From: Bill Payne (bpayne15@juno.com)
Date: Wed Mar 26 2003 - 23:45:12 EST
On Wed, 26 Mar 2003 10:01:31 -0000 "Michael Roberts"
<michael.andrea.r@ukonline.co.uk> writes:
> OK I will buy that and thus accept a continuous depostion at 5cm/day.
You miss the point, Michael. Fine-grained material can be deposited in
high-energy environments, which David said was not possible and therefore
a problem for YEC.
> > Since no one has commented on the paraconformities of Grand Canyon,
then
> > I assume it is reasonable that the lack of mechanical and chemical
> > erosion may demonstrate that there was little time elapsed during
each
> > paraconformity.
>
> This has been answered many times before and if you cannot accept it
then
> you must be invincibly ignorant. A gap in strata can mean one of two
> things, either strata were deposited and eroded or else they were not
> deposited in the first place. I get bored!
Yeah, that's me, Michael, invincibly ignorant. Thank you for explaining
what a paraconformity is, I never knew. Now that we have cleared that
up, could you also explain: (A) if strata were deposited and eroded - how
did the eroded surface end up so flat, and (B) if strata were not
deposited in the first place, why do we not see evidence of weathering?
For example, in eastern Utah, over 200 km (SW-NE) of the Lynch, Muav,
Tapeats and Ignacio are conformably overlain by the Redwall and
Leadville. You're the one who said these arguments don't stand under
scrutiny; please, if you could get unbored for a few minutes, explain the
details of the mechanism for 200 km of planar erosion, or for protecting
strata exposed for 140 million years from chemical weathering and
mechanical erosion.
Bill
________________________________________________________________
Sign Up for Juno Platinum Internet Access Today
Only $9.95 per month!
Visit www.juno.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Wed Mar 26 2003 - 23:59:03 EST