Catastrophist Geology

Historic planetary instability and catastrophe. Evidence for electrical scarring on planets and moons. Electrical events in today's solar system. Electric Earth.

Moderators: bboyer, MGmirkin

Robertus Maximus
Posts: 250
Joined: Mon Sep 02, 2013 6:16 am
Location: Liverpool, UK

Catastrophist Geology

Unread post by Robertus Maximus » Thu Apr 27, 2017 1:58 am

Modern geology generally excludes global cataclysms as having any role in shaping the surface of the Earth. Catastrophic events are acknowledged as having some limited role: impacts, volcanism, supernovae, climate change etc. but usually such events have been called upon to ‘explain’ certain specific occurrences e.g. the extinction of the dinosaurs and such events always happen at a safe distance in both time and space.

Whilst we have no real understanding of the true age of the Earth we do find surface features that don’t fit with an ‘old Earth’ view. It is entirely possible that the Earth is older than the consensus view if so, we have a discrepancy, an ‘old’ Earth with ‘young’ surface features that are frequently seen as just as ancient by consensus science. Could it be that many of the Earth’s surface features are not ancient but geologically speaking ‘young’?

If so, our understanding of ‘recent’ Earth history may be in need of revision. As consensus science is unlikely to tread this path I suggest that it is a path that Electric Universe proponents explore and see where it leads…

As an opening I offer the following, a view of an earth in upheaval:

Does the Western Interior Seaway Have a Catastrophic Explanation?

Geologists have traditionally interpreted the geological evidence from North America as having indicated, during the Cretaceous Period, the presence of a shallow mid-continental sea, the Western Interior Seaway (

Now compare the map shown in the link above with the maps shown in the following two links: ... -graveyard and

All three maps highlight approximately the same area of North America but have radically different interpretations.

This area is rich in fossils of extinct life- dinosaurs, pterosaurs, marine reptiles even various mammal groups including whales; in fact we find the remains of an entire lost ecosystem! Most are found in huge jumbled deposits known as ‘graveyards’. These assemblages better fit a catastrophic deposition scenario rather than the slow thousands/millions-of-years story.

Creationist researcher Michael Oard in his book ‘Dinosaur Challenges and Mysteries’ (see: introduces to the reader a hypothesis he calls BEDS (Briefly Exposed Diluvial Sediments) which is required under the creationist model to explain the strata and fossil distribution found in this band running the length of North America.

From another article (see: Oard writes, ‘There is another interpretation that also fits the facts and that is the BEDS (Briefly Exposed Diluvial Sediments) hypothesis…The BEDS model is based on the fact that the level of the Floodwater would fluctuate up and down as it rose in the first half of the Flood. The fluctuation would be caused by tides, uplift and sinking of the earth’s crust, and other mechanisms including effects of the earth’s rotation.’ (my emphasis) I have written about the role of vertical tectonics on another thread.

Creationist scientists have realised that the stratified layers of sedimentary rock covering the Earth’s surface would not have formed just by rising water levels alone, so, they have to invoke additional influences, tidal waves, hypercanes, close planetary encounters etc. to produce sizeable currents of water required for sediment transportation and deposition.

One such researcher, John Baumgardner, ran computer models of a repeated near Earth encounter by a planet/moon sized body. Regarding the simulation he writes: ‘Although the water initially is at rest, accelerations from the giant tidal perturbation quickly lead to water velocities of 270 m/s (metres per second) and more, with high levels of turbulence, intense cavitation erosion, and sediment suspended and transported for thousands of kilometres, as surges of water rush into the continent interior. The flow pattern becomes more complex as sedimentation and erosion alter the originally smooth topography and surges interact with one another. These processes continue, with accumulation of an increasing volume of eroded sediment with time blanketing the continent in a complex pattern, until bottom friction dissipates most of the tidal energy. In this particular run, an average of about 150 metres of sediment covers the continent after only 5 days. The average is over the entire continent, including the eroded portions. The case shows that the numerical treatments work as intended and that plausible parameter choices leave a significant blanket of sediment over much of the continental surface, most of which remains above the mean sea level. When that initial case of a single tidal pulse is extended to include five identical additional pulses spaced seven days apart, then the total sediment volume approaches what is actually observed in the Phanerozoic record.’ (my emphasis)

The Phanerozoic rock record covering or partly covering North America is comprised of six megasequences (megasequences are discrete groups of sedimentary rock layers bounded top and bottom by erosional surfaces, often with coarse sandstone layers at the bottom, followed by shale, and then limestone at the top), conventionally this spans over some 500 million years but what if each megasequence represents a marine transgression/regression cycle caused by the close approach of a planet/moon sized body?

Experiments in stratification by Guy Berthault found; ‘The flume experiments further demonstrated the mechanical nature of stratification, whereby: (1) Particles segregated according to their size when transported by a current of variable velocity; (2) Desiccation, or drying out, of deposits caused bedding partings; (3) Stratification of the deposit, under both dry and wet conditions, formed parallel to the slope of the deposit, which could exceed 30°.5

Highlighted facts
It was discovered that where there is a current:
1. Strata can form laterally and vertically at the same time;
2. Strata can form in the same way as sequences of facies;
3. Strata are not always a measure of chronology.
These highlighted experimental facts show clearly:

a. Superposed strata do not always result, according to Steno’s beliefs, from successive layers of sediment; consequently the principle of superposition does not always apply to strata formed in a current;
b. Stratification formed parallel to a slope exceeding an angle of 30°, can invalidate the principle of original horizontally. Inclined strata are not necessarily, therefore, the result of subsidence or uplift.’

Of course, the key element missing from both conventional and creationist science is electricity- the possibility of electrical erosion and deposition is not entertained let alone any electrically induced changes in surface gravity. In my view the cataclysm which brought about wide ranging changes to the Earth was triggered by a change in the electrical relationship between the Earth and its environment. Such a change may well have resulted in close encounters with other planetary bodies, which were affected by a similar change to their environment.

Does the Phanerozoic rock record represent 500 million years of slow gentle deposition? If not then it must be the signature of a global cataclysm one measured in years, perhaps but not hundreds of millions of years in duration and not millions of years ago.

Viewed in this light the sedimentary layers of the Western Interior Seaway would appear to have a catastrophic explanation. It would, indeed, be a narrow strip of land and not a shallow sea; a fleeting refuge for some, a final resting place for most ‘as surges of water rush into the continent interior’.



2. Baumgardner, J (2013). Explaining The Continental Fossil-Bearing Sediment Record In Terms Of The Genesis Flood: Insights From Numerical Modeling Of Erosion, Sediment Transport, And Deposition Processes On A Global Scale. Proceedings of the Seventh ICC.

Robertus Maximus
Posts: 250
Joined: Mon Sep 02, 2013 6:16 am
Location: Liverpool, UK

Re: Catastrophist Geology

Unread post by Robertus Maximus » Fri May 05, 2017 9:37 am

Did Limestone form catastrophically?

The origin of Earth’s limestone and dolomite are, after over one hundred years of theorising , still a problem for geology; even more so since these rocks have been found to be a part of the constituents of comets!

