromate formed. When formed in a test tube by diffusing one component from the top, layers or bands of precipitate form, rather than rings.-Wiki


Think of the implications of what we are seeing when we put it in context of what I saw in the abandoned sand pile--the laminations. There are several theories for this chemical event, but the debate is evidence that we don't know for sure what causes it. What causes atoms to arrange in sheets in many silicate minerals? Are you following me?

In other words, there is a distinct possibility, as shown by evidence, that the "layers" we see in the wave are chemically caused! It would be hard to attribute periods of time to each layer as they are winding and bent--and the attribution to eolian sand dunes would make this impossible!

So then, "the wave" is in the midst of a large basin, which is evidenced by many past water caused formations, as well as present topography evidenced by rivers which drain eventually through the Grand Canyon.

It has been diagenetically (sp?) altered by fluids--not by rain on calcified sand, but by most likely rapidly receding ocean waters (by an outburst drainage event)that were full of planktonic organisms and salts. The catastrophic flood model does not contradict the evidence.

#152 jason777

jason777

    Moderator

  • Moderator Team
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,670 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Machining, Engine Building, Geology, Paleontology, Fishing
  • Age: 40
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Springdale,AR.

Posted 07 January 2010 - 08:58 PM

Scanman,

Even the "hypothetical" chart you provided needs the water table to rise to account for the layering.How are you going to account for thousands of square miles of water in the Colorado Plateau.


Thanks.

#153 Scanman

Scanman

    Member

  • Banned
  • PipPipPip
  • 641 posts
  • Age: 49
  • Christian
  • Theistic Evolutionist
  • West Virginia

Posted 07 January 2010 - 10:20 PM

Scanman,

Even the "hypothetical" chart you provided needs the water table to rise to account for the layering.How are you going to account for thousands of square miles of water in the Colorado Plateau.
Thanks.

View Post


Before the canyon was carved and before the Colorado Plateau uplift occured, the land would have been flat and there would be a water table just below the surface.

Link

Abstract: The Lower Jurassic Navajo Sandstone Formation of south-west USA represents one of the largest erg deposits ever to have developed on Earth. Here, we report the widespread occurrence of silicified conifer stumps and trunks within interdune deposits near Moab, south-east Utah. Where present as (par)autochthonous assemblages, trees are associated with the deposits of spring-fed carbonate lakes. A few stumps preserved in growth position are rooted in aeolian sandstone immediately below the lake deposits, and evidently established on interdune soils in response to a rising water table. Following at least several decades of growth, trees were killed as the water table continued to rise forming shallow lakes containing ostracodes. Where present as allochthonous assemblages, randomly orientated tree trunks are associated with massive sandstone beds interpreted as fluidized mass flow deposits. These may have formed when dune slip-faces collapsed during occasional heavy downpours of rain, destroying stands of trees. The occurrence of large conifers over a wide area of the Navajo Sandstone Formation in south-east Utah may record long-lived pluvial episodes during which the dune field stabilized, or reflect the erg-margin position of the localities.


The predominant fossils that have been found in the Navajo Sandstone have been landdwelling vertibrates.

Here is a website concerning the Navajo Sandstone formation and the fossils that have been found in it:

Navajo Sandstone Link

Peace

#154 Scanman

Scanman

    Member

  • Banned
  • PipPipPip
  • 641 posts
  • Age: 49
  • Christian
  • Theistic Evolutionist
  • West Virginia

Posted 07 January 2010 - 10:39 PM

Again it is assumed to be wind origin.  But you are arguing this when it's sitting in a topographical basin full of massive water drainage evidence. Please consider the alternative catastrophic model for a minute in your mind.  Mainly because we have all heard the standard model since we were in grade school.  A true scientist can explore.

1. The wave is part of the Colorado Plateau (misleading), which is actually a basin.  It was originally named "The Colorado Plateaus" by it's explorer John Wesley Powell. (1)

2. The numerous slot canyons that I showed you and "the wave" are also a part of the same basin--the Colorado Plateau.

3. Keep in mind the Grand Canyon is in the extreme southwest of the "plateau."  The basin's rivers feed into the Colorado River which runs through the GC.

