>I'm much happier about this approach. However, there is still a need
>to show that these correlations can be linked to the concept of time
>equivalence.
>
I can point to things like the Diecke Bentonite. A bentonite is a fossil
volcanic ash. The ash is deposited by a volcanic explosion is spread through
the air, and is deposited within a few days. After an explosion a volcano
produces much less ash. In any event, the ash takes no more than a few months
to be deposited. The ash from each volcanic explosion, has a unique chemical
signature. Because of this you can find an ash and tell what explosion it
went with.
Now, the Diecke bentonite is a bentonite which is wide spread through out the
eastern US., from Michigan, to Alabama to New York. It is the same bentonite
as the Big Bentonite that covers large parts of Europe. The Deicke bentonite
is the largest volcanic eruption ever. Let me cite Huff et al,
"Biostratigraphical, geochemical, isotopic, and
paleogeographic data suggest that the Millbrig K-bentonite, one
of the thickest and most widespread Ordovician volcanic ash beds
in eastern North America, is the same as the so-called 'Big
Bentonite' in Baltoscandia. this is the first time that the same
K-bentonite has been identified in both North America and Europe,
and it serves as a unique event-stratigraphic marker over a large
portion of the Northern Hemisphere. This eruption produced at
least 340 km^3 of dense-rock-equivalent ash that was deposited in
a layer up to 1-2 m thick over several million square kilometres.
As much as 800 km3 of additional ash may have fallen into the
Iapetus Ocean, for a total of 1140 km^3. Trace element
geochemistry shows that the ash was derived from a felsic calc-
alkalic magmatic source characteristic of volcanism in a
continental crust-based, destructive plate-margin settling. THis
is one of the largest, if not the largest, ash falls recorded in
Earth's Phanerozoic stratigraphic record, but its recognizable
effect on faunas and floras was minimal, and it did not result in
a global extinction event. The Millbrig-Big Bentonite bed
provides accurate time control for sedimentologic, paleoecologic,
and paleogeographic reconstructions across plates positioned in
tropical (Laurentia) and temperate (Baltica) latitudes during
Middle Ordovician time."~Warren D. Huff Stig M. Bergstrom, and
Dennis R. Kolata, "Giant Ordovician volcanic ash fall in North
America and Europe: Biological, Tectonomagmatic, and Event-
Stratigraphic Significance," Geology, v. 20, Oct. 1992, p. 875-
878 esp. 875
This event allows one to know that the beds in Europe were the identical time
in America. The only reason anyone reading this is just now learning of it is
because Creationists don't know enough geology to even be aware of things like
this. Thus,they don't talk about them.
>A little aside here: I seem to remember you remonstrating with Steve
>Jones about citing your "former" publications - and here you are
>citing a Morton publication from your YEC days! I will declare an
>interest here and say that I regard this particular article as one of
>your best. It develops Derek Ager's Chapter 1 in "The nature of the
>stratigraphical record" very well. Has your article ever been
>answered? Is it still valid? Can plate tectonics provide the
>mechanisms for epositing these various lithologies on a global scale?
>
Thank you for the complement on the article. The data is still valid; my
conclusion about a global flood are as erroneous as they can be. I cite that
article because all of the data is there to back up what I am saying. I also
still support the following articles:
"Prolegamena to the study of the Sediments"Creation Research Society
Quarterly. 17:162-167.-Proved the global flood violated the second law of
thermodynamics
"Can the Canopy Hold Water?" Creation Research Society Quarterly. 16:164-169.
Proved that if there was a vapor canopy, the earth would have been too hot for
life (above 250 deg. F
"Warm Earth Fallacy" Creation Research Society Quarterly. 17:40-41. Proved
that the way YECs "prove" the pre-flood earth was warm, is logically flawed.
I can't think of anything else I will still stand by.
>> Third, there is occassionally depositional patterns which can be correlated
>>across these basins.The tertiary has more clastic deposition than almost any
>> other period... The Pennsylvanian strata all over the world is very cyclic
>>in nature.