Looking at the limestone of the Grand Canyon Steven A. Austin writes; ‘Shallow-water lime muds in today's tropical oceans accumulate at a rate of one foot thickness per one thousand years. These muds are formed by mechanical breakdown of carbonate containing sea creatures. Modern muds are believed by evolutionists to provide an excellent example of how ancient lime mudstones ("micritic limestones") were accumulated in Grand Canyon. Even some creationists believe that the evidence from lime muds is so convincing that one must certainly believe in long ages of slow deposition for Grand Canyon limestones.’

This is essentially the standard geological theory for the formation of carbonate rocks but is it correct?

Austin continues: ‘There are strong dissimilarities, however. Modern "shallow water" lime muds are dominated by "silt sized" crystals (approximately 20 microns in diameter) of the mineral aragonite (most contain 60 to 95% aragonite, and 0 to 10% calcite) derived from disaggregation or abrasion of skeletons of marine organisms. Ancient lime mudstones ("micritic limestones") are abundant in Grand Canyon, and are dominated by "clay sized" crystals (less than 4 microns in diameter) of the mineral calcite (nearly 100% calcite and/or dolomite) with "sand sized" and larger skeletal (shell) fragments floating in the fine crystal matrix… Micritic limestones, composed essentially of calcite, have textures quite different from those of the aragonite dominated modern lime muds that long have been regarded as their precursors…Modern carbonate sediments contrast sharply in their chemistry and mineralogy with ancient carbonate rocks… At the present time, it would be inappropriate to suppose that the scientific evidence requires that ancient fine-grained limestones were derived from lime muds resembling the muds being deposited slowly in modern tropical seas. Evolutionists may make the assumption, but the facts do not justify it. In the words of F.J. Pettijohn, "The origin of micrite is far from clear.”’

Austin then counters a common objection; ‘Critics… say that many abundantly fossiliferous limestones are organically constructed "reefs," which were accumulated slowly along the edge of an ancient sea… because it took thousands of years to construct a huge wave resistant framework, as innumerable generations of organisms chemically cemented themselves, one on top of the other… The most extensive study of Grand Canyon limestone was by McKee and Gutschick. They admit, "Coral reefs are not known from the Redwall Limestone." Concerning laminated algal structures (stromatolites) which might form slowly in tidal flat environments, they say, "the general scarcity or near absence of bottom building stromatolites suggests that places generally above low tide are not well represented."’

So, if the Redwall Limestone deposits of the Grand Canyon did not form over millennia in calm tropical seas, how did they form? A clue can be found at Nautiloid Canyon.

Austin explains; ‘Evidence of rapid deposition and burial of fossils is found in the Redwall Limestone. Along the Colorado River at Nautiloid Canyon, just north of Grand Canyon, the Redwall Limestone contains large fossils of nautiloids—"squid like" marine animals that possessed a straight shell, sometimes over two feet long. The long, slender shells of numerous nautiloids, in Nautiloid Canyon, have a dominant orientation, indicating that current was operating, as "fine grained" lime mud accumulated.

'Not all limestones of Grand Canyon are fine grained. Some contain coarse, broken fossil debris, which appears to have been sorted by strong currents. The Redwall Limestone contains coarse, circular disks (columnals) from the stems of crinoids—marine animals which lived in a cup, or head, attached to the stem. Evidently, water currents winnowed the finer sediment away, leaving a "hash" of crinoid debris. Occasionally, the heads of crinoids are found embedded in the coarse, circular disks. Sometimes these occur in deposits of inclined bedding (cross beds), which imply strong currents. Because modern crinoid heads in today's ocean are susceptible to rapid breakdown when these organisms die, we conclude that rapid burial is needed to produce fossil crinoid heads.

'Evidence of current transport of lime sediment is provided by quartz sand grains, which are found embedded in the fine-grained matrix of many limestones. These quartz sand grains are common in the Kaibab Limestone of Grand Canyon. They are even known in the Redwall Limestone. Because the quartz sand grains cannot be precipitated from seawater, they must have been transported from some other location. Any water current fast enough to move sand grains would be able to move lime mud, as well. These quartz sand grains argue that the Kaibab Limestone was accumulated from sediment which had been transported by moving water, not simply deposited from a slow, steady rain of carbonate mud in a calm and placid sea.’

The fossils of Nautiloid Canyon tell a story of catastrophic burial. One in which these creatures became trapped in a thickening flow of carbonate material eventually cementing them in the rock record. How could this not be the case? Otherwise we have to assume that individual nautiloids neatly aligned their conical shells during death, over thousands and millions of years, waiting to be fossilised!

We can picture a scenario; an external agent disrupts the Earth’s rotation and the planet quakes, huge tidal waves scour and redeposit surface material, flora and fauna are caught in the cataclysm and deposited in huge ‘graveyards’ the planet over. As tidal waves push far inland they remodel existing coastlines, depositing their load in an organised manner as they do. A diagram of such a marine transgression can be seen on page 3 of the document ‘Sedimentological Interpretation of the Tonto Group Stratigraphy’ by Berthault available for download at: ... -Group.pdf

But, what and where was the source material that formed the limestone deposits mentioned in the paper by Austin?

Carbonatites are an unusual type of rock consisting of greater than 50% carbonate minerals and have a global distribution. The only active carbonatite volcano is Ol Doinyo Lengai in Tanzania; the lavas of Ol Doinyo Lengai are rich in the rare sodium and potassium carbonate minerals and are known as Natrocarbonatites. Other forms include Ferrocarbonatite, Calciocarbonatite and Magnesiocarbonatite.

Carbonate rocks are not usually thought of as being igneous in origin but the idea is not a new one.

From an article in Nature (142: 704-705, 1938) ‘Limestones as Eruptive Rocks’, we read ‘…so early as 1892, some limestones occurring in the form of dykes and cutting the volcanic rocks of the Kaiserstuhl in Baden, were described by A. Knop, and three years later A. G. Hogbom described limestone dykes in a region of alkali-rich intrusive on the island of Alno in Sweden. Hogbom also recorded calcite as a primary mineral in some rocks at Alno, and there were other descriptions of primary calcite in alkali-eruptive rocks from Canada and India.’ And ‘The most convincing new evidence comes again from Alno, where the rocks are now far better exposed than they were at the time of Hogbom’s visits forty-three years ago. They have been studied thoroughly by Dr. Harry von Eckermann, of Stockholm, who opened the discussion at Cambridge. A large area of alkali-intrusives (nepheline- syenites and ijolites) cuts the Precambrian gneisses and is probably late Jotnian in age. Around the contact with the gneiss (which is altered) crystalline limestones appear, and outside the neck of the intrusive rocks there are calcitic and dolomitic dykes which are shown to be cone-sheets dipping towards two deep central foci. From the inclination of the cone-sheets the focus of the calcite dykes can be shown to be at 1-2 km below the present surface, and that for the dolomitic sheets at 6-7 km. The geology of the country near Alno is well known, and von Eckermann regards it as certain that for hundreds of miles around and to great depths there is no trace of sedimentary limestone in the Archaean rocks of earlier age than the alkali-intrusives. All the evidence points to a magmatic origin for these limestones at Alno.’