Yes, as you might know, a hogsback is an anticline that has been eroded in the middle.  But what eroded it in this picture?  It was water.  Notice the rather steep dunes in the basin of the channel.  And this is in the large basin of the Colorado plateau.
Finally, the wave is meta-sedimentary.  That is it has undergone interesting diagenetic processes.
1. "...diagenetic fluid flow and chemical reaction fronts...."
This sandstone has undergone diagenetic or chemical processes in the crystallization process.  It is not just cemented together--it is bonded molecularly through chemical and metamorphic processes. 

2.  "...diagenetic grain-coatings of iron oxides (e.g., hematite)...." Notice the grains are "coated" with hematite (an iron ore which in this case has oxidized) as much of the southwest U.S. topography is stained with hematite.  WIND DID NOT COAT THE ROCK AND GRAINS OF SAND WITH HEMATITE.  IT WAS CAUSED BY WATER.


3. "...black to purple liesegang rings; and a final overprinting of a yellow liesegang-type banding...."

What are liesegang rings?
Think of the implications of what we are seeing when we put it in context of what I saw in the abandoned sand pile--the laminations. There are several theories for this chemical event, but the debate is evidence that we don't know for sure what causes it.  What causes atoms to arrange in sheets in many silicate minerals?  Are you following me?

In other words, there is a distinct possibility, as shown by evidence, that the "layers" we see in the wave are chemically caused!  It would be hard to attribute periods of time to each layer as they are winding and bent--and the attribution to eolian sand dunes would make this impossible!

So then, "the wave" is in the midst of a large basin, which is evidenced by many past water caused formations, as well as present topography evidenced by rivers which drain eventually through the Grand Canyon. 

It has been diagenetically (sp?) altered by fluids--not by rain on calcified sand, but by most likely rapidly receding ocean waters (by an outburst drainage event)that were full of planktonic organisms and salts.  The catastrophic flood model does not contradict the evidence.

View Post



You are correct in regard to the Liesegang banding in the aeolian Navajo Sandstone.

The Wave Link

“The Wave” in the Jurassic Navajo Sandstone at Coyote Buttes, lies at the northern margin of the Vermilion Cliffs National Monument on the Arizona and Utah border. This feature, named for its resemblance to a cresting ocean wave, is a tremendous draw for thousands of wilderness enthusiasts and photographers every year. There are three major geologic features that contribute to the unique character of The Wave.

1. Large eolian foresets consist of rhythmic and cyclic alternating grainflow and windripple laminae that reflect seasonal changes in dune migration.

2. Stunning sandstone coloration in a wide range of red, orange, yellow, white, and purple hues is largely controlled by iron oxide mineralogies that document diagenetic fluid flow and chemical reaction fronts in Navajo Sandstone. There are at least four distinct coloration events: an initial reddening by syndepositional to early diagenetic grain-coatings of iron oxides (e.g., hematite); a bleaching event by reducing fluids; a secondary introduction of Fe evidenced by dark, black to purple liesegang rings; and a final overprinting of a yellow liesegang-type banding.

3. Although The Wave follows a large natural fracture in an upper cliff of the Navajo Sandstone that has been enlarged by water, the smooth bowl is a predominantly wind-scoured channel with its dimensions likely acting as a venturi, to effectively increase wind speed within the bowl of The Wave. Wind erosion further sculpts around delicate eolian foreset features to enhance textural differences and highlight the diagenetic colors.

The Wave's combination of features provides insight into the geomorphic and diagenetic evolution of eolian deposits on the Colorado Plateau. The Wave is a valuable geologic resource for the scientific community, and an exceptional aesthetic landscape feature for resource management in the Vermilion Cliffs National Monument.


Peace

#155 AFJ

AFJ

    AFJ

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,625 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Baton Rouge, LA
  • Interests:Bible, molecular biology, chemistry, mineralogy, geology, eschatology, history, family
  • Age: 51
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Baton Rouge, LA

Posted 09 January 2010 - 08:14 AM

You are correct in regard to the Liesegang banding in the aeolian Navajo Sandstone.
Peace

View Post


Here is an article that shows others have observed quick forming laminations in sand besides me (glad I wasn't seeing things--lol).

Posted Image
The cliff scarp on Coolangatta Beach, formed by a storm surge.


Posted Image
Laminations in the cliff scarp sand. The height is about 650 mm (2 feet).


