Rock Strata Formation

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

Moderators: MGmirkin, bboyer

Re: Rock Strata Formation

Unread postby Robertus Maximus » Mon Nov 21, 2016 12:12 pm

webolife wrote:The chronology of the so-called geologic column is an abstract construct needlessly attached to the observation of various large scale deposits bearing signatures that span the globe. Hence, in this catastrophic view, the Permian and Creataceous [and other] extinction [misnomered "explosion"] episodes may be seen as contemperary, or coeval.

webolife
Thank you for your comments.

I have carried out my own ‘armchair research’ and I agree that a cataclysm has occurred. In my view the Earth may be much older than what is currently accepted but its surface features are ‘recent’ in comparison. How have I reached this conclusion? Well, ‘…when you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth?’

You are correct regarding your observation of the geological column as Derek Ager has noted there are more gaps than record; if my memory serves me correctly I think that there are only a handful of isolated locations on the Earth’s surface where the complete column is supposedly found. Indeed a recent study has found ‘..that sedimentation provides a record of only 10% of the time, while 90% is not represented by any strata at all.’ But this is just uniformitarian conjecture, there has to be ‘deep time’, there are insufficient strata- no problem fill it with gaps!

Here is a typical example: ‘Three geologists writing about the continuous 600 metre thick sequence of sedimentary rocks in the southern Teton Mountains, north-west Wyoming, USA, stated: “The regularity and parallelism of the layers in well-exposed sections suggest that all these rocks were deposited in a single uninterrupted sequence.”’

Despite the fact that the rocks looked as if they were a continuous singular deposit did the geologists believe their eyes? No, the entire formation took 200 million years to form including hypothetical ‘gaps’ spanning millions of years!

It is findings such as this that has led me to conclude that the Phanerozoic rock record is a record of a series of closely spaced cataclysms during a geologically ‘recent’ period of planetary and possibly solar system instability. Sloss identified six sedimentary megasequences blanketing the North American continent spanning the Phanerozoic, megasequences have subsequently been identified on other continents. To my mind this indicates that a series of globally synchronous marine transgressions/ regressions occurred, regional variations meant that the entire geological column never was deposited complete.

I think we’re on the same page here? In my view there never was a Permo-Triassic or Cretaceous extinction- the fossil record is not a history of evolutionary progress but rather devastated ecosystems- which occurred during the same cataclysmic period.
Robertus Maximus
 
Posts: 101
Joined: Mon Sep 02, 2013 6:16 am
Location: Liverpool, UK

Re: Rock Strata Formation

Unread postby Grey Cloud » Mon Nov 21, 2016 3:35 pm

Robertus Maximus wrote:
Despite the fact that the rocks looked as if they were a continuous singular deposit did the geologists believe their eyes? No, the entire formation took 200 million years to form including hypothetical ‘gaps’ spanning millions of years!
Sadly this type of mindset is not confimned to geology. Archaeology1, cosmology2 and physics3, to name a few, all share it.
1. Dark Ages.
2. Inventing different types of star etc.
3. Inventing different types of particle etc.
In short, making the evidence fit the theory.
If I have the least bit of knowledge
I will follow the great Way alone
and fear nothing but being sidetracked.
The great Way is simple
but people delight in complexity.
Tao Te Ching, 53.
Grey Cloud
 
Posts: 2451
Joined: Sun Apr 13, 2008 5:47 am
Location: NW UK

Re: Rock Strata Formation

Unread postby seasmith » Mon Nov 21, 2016 5:34 pm

Robertus Maximus wrote:
‘Three geologists writing about the continuous 600 metre thick sequence of sedimentary rocks in the southern Teton Mountains, north-west Wyoming, USA, stated: “The regularity and parallelism of the layers in well-exposed sections suggest that all these rocks were deposited in a single uninterrupted sequence.”’


Hi Robertus, Don't know what your source was there, but it sounds like they are tacking a couple extra zeroes on to their dates.
The Tetons are among the very youngest ranges in N. America, with 10 my of uplift often given as a ball park figure. (have you been there ? ) Even if that figure is too large by a factor of ten, ~just one million years is a long time.
The "continuous 600 meter thick sequence of sedimentary..." line reads like a core drilling report (oilfield survey?), which survey would have been taken on the adjacent valley floor, to intersect any possibly trapped hydrocarbons at the transverse faulting zones.
[Of abiotic origen no doubt].

Compare this overview from the usnps:

https://www.nps.gov/grte/learn/nature/geology.htm

Having hiked there some, it was readily apparent to this bedroll geologer that their orogeny was more recent than the US Rockies, and much, much more recent than that of the Appalachians.

Beyond a few hundred thousand years, Nobody knows, or can know, the ages of the geologic epochs, it is all conjecture,
imo.

btw, i also enjoyed your succinct synopsis of abiotic HCO2 origins, much easier read than the opus "Hydrocarbons in the Deep" thread; which makes a Tolstoi novel seem brief ...
seasmith
 
Posts: 2572
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2008 6:59 pm

Re: Rock Strata Formation

Unread postby Robertus Maximus » Tue Nov 22, 2016 9:05 am

seasmith wrote:
Robertus Maximus wrote:
‘Three geologists writing about the continuous 600 metre thick sequence of sedimentary rocks in the southern Teton Mountains, north-west Wyoming, USA, stated: “The regularity and parallelism of the layers in well-exposed sections suggest that all these rocks were deposited in a single uninterrupted sequence.”’