Now for some speculation. The western Pacific Ocean is littered with seamounts and guyots. Deep sea drilling of Eniwetok Atoll in the Marshall Islands unveiled a 4,133 to 4,608 feet (1,260 to 1,405 m) thick carbonate cap. To quote Michael Oard, ‘Legs 143 and 144 of the Deep Sea Drilling Project drilled into the tops of a number of guyots in a large area west of the Hawaiian Islands centred at about 18°N and 180°E,and in the Marshall Islands centred at about 10°N and 165°E. The former area includes the submarine Mid-Pacific Mountains. Resolution Guyot with suggested perimeter reefal mounds, supposedly mimicking an atoll, was drilled in the Mid-Pacific Mountains. The scientists discovered that numerous guyots in the Mid-Pacific Mountains were capped by thick carbonate, just like on Eniwetok Atoll. The carbonate caps range between 3,000 to 5,250 feet (900 to 1,600 m) thick and lie over basalt lava. The thick carbonate was a surprise.’

Could it be that the guyots and seamounts of the western Pacific Ocean are all that remains of a former continent-sized carbonatite/carbonate platform; a platform that was easily eroded by wave action during a cataclysm, the erosional products of which were transported far to the east to be deposited on a pre-existing landmass? Were Calciocarbonatites and Magnesiocarbonatites eroded re-worked and deposited as limestone and dolomite? If so, then perhaps limestone and dolomite should be re-classified as ‘catastrophites’!


1. ... GUqfMlqxeY
2. Austin, S. A. 1990. Were Grand Canyon Limestones Deposited by Calm and Placid Seas? Acts & Facts. 19 (12).
5. Milton, R. 1992. The Facts of Life

Posts: 4433
Joined: Fri Apr 04, 2008 2:54 pm

Re: Catastrophist Geology

Unread post by Lloyd » Thu May 11, 2017 2:47 pm

Robert, that's good material for my thread at ... 10&t=16025

Since you're not discussing electric forces here, this thread may get moved to NIAMI. The E.U. derived from catastrophism, but they don't have a board for that for some reason.

It's interesting that carbonates may be igneous. It turns out that salt also is likely igneous. I think I saw an article recently that said there's a large deposit of carbon under the western U.S. I only read the title. If the Pacific had a deep thick layer of igneous carbonate that later eroded onto the continent, there must have been a carbon layer under the Pacific too, unless it came from the western U.S. source or something.

How about collaborating?

Also, I want to mention this:
Need Data to Help Create Alternative Science Wiki ... 61#p119561

Posts: 4433
Joined: Fri Apr 04, 2008 2:54 pm

Re: Catastrophist Geology

Unread post by Lloyd » Thu May 11, 2017 8:54 pm

Here's that article about a deep carbon reservoir under the western U.S.

Scientists uncover huge 1.8 million km2 reservoir of melting carbon under Western United States ... ted-States

That's rather huge, equivalent to over 800 miles square. And it's said to be 350 km deep and is melting. It probably melted during rapid continental drift due to a major impact over 4 millennia ago. If so, the carbonates in the Pacific must have been from an earlier catastrophic event.

Robertus Maximus
Posts: 250
Joined: Mon Sep 02, 2013 6:16 am
Location: Liverpool, UK

Re: Catastrophist Geology

Unread post by Robertus Maximus » Fri May 12, 2017 10:38 am

Lloyd wrote:Robert, that's good material for my thread at ... 10&t=16025

Since you're not discussing electric forces here, this thread may get moved to NIAMI. The E.U. derived from catastrophism, but they don't have a board for that for some reason.

It's interesting that carbonates may be igneous. It turns out that salt also is likely igneous. I think I saw an article recently that said there's a large deposit of carbon under the western U.S. I only read the title. If the Pacific had a deep thick layer of igneous carbonate that later eroded onto the continent, there must have been a carbon layer under the Pacific too, unless it came from the western U.S. source or something.

How about collaborating?

Also, I want to mention this:
Need Data to Help Create Alternative Science Wiki ... 61#p119561
Thanks for the link to your thread plenty of reading there! I posted this thread as a focus for views, observations and contributions not accepted by consensus geology (extending to palaeontology) that better suit a catastrophic interpretation.

Whilst not all geological features require or necessitate an electrical aspect, in my view an electric discharge was the ‘prime mover’ during a catastrophic period of earth history. During this period both the characteristics of the Earth and its environment changed, a change the Earth is, even today, adjusting to- hence my thread ‘An Alternative to Plate and Expansion Tectonics’.

I agree with your comment regarding salt, salt is certainly an igneous rock and I hope to post another contribution soon looking at a role played by salt- quite obviously I view the consensus geological explanation- vast dried up seas- with a large slice of scepticism! Salt may also play an important electrical role today something I touched on in ‘An Alternative to Plate and Expansion Tectonics’ given the amount of brines discovered by superdeep drilling projects- did conductive salt magmas play an electrical role in a past cataclysm?

(I am currently looking at the difference between Precambrian and Phanerozoic sedimentary strata to see if an electrical process could account for the lack of fossils in Precambrian strata.)

If correct, the discovery of carbonate under the U.S only confirms my view that our understanding of the structure and composition of the Earth’s crust and interior is in need of revision, perhaps the different compositional varieties of asteroids and comets can provide clues as these bodies would be remnants of the terrestrial planets themselves. Furthermore, it is possible that the reworking of chemically different carbonatites would have led to the formation of not only limestone but also dolomite.

Collaboration? Certainly.

Posts: 1111
Joined: Wed Mar 19, 2008 3:18 pm
Location: Adelaide

Re: Catastrophist Geology

Unread post by moses » Fri May 12, 2017 7:30 pm

<(I am currently looking at the difference between Precambrian and Phanerozoic sedimentary strata to see if an electrical process could account for the lack of fossils in Precambrian strata.) Robertus Maximus >

Well I must say this is strange. An examination of Phanerozoic rocks for signs of electrical processes, seems more like it. Perhaps one could find that the Sun was a lot less bright in the Precambrian and tie that into galactic electric currents, but I cannot see the interest in what you are looking into.


Posts: 4433
Joined: Fri Apr 04, 2008 2:54 pm

Re: Catastrophist Geology

Unread post by Lloyd » Sat May 13, 2017 1:15 pm

Robert, I sent you a private message to discuss collaboration.