Sandy Stripes Article

"How did the sand on the beach come to be laminated? Beach sand is not often layered like this. This sand had been put there recently in a beach restoration project of the Gold Coast City Council. The beaches along this part of the coast lose sand, apparently because of breakwaters...According to Dr Tom Conner of Kinhill, Cameron and McNamara, the engineering company which managed the project, the ship carried 8,000 cubic metres of sand at a time. It took only an hour to pump the sand to the beach in a slurry of approximately 30 per cent sand and 70 per cent water. This amounts to over 400,000 litres of water and sand.... This created what Dr Conner described as quite a fast flowing little ‘river’ back towards the sea, with the sand being deposited as the water flowed. In other words, the sand was deposited in quite a fast-flowing, turbulent environment."

In light of this, I have some questions/comments for the modern science "explainers."

We have seen that it is possible for laminations to form quickly in sand, yet the "orthodox" view is that layers in sand stone, shale, and other sedimentary rocks were laid (originally) horizontally over eons. Unfaulted folds (synclines, anticlines) are explained as a result of thrusts, plunges, uplifts, groundwater, pressure over millions of years.

This is my beef with what I see as a major irregularity among the science establishment. If a geologist sees varves in rather unwinding shale, or parallel strata in sandstone--by appealing to the intuitive nature of man, he explains this by a simple, mechanical, chronological order of layering over time. This is based on the same assumptions that have been intuitively assumed by Hutton, Lyell, and others even before them.

But if he sees winding laminations int "the wave," he groups it with other cross-bedding formations--hence a petrified sand dune!

What happened to the layering explanation?? When we see horizontal laminations in shale and sand stone, we are told this happened by slow uniforminarian processes.

But when we see the laminated "WAVE," the explanation suddenly becomes an INTACT SAND DUNE FORMATION WHICH SOMEHOW CALCIFIED, LITHIFIED AS A UNIT. HOW DID A SAND DUNE STAY INTACT, WITHOUT CHANGING OVER THE TIME IT TOOK TO LITHIFY UNDER THE UNIFORMITARIAN MODEL??


Furthermore we are told that severely winding strata are a result of slow earth movement, groundwater and pressure on the rock strata over great time. Yet this is not attributed to the winding laminations in "the wave." Why??

The entire scenario I have just expounded is an entirely irregular way of interpreting the strata and laminations of different formations in the same kinds of rock.

#156 Scanman

Scanman

    Member

  • Banned
  • PipPipPip
  • 641 posts
  • Age: 49
  • Christian
  • Theistic Evolutionist
  • West Virginia

Posted 09 January 2010 - 10:11 AM

Here is an article that shows others have observed quick forming laminations in sand besides me (glad I wasn't seeing things--lol).

Posted Image
The cliff scarp on Coolangatta Beach, formed by a storm surge.


Posted Image
Laminations in the cliff scarp sand. The height is about 650 mm (2 feet).
Sandy Stripes Article

"How did the sand on the beach come to be laminated? Beach sand is not often layered like this. This sand had been put there recently in a beach restoration project of the Gold Coast City Council. The beaches along this part of the coast lose sand, apparently because of breakwaters...According to Dr Tom Conner of Kinhill, Cameron and McNamara, the engineering company which managed the project, the ship carried 8,000 cubic metres of sand at a time. It took only an hour to pump the sand to the beach in a slurry of approximately 30 per cent sand and 70 per cent water. This amounts to over 400,000 litres of water and sand.... This created what Dr Conner described as quite a fast flowing little ‘river’ back towards the sea, with the sand being deposited as the water flowed. In other words, the sand was deposited in quite a fast-flowing, turbulent environment."

In light of this, I have some questions/comments for the modern science "explainers." 

We have seen that it is possible for laminations to form quickly in sand, yet the "orthodox" view is that layers in sand stone, shale, and other sedimentary rocks were laid (originally) horizontally over eons.  Unfaulted folds  (synclines, anticlines) are explained as a result of thrusts, plunges, uplifts, groundwater, pressure over millions of years.

This is my beef with what I see as a major irregularity among the science establishment.  If a geologist sees varves in rather unwinding shale, or parallel strata in sandstone--by appealing to the intuitive nature of man, he explains this by a simple, mechanical, chronological order of layering over time.  This is based on the same assumptions that have been intuitively assumed by Hutton, Lyell, and others even before them.

But if he sees winding laminations int "the wave," he groups it with other cross-bedding formations--hence a petrified sand dune! 