>>
>> Finally, chemicals can be correlated. The majority of the Coal is found in
>> carboniferous strata. Banded iron formations are only found at the bottomof
>>the pile in the pre-cambrian.The iridium anomaly at the top of the
>>Cretaceous appears to be a world-wide event.Ratios of sulfur isotopes can be
>> correlated around the world
>>
>> These types of correlations from basin to basin help tell what rock is
>> to be correlated with what rock.
>
>These are all reasonable approaches to correlation, although a number
>of these generalised correlations only really emerge one the rocks
>are reexamined in the light of the Geological Column concept.
No. The are the order that the rocks are found in undisturbed basins. The
data is mere observation of order and lithology.
>
>I would suggest that more is needed to establish time-equivalence.
>Here are some possibilities:
>(a) Orogenies. Major deformation events in earth history have
>occured: lower-lying rocks exhibit folding, etc., and are overlain by
>relatively undeformed strata. This establishes a time sequence and
>correlation proceeds by linking together rocks in the same orogenic
>belt.
There are hundreds of bentonites throughout the geological column. These can
be used to correlate separate basins.
>(b) Metamorphism. Metamorphic events seem always to occur at depth,
>where mineral changes may be induced by temperature, pressure and the
>presence of water and minerals in solution. Metamorpic rocks are
>generally separated from normal rocks by an unconformity. By
>examining these mineral changes, a time sequence within a sequence of
>rocks can be established - and this may lead to further correlations
>which have time significance.
>(c) Large-scale unconformities. Whilst unconformities are pervasive
>in the rock record, there are some which stand out. The Cambrian
>unconformity marks the base of the rock record which carries hard-
>bodied fossils.
I am not an expert in that part of the column, but my understanding is that
this last statement is no longer true. I am going to give you a non-scientific
reference, since it has been a while since I have studied that area. see
"When Life Exploded," TIME Dec 4, 1995, p. 773-774.
I just found a scientific source, see John P. Grotzinger, Samuel A. Bowring,
Beaverly Z. Saylor and Alan J. Kaufman, "Biostratigraphic and Geochronologic
Constraints on Early Animal Evolution," Science 270, Oct. 27, 1995, p. 603-604
(598-604).
I guess it hasn't been that long after all.
> The Permian unconformity marks the development of a
>global pattern of non-marine red-beds. In the Cretaceous, prior to
>the development of the Chalk facies, there seems to have been a major
>erosive horizon. These unconformities suggest that certain fossil
>and lithographic correlations are, in fact, time correlations as well.
>
>> Frankly, Christians have been extremely derelict in their treatment of
> the
>> geologic column and most of those making such claims have never even been
> on a
>> geologic field trip.
>
>This goes back to George McCready Price, who developed this
>"treatment" of the GC, but whose field experience was very limited.
>
That is exactly the man to blame for the geological mess we are in.
[snip]
>> In all the creationists books I have read, and I have read a bunch, only
> two
>> of them attempted to diagram what an overthrust looks like. One, Eric Von
>> fang's Time upside down drew a diagram like the first on. He is wrong.
> The
>> other, Earth Science for Christian Schools, by Mulfinger and Snyder,
>> diagrammed it correctly, but stated that overthrusts do not exist.
>
>This does seem a little unfair. Harold Clark was a student of
>Price's who sought to develop the flood geology approach. Clark came
>to reject Price's hostility toward the GC, and he defended his views
>in great detail in "The New Diluvialism". Clark accepted
>overthrusting as a real phenomenon. Harold Coffin, one of Clark's
>students, also accepted the GC and overthrusting. Coffin's "Origin
>by Design" is in print today (I think).
Thanks for the correction and my apologies to Clark and Coffin. I am afraid
that they are among the few creationist books I have not read.
glenn
Foundation,Fall and Flood
http://members.gnn.com/GRMorton/dmd.htm