Robertus Maximus
Posts: 250
Joined: Mon Sep 02, 2013 6:16 am
Location: Liverpool, UK

Re: Catastrophist Geology

Unread post by Robertus Maximus » Thu May 25, 2017 3:43 am

Catastrophic Origin of Sand and Sedimentary Strata


Geologist Louis Hissink has proposed a mechanism to explain the origin of the vast quantities of quartz sand covering the surface of the Earth. Taking into account Australian Aboriginal stories of the Rainbow Serpent Louis Hissink explains: “…the Rainbow Serpent is interpreted by me as an historical, planetary sized, electric-plasma discharge between the Earth and some cosmic interloper, the morning star, via the ionosphere, that literally ‘laser’ machined the Earth’s surface. Carving out the Earth’s landscape by enormous electrical discharges will of necessity produce abundant eroded material whose nature will vary depending on the nature of the underlying earth. The interesting fact is the very old nature of the West Australian cratons, often covered by thick blankets of regolith or chemically weathered basement and laterites indicative of a previous wet tropical climate. In many areas this regolith has been stripped off by erosion leaving isolated mesas upstream. But if this regolith stripping was caused by the Rainbow Serpent mechanism (RSM), then logically the old land surface would have covered a deeply weathered regolith of clay and minor quartz which when subsequently subject to the impact of a large electric-plasma cutting mechanism would, under the extreme temperatures and Z-Pinch pressures cause partial melting of the clays and formation of droplets of glass or quartz.” (1)

Elsewhere I have suggested a similar process was involved in the formation of loess and the Worzel Deep Sea Ash (2). I see both processes occurring during a global cataclysm and both would have generated vast quantities of sediment available for transport. From Louis Hissink’s proposal I see the ‘Rainbow Serpent Mechanism’ functioning throughout the cataclysm- this would provide abundant amounts of sediment in the initial stages from, as I see it, a largely ‘flat’ Earth. Later episodes of the RSM carved dendritic patterns in newly raised areas of the Earth’s surface.

Red Beds

Geologist Jan. P. Snoep questions many of the conventional geological explanations of the origin of redbed strata suggesting that they fall far short, the: “… general accepted mechanism of their accumulation was described as flash floods, braided rivers and fluvio-deltaic alluvial sedimentation. ‘No similar deposits accumulate on the continents today.” (3)

Whatever process deposited Red Bed strata is not occurring today- the present is not the key to the past.
The author suggests that such formations were deposited by huge tidal waves, according to the author " the past, moon orbits must have been strongly eccentric as a result of gravitational resonance between the moon and Jupiter and Venus."

Another possibility is that the moon’s orbit was disturbed periodically by a passing "…errant celestial body…"

On this point I do not disagree with the author, in my view I see the Moon as a former independent planet that was captured by the Earth, such an event would surely have had catastrophic consequences for both bodies concerned.

On the original website I had one minor area of criticism concerning the author’s comments about dinosaurs even going so far as to suggest that some dinosaurs- sauropods- had some degree of adaptation to large tides. Firstly, there are no preserved ecosystems, fossilised remains, dinosaur or otherwise, are found either isolated or in ‘graveyards’. Quite often terrestrial and marine creatures are found at the same location an observation that is rarely mentioned. Mass burial sites cannot tell us what environmental or evolutionary factors led to the development of- for example- the long necks of sauropod dinosaurs, as these and other creatures have been buried in unnatural conditions.

Secondly, dinosaur track-ways are not records the natural movement of these animals, rather they record the unnatural movement of creatures fleeing an approaching danger- one that probably led to the demise of these animals.

Global Quartzite and Conglomerate

Even more remarkable than the basal Ordovician quartzite is the one that is found, almost all over the world, at the bottom of the Cambrian. Here dating becomes more and more problematical as the time spans become longer and longer. One is tempted to get mixed up with the arguments about the origins of life and the beginning of the main fossil record, of the mysterious ‘Lipalian Interval’ that was once favoured and of great worldwide marine transgressions. Perhaps all that is safe to say in this context is that very commonly around the world one finds an unfossiliferous quartzite conformably below fossiliferous Lower Cambrian and unconformably above a great variety of Precambrian rocks. This is true wherever one sees the base of the Cambrian in Britain, it is true in east Greenland, it is true in the Canadian Rockies and it is true in South Australia. In fact it is even more remarkable than this, in that it is not only the quartzite, but the whole deepening succession that tends to turn up everywhere; i.e. a basal conglomerate, followed by glauconitic sandstones, followed by marine shales and thin limestones.” (4)

The Grand Conglomerat at the base of the Kundelungu system in the former Belgian Congo is dated as late Precambrian. With a thickness of 2,500 feet and sometimes classed as tillite, it had posed the problem of equatorial glaciation versus a former polar location near the equator, but up to the present has not had a generally accepted explanation. The Ocoee series of late Precambrian age in the Great Smoky Mountains has been equally puzzling. It contains the Thunderhead Conglomerate, which is assigned a thickness of 6,000- 10,000 feet by King and co-workers. Although it contains some graded beds 5- 25 feet in thickness, most of it appears to have been deposited by more normal currents of high velocities. Barrell found no evidence of glacial origin. He believed the deposit to be of terrestrial origin brought by rivers of some length flowing on a considerable grade. Sediments of this character and thickness are nowhere being deposited at present.

The Shedroof is the extensive basal conglomerate of the Windemere series which underlies lower Cambrian formations and rests with strong unconformity on the Belt series in Washington and Idaho. It contains some beds of dolomite, which suggest marine deposition, and has a thickness range of 3,000- 11,000 feet according to Park and Cannon. It is poorly bedded and sorted and appears to correlate with units of the Windemere series in Canada which are described as tillite. It is younger than the Siyeh formation of the Belt series which Goldich and co-workers date as 740 and 780 million years by different methods.

The North Boulder Group in southwestern Montana is a basal conglomerate in the middle sequence of the Belt series. McMannis and Ross give it thickness of 5,000- 10,000 feet. To the north, it is overlooked by the Spokane Shale which Obradovich and Peterman consider to be the basal part of the Sun River and underlying sequences.

“The Copper Harbor formations consists of the Great Conglomerate and the Outer Conglomerate separated by volcanic flows called Lake Shore traps. The total thickness reaches 6,000 feet in a single conformable sequence. It lies unconformably on the Portage Lake lava flows according to paleomagnetic data of Vincenz and Yaskawa although Broderick and co-workers do not show it. It is overlaid conformably by the Nonesuch Shale, which Barghoorn and co-workers date as 1,046 million years, and is probably of marine origin.
” (5)

The period of worldwide erosion immediately preceding the Cambrian was called the Lipalian interval by Walcott…

Walcott’s Lipalian interval was called the Infracambrian by Pruvost…

The Infracambrian formations present a unique combination of lithological characteristics and inferred stratigraphic environments over their entire extent. The predominant type is coarse, clastic, arkosic deposit which may be cross-bedded with alternating beds of siltstone and mudstone. The distinguishing characteristic is the presence of angular boulders and conglomerate layers in a poorly sorted matrix. In these characteristics they resemble ground moraine, fluvioglacial deposits, and boulder clay or tillite which are products of Pleistocene glaciers. For this reason they have been interpreted by Coleman, Howell, and others as representing an ancient widespread period of glaciation. This event is explained by Termier as having taken place between 700 and 680 million years ago.

Associated with these conglomerates and supposed tillites are limestones and dolomites of very substantial thickness, in some cases up to 10,000 feet. These carbonates are fine grained, often banded or ripple marked, with little evidence of organic remains except stromatolites (algae). They are inferred to be essentially chemical precipitates.