What happened to the layering explanation??  When we see horizontal laminations in shale and sand stone, we are told this happened by slow uniforminarian processes. 

But when we see the laminated "WAVE,"  the explanation suddenly becomes an INTACT SAND DUNE FORMATION WHICH SOMEHOW CALCIFIED, LITHIFIED AS A UNIT.  HOW DID A SAND DUNE STAY INTACT, WITHOUT CHANGING OVER THE TIME IT TOOK TO LITHIFY UNDER THE UNIFORMITARIAN MODEL??


Furthermore we are told that severely winding strata are a result of slow earth movement, groundwater and pressure on the rock strata over great time.  Yet this is not attributed to the winding laminations in "the wave."  Why?? 

The entire scenario I have just expounded is an entirely irregular way of interpreting the strata and laminations of different formations in the same kinds of rock.

View Post


The Liesegang banding is a chemical diffusion phenomenon that a trained geologist can distinguish from that of the actual stratification layers...but just so you understand, Liesegang banding does follow stratification layers.

As for the 'Wave', it is a lithified sand dune that also exhibits the Liesegang banding.

Sand dunes stay intact over time because they are covered up by other dunes and layers of material. Over time lithification takes place.

The shapes that you observe in the 'Wave' today are not the shapes of the original dunes themselves, but that of wind and rain carving intricate pathways through the Navajo Sanstone.

The Wave Link

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/fE6mVQ_oyRM&hl=en_US&fs=1&%22></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/fE6mVQ_oyRM&hl=en_US&fs=1& type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

By looking at natural cross-sections of the Navajo Sandstone in other areas of the Colorado Plateau, it is possible to see the 'layered' structure of the original dune formations.

The size and shape of the sand grains, the angle and patterns of the Navajo Sandstone are consistent with that of an eolian formed dune.

The Navajo Sandstone was once a large 'erg', rivaling that of the Empty Quarter in the Saudi penisula.

The fossil record within the Navajo Sandstone is predominantly made of land vertebrates. Evidence of burrows and tracks are consistent with that of insects such as spiders and scorpians, worms, termites and possibly crayfish. The fauna fossil remains are mostly land fauna.

Navajo Sandstone Fossil Record Link

Efforts to define the Navajo Sandstone as a subaqueous formation are motivated by a desire to fit the formation into a global flood paradigm, rather then a desire to discover the truth.

Peace

#157 AFJ

AFJ

    AFJ

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,625 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Baton Rouge, LA
  • Interests:Bible, molecular biology, chemistry, mineralogy, geology, eschatology, history, family
  • Age: 51
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Baton Rouge, LA

Posted 09 January 2010 - 08:17 PM

The Liesegang banding is a chemical diffusion phenomenon that a trained geologist can distinguish from that of the actual stratification layers...but just so you understand, Liesegang banding does follow stratification layers.

View Post


Scanman--the fact remains that laminations and varves have long been used to justify an old earth model, no matter what the cause of the laminations. There are factors "trained" geologists did not realize when Lyell won the minds of academia 150 years ago. And the modern science still ignores evidence which challenges their explanation on laminations.

You said nothing about the beach sand. It is in line with what I saw. The point is that standard geology says that laminations/ varves are caused by activity/ no activity patterns over long periods of time. But evidence has been submitted in more than one form on this thread that rapid, water-caused lamination can be produced--and does not require millions of years.

As for the 'Wave', it is a lithified sand dune that also exhibits the Liesegang banding.

Sand dunes stay intact over time because they are covered up by other dunes and layers of material. Over time lithification takes place.

View Post

The same thing could have happened by water, especially water that kept rising. You have said that water can not cause dunes that cross bed at steep angles like wind can. Yet you have seen the video--that water caused cross-bedding at 36 degrees.

Also, there is no doubt that two of the pictures I showed you were water dunes and they were much more than 10 degrees.

Posted Image

This is shale. These dunes are obviously more than 10 degrees.

The shale shows evidence of a former large body of water and it is adjacent to topography you want us to believe was a desert in a basin.


The shapes that you observe in the 'Wave' today are not the shapes of the original dunes themselves, but that of wind and rain carving intricate pathways through the Navajo Sanstone.

View Post


Glad you said rain. I've been wanting to ask you how did the rain stain all that sand in the wave, the Colorado Plateau, and the rest of the southwest U.S.? It is all stained with hematite, and there is no evidence of iron ore in the sand. The evidence suggests that it came from the ground--there is no other possibility.