This association of coarse clastics, including inferred tillites, with carbonates is practically worldwide….They include the Hekla Hock series in Spitsbergen, the Sparagmite in Norway, the Dalradian in Great Britain, the Tillite Canyon and Cape Oswald formations in Greenland, the Uluksan Group in the Canadian Arctic, the McCoy Creek series in Nevada, the Ocoee series in Tennessee, the Bukoban and Uha systems in Tanganyika, the Kundelungu system in the Congo, the Sinian system in Siberia, the Kuken series in Korea, and the Marinoan series in Australia. In Asia we may add the Vindhyan system in the Himalayas described by Gansser. In South America we have the supposed tillites of the Orapu system in French Guiana and Surinam traced by Choubert, the Lavras and related series in eastern Brazil described by de Oliveira and in more detail by Guimaraes. Some of these extend into Paraguay, eastern Bolivia, and northern Argentina.” (6)

Strontium isotope ratios: an indication of massive erosion

87Sr is a radiogenic daughter isotope of 87Rb and is found in silicate rocks such as granite. The abundance of radiogenic 87Sr relative to ‘common’ 86Sr in a sample of sediment is related to the amount of sediment that originated from erosion of continental crust as opposed to that originating from the ocean. The observed increase in Upper Proterozoic strontium isotope ratios 87Sr/86Sr has been explained by accelerated rates of erosion during the so-called Pan-African orogeny, and high crustal erosion rates have been inferred from Cambrian 87Sr/86Sr values.” (7)


From the writings of Ager and Olson we see that the Cambrian- Precambrian boundary is marked by a global layer of conglomerate and ‘supposed tillites’. It was the opinion of Olson that such deposits could only be the result of massive ocean tides or incursions; today such deposits are linked to supposed ancient ice-ages but this is to make the geologic timescale conform to the uniformitarian world-view of geologists. Ice-ages were introduced to exclude catastrophic readings of the rock record; indeed, numerous supposed ancient ice-age deposits have now been reclassified as mass-flow deposits. (8)

Red Bed strata are often associated with conglomerate and quartzite deposits, commenting on conglomerates associated with redbeds Snoep writes: “The old ones (conglomerates) show a striking similarity with the recent ones (conglomerates) left by the tsunamis, or with the pebbles lying on the bottom of the English Channel or deposited by the Scabland floods in the State of Washington. They always represent the result of large floods over wide areas as we can expect in case of giant tides.

Furthermore, analysis of Strontium isotope ratios indicates an increase of erosion rates, on the uniformitarian geological timescale, from the late Precambrian to the end of the Cambrian.

All in all, the evidence points to a global erosional event or series of events that was then followed by a global depositional event or series of events- events that are not occurring on Earth today. Sedimentary strata were deposited during a paroxysm of nature not during an ice-age.


It has been suggested that redbeds were deposited by the action of huge tides/ tidal waves but what is the significance of their red colour? Jan Snoep tells us that: "The work by Glennie et al. (1978) on Rotliegendes samples from 2000 metres depth below the North Sea has shown that haematite coating was not present at the points where sand grains touch. This is proof that there is an undeniable hypogene authigenic origin of the haematite in this case, and that red colouring is not a surface phenomenon, as was already concluded by Walker (1967), but took place long after sedimentation. Other neo-formation minerals include illite, chlorite, albite, analcime, dolomite, anhydrite, quartz and calcite, all indicative of an alkaline (sodic) environment."

Red Beds attained their red colour after they were deposited but how?

Red Beds are often associated with major lava outflows and ‘evaporite’ deposits is this a clue?

“The common association of red beds and evaporites of all ages is striking on all continents. Present-day continental deposits do not contain great salt concentrations similar to the ancient ones. The old accumulations are incomparably larger in size than the recent ones and are all of marine origin. Busson (1972) draws the conclusion that the great salt accumulations of North Africa cannot be compared to supra-tidal or continental deposits, but can only be of marine origin, the more so as these deposits are commonly associated with high-energy conglomerates. He calls it a "marine desert” environment and insists also on the strong variations between the proportions of different evaporitic minerals within a single basin. Effectively, it is common to find hundreds of thousands of cubic kilometres of gypsum and limestone of evaporitic origin widely separated from the normally associated halite. This indicates clearly that conditions are different from the evaporation of a given quantity of seawater in a confined concentric setting, such as in a salt lake. The present sebkahs in coastal areas of desert country are several orders of magnitude smaller in size than the ancient salt accumulations. Present sedimentation conditions of evaporites are very different from the ones that existed during various periods in the past. The oldest salt deposits have been described in the Proterozoic of the Fenno-Scandian shield (Melezhik 2005).

We may conclude, that the major salt deposits associated with red beds are indicative of marine sedimentation conditions.

The author has concluded that the redbed- ‘evaporites’ connection is further evidence of the tidal nature of their formation. While I do not disagree with the tidal/ tidal wave redbed formation mechanism I do question the ‘evaporite’ evidence.

What is at question here is the origin of salt, unlike the author I favour the magmatic theory for the origin of salt (9). Now, when we put the two theories together I propose that the red haematitic stain of redbeds arose via the action of brines associated with large salt magmas leeching out haematite from the associated basaltic lava outflows. Salt deposits are associated with occurrences of carbonatite lava outflows, carbonatite is found amongst the basaltic lava outflow of the Deccan Traps. These deposits and outflows show some degree of overlap, I suggested previously that limestone and dolostone are reworked carbonatite a ‘catastrophite’ if you will. To my mind the occurrence of Red Limestone in redbeds strengthens this proposal.


Hissink, Snoep, Ager and Olson have all described geologic formations – sedimentary strata and sand- that require a catastrophic period in Earth history.

An electrical discharge machining event(s) would have produced abundant quantities of sediment that would have been transported and redeposited in megasequences by winds and tides petrifying unsuspecting life forms in the process. The blood-red staining of certain deposits probably began as the cataclysm unfolded and continued until the flowing salt lavas and brines, having leached haematite from basalt outpourings, subsided.

Sediment machined in the latter stages of the cataclysm was less likely to be redeposited as sedimentary rock, the global tidal waves having subsided, instead it formed deposits of regolith upon the reworked surface of the Earth.


1. See: ... artz-sand/
2. See: ‘An Alternative to Plate and Expansion Tectonics’ on this Forum
3. The original website at now appears to be discontinued. (See:
4. Ager, Derek V. 1973, The Nature of the Stratigraphic Record, London
5. Olson, Walter S. 1970, Tidal Amplitudes in Geological History, New York Academy of Sciences, Transaction, 32:220
6. Olson, Walter S. 1966, Origin of the Cambrian- Precambrian Unconformity, American Scientist, Transaction, 54:458
7. Dickens, Harry. 2016, The ‘Great Unconformity’ and associated geochemical evidence for Noahic Flood erosion, Journal of Creation, 30:1
8. Oard, Michael J. 2008, An ancient ‘ice-age’ deposit attributed to subaqueous mass flow- again!, Journal of Creation, 22:2
9. See:

Posts: 4433
Joined: Fri Apr 04, 2008 2:54 pm

Re: Catastrophist Geology

Unread post by Lloyd » Thu May 25, 2017 8:35 pm

Very informative. I still haven't seen your long thread yet, but I read your shorter ones.

You said: From Louis Hissink’s proposal I see the ‘Rainbow Serpent Mechanism’ functioning throughout the cataclysm- this would provide abundant amounts of sediment in the initial stages from, as I see it, a largely ‘flat’ Earth. Later episodes of the RSM carved dendritic patterns in newly raised areas of the Earth’s surface.
Regarding an initially "largely ‘flat’ Earth" (i.e. with a largely smooth surface) Charles Chandler said the heavy elements in Earth's continental crust suggest that the continents originally were part of a large body that collided with Earth. This body largely melted and pancaked out to form a supercontinent, which later broke up from a large impact. If Earth were flat before the cataclysms, it should have had light elements on the surface and no continents. The pancaked supercontinent would have likely been fairly flat, but it was still over 2 miles higher than the seafloors. See e.g. ... cb#p102295

Would you like to have an EU debate on this board or on the EU board? If so, may I start the thread?

Posts: 1111
Joined: Wed Mar 19, 2008 3:18 pm
Location: Adelaide

Re: Catastrophist Geology

Unread post by moses » Fri May 26, 2017 6:53 pm

Robertus Maximus,
I'd like to see a comparison of these sands and rocks formed at the end of the Precambian and asteroids. If similar this will suggest the same origin for both. It is the connection with the Precambrian boundary which would suggest an event of interaction with another body.


User avatar
Posts: 2539
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 2:01 pm
Location: Seattle

Re: Catastrophist Geology

Unread post by webolife » Sat May 27, 2017 9:59 am

This topic is my area of research since 1973. I have entered probably a thousand TB posts on the subject so will not derail this great thread with personal remarks unless I see some blatant "problems" cropping up. Oard has done good work, and I value and support most of his conlusions. Looking forward to seeing more of your ideas.
Truth extends beyond the border of self-limiting science. Free discourse among opposing viewpoints draws the open-minded away from the darkness of inevitable bias and nearer to the light of universal reality.

Posts: 4433
Joined: Fri Apr 04, 2008 2:54 pm

Re: Catastrophist Geology Debate

Unread post by Lloyd » Sat May 27, 2017 2:45 pm

Robert said he's agreeable to debate (on both boards I think), so I'll start debating now. I guess he may take a few days to reply sometimes.

Robert, you said at the top of your last post that Louis Hissink thinks "Australian Aboriginal stories of the Rainbow Serpent" came from their ancestors' observations of "planetary sized, electric-plasma discharge between the Earth and some cosmic interloper, the morning star, via the ionosphere, that literally ‘laser’ machined the Earth’s surface". In many areas of West Australia where the regolith "has been stripped off by erosion leaving isolated mesas upstream" he thinks the interplanetary electric discharge was the cause of the erosion and "partial melting of the clays and formation of droplets of glass or quartz.” You suggested "a similar process was involved in the formation of loess and the Worzel Deep Sea Ash" as "vast quantities of sediment available for transport". And "Later episodes of the RSM carved dendritic patterns in newly raised areas of the Earth’s surface".

Q1: Have you done or read any calculations of EDM that support those ideas in detail?
Q2: Do you know of experiments that show that EDM can erode surfaces like that and produce partly melted clays and quartz sand?
Q3: A close encounter between planets would surely raise very high tides, causing megatsunamis, so why would not the cavitation effect produce the sand from granite bedrock and the tsunamis account for the sediment deposition and erosion, leaving behind some mesas?
Q4: Doesn't water erosion produce dendritic patterns?
Q5: The EU team accept much of Velikovsky's evidence on catastrophism, and Velikovsky referred to violent winds that occurred, so wouldn't the winds account for loess and volcanism account for deep sea ash?

Robertus Maximus
Posts: 250
Joined: Mon Sep 02, 2013 6:16 am
Location: Liverpool, UK

Re: Catastrophist Geology

Unread post by Robertus Maximus » Tue May 30, 2017 1:16 pm


Most of the points you raise I had covered on ‘An Alternative to Plate and Expansion Tectonics’ thread: viewtopic.php?f=4&t=16534

In part 3 of this thread see: viewtopic.php?f=4&t=16534#p116159
I mention the work of Robert Johnson (Johnson. Robert. 2014. Massive Solar Eruptions and their contribution to the causes of Tectonic Uplift. NCGT Journal Vol.2 No.1.) ... h_2014.pdf

‘Abstract: All theories of tectonic uplift published to date rely on the Earth’s internal sources of energy to power the process. This assumption imposes constraints on the various models of uplift which often conflict with the geomorphic evidence. An external source of energy would alter the constraints and thus could reconcile many existing models with the evidence. This paper demonstrates that an external source of energy arising from massive solar eruptions is likely to have been available on rare occasions in past eras. The astrophysical evidence for the Earth-Sun connection and the variability of the Sun’s coronal discharges is examined together with published models of the expected effect of extreme solar eruptions. It is shown that electric discharges to the Earth’s surface many orders of magnitude larger than present-day lightning strikes would result from the impact of an extreme Coronal Mass Ejection. The energy delivered directly to the crustal strata could have been sufficient to contribute to uplift via many of the existing thermal expansion and phase change models. Rapid ion diffusion in the electric fields associated with the discharges is also likely to have occurred, thereby potentially offering a solution to ‘the granite problem’. Geological evidence is brought forward in support of the present hypothesis.’

In that paper Robert Johnson introduces the reader to the ‘Gold scenario’:
“The astronomer Thomas Gold suggested in 1962 that there was no reason to assume on the present data that the Sun had always emitted energy at the rate seen in the present era (Gold, 1962, discussion p. 170). He considered what effect a more massive solar eruption would have on the Earth’s immediate environment. In the scenario outlined by Gold, the increased solar wind pressure would drive the inner edge of the Earth’s [outer] magnetosphere down into the upper atmosphere. Gold argued that the atmosphere is a good insulator and so the storm-generated electric currents which normally run in this conductive inner edge of the outer magnetosphere would then encounter great resistance. In this circumstance, the path of least resistance is to short down in a massive and continuous ‘lightning strike’ or discharge through the atmosphere, run through the more conducting surface of the Earth, and short back up to the magnetosphere in a second discharge to close the circuit back to the magnetosphere (see Gold,1962, figs. 1 and 2).

“In this situation, huge direct currents of “hundreds of millions of Amps” (Gold, 1962) would run in the surface of the Earth between the points of discharge connecting the surface to the compressed magnetosphere.”

Robert Johnson proposes that just such electrical discharges acted to uplift modern mountainous regions to their present elevation- I agree.

Such currents would flow if either Earth encountered another celestial body or Earth’s electrical environment changed. One area yet to explore- I see such discharge altering Earth’s surface gravity which may have contributed to the vertical tectonics at that time (see ‘An Alternative to Plate and Expansion Tectonics’ for my views on vertical tectonics).

Of course, water being plentiful on the Earth’s surface undoubtedly play a role during the cataclysm- after all 95% of all fossils are of marine organisms- and John Baumgardner has conducted simulations on how tides/ tidal waves could generate sediment from crystalline basement forming the sedimentary megasequences, see: ‘Explaining The Continental Fossil-Bearing Sediment Record In Terms Of The Genesis Flood: Insights From Numerical Modeling Of Erosion, Sediment Transport, And Deposition Processes On A Global Scale. Proceedings of the Seventh ICC’.