Posted Image
From an iron mine

The fossil record within the Navajo Sandstone is predominantly made of land vertebrates. Evidence of burrows and tracks are consistent with that of insects such as spiders and scorpians, worms, termites and possibly crayfish. The fauna fossil remains are mostly land fauna.

View Post


Again, how the rules change. So marine fossils in mountains are from receding oceans, but no possibility of water in the Colorado Plateau based on land species. What are you going to believe if they find marine fossils in the rock there?

I don't know the list of fossils they've found in the Navajo, but I do know some data on the Coconino, which is also attributed to eolian processes. Does millions, if not billions of well preserved nautiloids qualify for evidence of water?source

Also--"Parting lineations, which is erosion formed by short bursts of fast-flowing water. They have never been observed in desert sand dunes."source


Efforts to define the Navajo Sandstone as a subaqueous formation are motivated by a desire to fit the formation into a global flood paradigm, rather then a desire to discover the truth.

View Post

Really? It seems to me that creationists are putting up a reasonable argument. I once believed in an old earth--so did Steven Austin, and many other creationists who heard a one sided science model through years of education. The evidence will continue to come in. The Lyellites have quite a head start.

Furthermore, your suggestion that unis want only to discover the truth, while we narrow minded creats hold stubbornly to the deluge is like the pot calling the kettle black. Especially when we think that unis want us to still believe that blood cells can endure 68 million years.

#158 jason777

jason777

    Moderator

  • Moderator Team
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,670 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Machining, Engine Building, Geology, Paleontology, Fishing
  • Age: 40
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Springdale,AR.

Posted 09 January 2010 - 08:37 PM

The fossil record within the Navajo Sandstone is predominantly made of land vertebrates. Evidence of burrows and tracks are consistent with that of insects such as spiders and scorpians, worms, termites and possibly crayfish. The fauna fossil remains are mostly land fauna.

Again, how the rules change. So marine fossils in mountains are from receding oceans, but no possibility of water in the Colorado Plateau based on land species. What are you going to believe if they find marine fossils in the rock there?


http://www.nps.gov/c...tromatolite.htm

Crocodile fossils have been found in the navajo sandstone too.It should also be noted that foot tracks are never found between the layers,but only on top of them.Likey made after the flood when the ground was still wet and pliable.

Posted Image



Enjoy.

#159 Scanman

Scanman

    Member

  • Banned
  • PipPipPip
  • 641 posts
  • Age: 49
  • Christian
  • Theistic Evolutionist
  • West Virginia

Posted 09 January 2010 - 11:10 PM

I don't know the list of fossils they've found in the Navajo, but I do know some data on the Coconino, which is also attributed to eolian processes.  Does millions, if not billions of well preserved nautiloids qualify for evidence of water?[


AFJ,

The nautiloids were found in the Redwall Limestone, not the eolian Navajo Sandstone.

The Navajo Sandstone does not appear in the Grand Canyon stratigraphic formation, but is located above the GC's highest layer (the Kaibab) elsewhere on the Colorado Plateau.

Peace

#160 Scanman

Scanman

    Member

  • Banned
  • PipPipPip
  • 641 posts
  • Age: 49
  • Christian
  • Theistic Evolutionist
  • West Virginia

Posted 09 January 2010 - 11:32 PM

You said nothing about the beach sand. It is in line with what I saw.  The point is that standard geology says that laminations/ varves are caused by activity/ no activity patterns over long periods of time.  But evidence has been submitted in more than one form on this thread that rapid, water-caused lamination can be produced--and does not require millions of years. 
The same thing could have happened by water, especially water that kept rising.  You have said that water can not cause dunes that cross bed at steep angles like wind can.  Yet you have seen the video--that water caused cross-bedding at 36 degrees. 


It appears from your photo, that the banding that you see is indeed Liesegang in nature.
The water level/table appears to have risen and fallen over whatever period of time and caused this discoloration.
Laminar discoloration is not the only thing that determines 'layers' of stratification.

As for the video...if you are referring to the flume study using glass beads...they were simulating eolian processes, not subaqueous. They were unable to use sand because of it's size and weight.

Subaqueous dunes are typically 10 degrees or lower.

The shape and frosting of the sand grains in the Navajo SS are consistent with eolian formed dunes.

Peace




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users