We can picture both electrical and physical processes generating sediment but wave action certainly did not sculpt Mt Everest- the dendritic patterns of mountain ranges must have an electrical origin. Paul Anderson has done work in this respect. See:

As for ice sculpting mountains geologist Louis Hissink writes: “Another example of this logical fallacy is the belief that mountain glaciers actively erode the bedrock to form characteristic topographic features such as cirques and corries. This interpretation is the result of noticing that during winter the uplands of the creeks and drainages in the mountains are filled with glacial ice that on melting must have thus formed the peculiar and assumed diagnostic features of glacial erosion. The problem is, however, that glacial ice flows and is not capable of grinding and comminuting bedrock. But since no other physical agent was observed it was logically assumed that the ice was responsible.”

Again form ‘An Alternative to Plate and Expansion Tectonics’ part 3 thread I write: “Paul Anderson uses fractal analysis to determine what process –fluvial or electrical- shaped the various landforms on the Earth, the main focus being canyons and riverbeds. This analysis is then compared to electrical discharge patterns recorded in laboratory experiments. In concluding he writes: ‘Just as water flows and collects in the tire tracks of a mud road, it is the author’s hypothesis that water on earth flowed into the remnants and the surfaces carved by electrical events in the recent past. Water flow does not appear to form structures with as many branches, particularly perpendicular branches, as do electrical events. While the mechanisms of discharge formation are still under study by those in the EU (Electric Universe) community, the current from the source must have been higher than it is today in the present auroras. The auroral process would have extended well beyond the current northern and southern locations, and once the atmosphere could not support the ionization it would break down in the form of electric discharges.’

“The fractal signature of an electrical discharge is the Lichtenberg figure, (9) not only is this figure associated with canyons and riverbeds (10) it is also apparent in mountain ranges (11, 12). If the major canyons and riverbeds on Earth’s surface were carved out electrically then it is reasonable to assume that the iconic mountain form must have been also- possibly during the same electrical event.

“One property of electric arcs is to preferentially strike raised surfaces, now, combining Johnson and Anderson we see that mountain formation was not only due to electrical uplift but also due to electrical erosion. In this image of the Tibetan Plateau -from the International Space Station- (13), we notice the uplifted plateau the rim of which has been eroded to form snow-capped mountain ranges.

“This is the pattern we see the world over and now we have an explanation. During a period of global upheaval immense electric currents swept across and penetrated deep below the surface of the Earth. As immense blocks were raised from a former flat planation surface high points became a focus for electrical erosion. What strata escaped being metamorphosed were eroded, pulverised and scattered by intense electrical winds (something similar but on a vastly reduced scale still occurs on Mars today (14)).” (References given in thread)

In the same thread I write: “Ashes and Dust Large areas of the Earth’s strata and surface record what geologists perceive as ‘massive volcanic eruptions’ quite often these prehistoric eruptions dwarf any recorded eruption. For example, Dinosaur National Monument (Utah, USA) is part of the Morrison Formation which covers some 700,000 square miles. Part of the formation is: ‘dominated by silica-rich volcanic ash representing explosive volcanism on a colossal scale…A staggering quantity of volcanic materials, estimated at more than 4,000 cubic miles, occurs within the thin but widespread Brushy Basin Member in Wyoming, Utah, Colorado, New Mexico, and Arizona. No volcano is known within the boundary of the Morrison deposit, no local lava flows are known within the Morrison boundary, and geologists place the nearest explosive volcanic source vents in southern California or Nevada. How these coarse volcanic materials in such colossal quantities were distributed on so wide a scale remains a mystery.’(15)

“The Worzel Deep Sea Ash is another mystery. Following the discovery of the ash researchers noted: ‘The ash consists of colourless shards of volcanic glass with an index of refraction of 1.500 and varying in size from 0.07 to 0.2 mm. There is no particle size sorting. Most of the shards are in the form of curved, fluted, or crumpled films of glass. A minority are nearly equidimensional fragments of silky pumice. No crystalline minerals have been found. In all important respects it is similar to material which has been classified as volcanic ash in the deep-sea deposits of the world. On preliminary examination, the ash of the Worzel layer appears to be quite similar to the ash layer which occurs in a suite of cores from the Gulf of Mexico. Rex and Goldberg have found quartz particles of continental origin in abundance in Pacific sediments as much as 2,000 miles from the nearest continent…The ash is entirely unlike material described as meteoritic dust.’ (16)

“The researchers concluded: ‘Apparently we require either a single very large volcanic explosion, or the simultaneous explosion of many volcanoes, or conceivably a cometary collision similar to that suggested by Urey as a "last resort type explanation" for the origin of tektites.’ In other words a global cataclysm is required to account for the ash. However, if we look at the chemical composition of the ash (17) we find it shares similar chemical properties with granite (18).

“Loess covers about 10% of the Earth’s land surface and is according to Michael Oard: ‘…difficult to define, but it is generally considered to be wind-blown (Aeolian) silt. It is composed mostly of quartz grains, with minor portions of clay and sand often mixed with the silt. Loess is commonly intermixed vertically with ‘paleosols’, which are supposedly fossil soils that have been preserved in the geologic record or buried deeply enough that it is no longer subject to soil forming processes. Scientists previously believed the silt particles in loess were derived from ice abrasion, but they now believe that loess has both a glacial and non-glacial origin.

“‘Loess covers much of the mid and high latitude continents, forming a thickening belt in Europe from the Atlantic coast east into Russia and the Ukraine in areas generally south of the Scandinavian Ice Sheet. It also covers a large portion of the Midwest of the United States, the lowlands of Alaska, southeast Washington and eastern Idaho and some 440,000 km2 of central China, where it is up to 300m thick. Millions of woolly mammoths and other Ice Age animals are mostly entombed in loess in non-glaciated areas of Siberia, Alaska and the Yukon Territory of Canada. Wind blown material is common within the Ice Age portion of the Greenland ice cores.

“‘Despite the large number of studies, there are many problems associated with loess from a uniformitarian view: ‘Few problems in Quaternary geology have raised so much controversy as loess’.’(19)

“Whether it be ‘volcanic ash’, deep sea ash or loess the origin of this material is mysterious evoking massive eruptions of missing volcanoes or in the case of loess: ‘(1) hot deserts, (2) cold deserts, (3) drowned sources covered by late-glacial sea level rise and (4) glacial grinding.’ A more encompassing explanation would be that all this material is the by-product of the electrical erosion that occurred during the mountain forming period. Depending on exactly when the material was eroded determined its ultimate classification. For example, material eroded in the early stages may have been deposited whilst marine incursions were still ongoing- this material would have been incorporated into marine strata and interpreted as ‘volcanic’. During the latter stages when marine transgressions had subsided electrical dust storms would have scattered the material globally- eventually to settle on the ocean floor or entrap ‘Ice Age’ mammals.

“Furthermore, marine sponge spicules have been identified in loess, we have already seen that the fossilised remains of sea creatures have been found atop Mount Everest- it is likely that the remains of sponges originated from the uplifted uppermost sedimentary strata which, as mentioned previous, was pulverised and scattered as an electrical discharge carved out a mountain.” (References given in thread)

Back to Louis Hissink, I find it difficult to disagree with what he writes and this article is no exception: ... s-hissink/
What is interesting here is the radiometric profile of the Woolfe Creek Crater with its radioactive crater rim! I agree with Louis Hissink what we’re looking at is an electrical discharge one producing radioactive elements in situ.

Given the association of radioactive elements with granite and that: ““…great masses of granite are found to have been emplaced among deformed and metamorphosed sedimentary strata to form enormous granite bathyliths in the cores of major mountain ranges.” (ibid., p. 636). Granite is never found outside mountain belts (Bucher, 1950, p. 37).”; do we now have a link between electrical discharges and topographic uplift?

Posts: 4433
Joined: Fri Apr 04, 2008 2:54 pm

Re: Catastrophist Geology

Unread post by Lloyd » Wed May 31, 2017 1:15 pm

Robert, you said: "What strata escaped being metamorphosed were eroded, pulverised and scattered by intense electrical winds (something similar but on a vastly reduced scale still occurs on Mars today"
- Are you referring to global dust storms from electrified dust devils?
- Do you see dendritic EDM patterns on Mars from dust devils, like what you say are in Earth's mountains?

- What about this article "Mars Dust-Devil Mystery Solved on Earth" at ?
Most [Mars dust devil tracks] are darker than the surrounding sand. The coarser the grains of sand are, the darker they appear. When dust devils swish by, they clear their paths of smaller grains, leaving dark tracks like ... swirly tattoos. But occasionally, cameras orbiting Mars have caught glimpses of bright streaks on dark sand.
- It shows that similar tracks to those on Mars are made on Earth by dust devils. So how do dust devils support EDM theory regarding original erosion of mountains on Earth? And why do Mars and the Moon have no mountain ranges like on Earth?
- Here are dendritic patterns in normal water erosion.
Dendritic erosion at Mt. St. Helens Fig. 3
SOIL EROSION ... e06873.jpg
- So why assume EDM erosion produced the dendritic patterns in mountainous areas? Shall we discuss Oard's comments on Walter Brown's theory regarding the Grand Canyon?
- Also, let's have a calculation of the maximum size and duration that's possible for an E.D. between say Earth and Venus at say 1 to 30 Earth diameters apart with maximum charge difference between them. Earth's oceans would surely get in the way; would they not?

This is from Wikipedia.
Granitic rock is widely distributed throughout the continental crust. Much of it was intruded during the Precambrian age; it is the most abundant basement rock that underlies the relatively thin sedimentary veneer of the continents. Outcrops of granite tend to form tors and rounded massifs. Granites sometimes occur in circular depressions surrounded by a range of hills, formed by the metamorphic aureole or hornfels. Granite often occurs as relatively small, less than 100 km² stock masses (stocks) and in batholiths that are often associated with orogenic mountain ranges. Small dikes of granitic composition called aplites are often associated with the margins of granitic intrusions. In some locations, very coarse-grained pegmatite masses occur with granite.
Origin. Granite has a felsic composition and is more common in recent geologic time in contrast to Earth's ultramafic ancient igneous history. ... [G]ranitic rocks form the basement of all land continents.

- So it seems that your quote from 1950 is wrong. Isn't it? It looks like granite is simply closer to the surface in mountain belts than it is in other parts of continents.
- Do you have info on exactly how electrical breakdown can form granite? What was the material before it became granite? Wasn't some granite formed from sedimentary rock, like in New England? Can you rule out extreme heat and pressure as the cause of granite formation, since that would likely involve ionization and electrical forces? I know of a likely source for such heat and pressure.

- Do you accept these statements?
From ... posits.gif
Loess is a sedimentary deposit composed largely of silt-size grains that are loosely cemented by calcium carbonate.
From "Distribution and composition of loess sediments in the Ili Basin, Central Asia" at ... 8213009877
The bulk mineral components of the Ili loess are dominated by quartz and feldspar with minor amounts of calcite, chlorite, mica, dolomite and hornblende. More than 20 types of heavy minerals were observed with major components of amphibole, magnetite and epidote. The major elements of the Ili loess are characterized by high abundance of SiO2, Al2O3 and CaO and minor amounts of Fe2O3, MgO, Na2O and K2O.
- What evidence do you have that loess could not have been swept up from silt deposits by extreme winds during a global cataclysm?

- Do you have reason to doubt the following? It appears that Worzel Ash is volcanic, not EDM.
From "The 'Worzel Ash' (Los Chocoyos Volcanic Ash)" at ... 845,245282
... Note "Minds in Ablation, Part Seven: Dust" is at: [ ]
The extent of the "Worzel Ash" of Worzel (1959) and as discussed by Ewing et al. (1959) and Anders and Limber (1959) is now known to have been vastly overestimated. Detailed research published by Bowels et al. (1973), Drexler et al. (1980), Ledbetter (1984, 1985), and Ledbetter and Sparks (1979), which included trace element analysis and dating by biostratigraphy, oxygen isotope stratigraphy, and radiometric methods not performed by Worzel (1959), show that what he mapped as the "Worzel Ash" actually consists of a number of different beds of volcanic ash that vary greatly in age. They found that the "Worzel Ash" was not a single global ash bed. From the trace and minor element analysis of 128 volcanic ash samples from 56 cores, Bowles et al. (1973) concluded that the unit, which Worzel (1959) mapped as the "Worzel Ash" consists of different ash beds of differing ages including three regionally widespread volcanic ash beds. Ledbetter and Sparks (1979) found what they called the "Worzel D ash" to be the distal counterpart of the rhyolitic Los Chocoyos ash-flow tuff of Guatemala and both were the result of a caldera ("supervolcano") eruption. Drexler et al. (1980) found that the "Worzel D" (Los Chocoyos) ash was created by a massive caldera eruption of the Atitlan caldera, which buried ... much of the Guatemalan Highlands and Pacific coastal plain under a thick layer of ignimbrite and spread volcanic ash from Florida to Ecuador. Drexler et al. (1980) contains a map showing the distribution of the Los Chocoyos ("Worzel D" and Y8) ash bed. In this eruption, the Atitlan caldera erupted 270-280 cubic kilometers of volcanic material and created a huge volcanic caldera now filled by Lake Atitlan (Rose et al. 1987).
- "More coring and detailed geochemical analyses by Ledbetter (1985) of ash layers recovered from cores in the Gulf of Mexico and the Pacific Ocean adjacent to Central America defined 11 distinct ash beds within the sediments underlying the Gulf of Mexico and Pacific Ocean surrounding Central America.

Posts: 140
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2011 4:43 am

Re: Catastrophist Geology

Unread post by johnm33 » Thu Jun 01, 2017 2:14 pm

This may be relevent, maybe not. Thinking about the Velikovskian encouter with Venus, and the earths spin stopping, the bible account says the waters in the river were scalding, just what you expect from the translation of kinetic energy to heat. Lets assume the rivers were at about 10C, scalding could be anywhere from 45-80C so 35C heat gain. Water has a very high specific heat, using the same amount of energy to raise water 350 would raise limestone to about 160C. We're not just looking at a surface effect, in practical terms it's the whole lithosphere and then some. There would be all sorts of ore bodies deep down already near critical so massive amounts of inner heat would be carried up towards the surface. Any cracked rocks that got above 100C would cause massive steam explosions. Then of course we have all the seas rushing poleward, and back again, and on the way back meeting very hot rocks, the atmosphere was probably at close to 100% humidity for days.


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 14 guests