Hi Robertus, Don't know what your source was there, but it sounds like they are tacking a couple extra zeroes on to their dates.
The Tetons are among the very youngest ranges in N. America, with 10 my of uplift often given as a ball park figure. (have you been there ? ) Even if that figure is too large by a factor of ten, ~just one million years is a long time.
The "continuous 600 meter thick sequence of sedimentary..." line reads like a core drilling report (oilfield survey?), which survey would have been taken on the adjacent valley floor, to intersect any possibly trapped hydrocarbons at the transverse faulting zones.
[Of abiotic origen no doubt].

Compare this overview from the usnps:

https://www.nps.gov/grte/learn/nature/geology.htm

Having hiked there some, it was readily apparent to this bedroll geologer that their orogeny was more recent than the US Rockies, and much, much more recent than that of the Appalachians.

Beyond a few hundred thousand years, Nobody knows, or can know, the ages of the geologic epochs, it is all conjecture,
imo.

btw, i also enjoyed your succinct synopsis of abiotic HCO2 origins, much easier read than the opus "Hydrocarbons in the Deep" thread; which makes a Tolstoi novel seem brief ...

seasmith, thanks for your comments.

The information comes from ‘Creation of the Teton Landscape’ by Love, Reed and Pierce 2007. An earlier online edition with imperial as opposed to metric units can be found here:

https://www.nps.gov/parkhistory/online_books/grte/grte_geology/sec6.htm

Just to be clear I am not talking about uplift but what has been uplifted, I’ll post my views of mountain formation in a separate thread.

If we look at the strata concerned in the Alaska Basin: Flathead, Gros Ventre, Gallatin, Bighorn, Darby and Madison that gives us a deposit of some 2,455 feet, newer estimates may have been revised lower.

According to the authors: ‘The regularity and parallel relations of the layers in well-exposed sections such as the one in Alaska Basin suggest that all these rocks were deposited in a single uninterrupted sequence. However, the fossils and regional distribution of the rock units show that this is not really the case. The incomplete nature of this record becomes apparent if we plot the ages of the various formations on the absolute geologic time scale (fig. 34). The length of time from the beginning of the Cambrian Period to the end of the Mississippian Period is about 285 million years. The strata in Alaska Basin are a record of approximately 120 million years. More than half of the pages in the geologic story are missing even though, compared with most other areas, the book as a whole is remarkably complete! During these unrecorded intervals of time either no sediments were deposited in the area of the Teton Range or, if deposited, they were removed by erosion.’

Regardless of what units we use the appearance of the deposit in well exposed sections ‘suggest that all these rocks were deposited in a single uninterrupted sequence’ however we are told this is an illusion when compared to the reality of ‘the absolute geologic time scale’. More than half of the absolute geologic timescale is missing and this is considered complete, we are reassured that the missing time occurred but how is this known for certain? As you pointed out it does indeed seem to be ‘all conjecture’!

Ps. Thanks for the link- very impressive scenery!
Robertus Maximus
 
Posts: 101
Joined: Mon Sep 02, 2013 6:16 am
Location: Liverpool, UK

Re: Rock Strata Formation

Unread postby Robertus Maximus » Tue Nov 22, 2016 11:11 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: http://efficalis.com/sedimentology/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/Lithulogy-and-Mineral-Resources-2004-Tonto-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 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’!

References:

1. http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/deepimpact/media/spitzer-di-090705.html#.VGUqfMlqxeY
2. Austin, S. A. 1990. Were Grand Canyon Limestones Deposited by Calm and Placid Seas? Acts & Facts. 19 (12).
3. http://www.sedimentology.fr/
4. http://michael.oards.net/
5. Milton, R. 1992. The Facts of Life
Robertus Maximus
 
Posts: 101
Joined: Mon Sep 02, 2013 6:16 am
Location: Liverpool, UK

Re: Rock Strata Formation

Unread postby Grey Cloud » Tue Nov 22, 2016 2:18 pm

The incomplete nature of this record becomes apparent if we plot the ages of the various formations on the absolute geologic time scale (fig. 34).
'Absolute'????????? :shock:
If I have the least bit of knowledge
I will follow the great Way alone
and fear nothing but being sidetracked.
The great Way is simple
but people delight in complexity.
Tao Te Ching, 53.
Grey Cloud
 
Posts: 2451
Joined: Sun Apr 13, 2008 5:47 am
Location: NW UK

Re: Rock Strata Formation

Unread postby Robertus Maximus » Wed Nov 23, 2016 9:26 am

Grey Cloud wrote:
The incomplete nature of this record becomes apparent if we plot the ages of the various formations on the absolute geologic time scale (fig. 34).
'Absolute'????????? :shock:

In short, making the evidence fit the theory! Yet again.
Robertus Maximus
 
Posts: 101
Joined: Mon Sep 02, 2013 6:16 am
Location: Liverpool, UK

Re: Rock Strata Formation

Unread postby JouniJokela » Sat Nov 26, 2016 8:53 am

Robertus Maximus wrote:Did Limestone form catastrophically?

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



Carbonate rocks?
-Limestone, mainly Calcite & Aragonite are just different chrystal forms of chemical compound CaCO3
-Dolomite is chemically CaMg(CO3)2

One possible explanation for the formation of these, is that the whole nucleosynthesis of matter is happening all the time on all objects in space; Light is turned to matter in Thermosphere. I just noticed that Neon gas is missing from my data. But at least it's abundand in moons exosphere;
https://sservi.nasa.gov/articles/nasas- ... tmosphere/

Thus Calsium could be continuously synthesized from Neon Gas (Ne), and this (Ne) and the rest of the stuff (C,O,Mg) is created through proton (Hydrogen-ion) capture in the bottom of thermosphere.

I support my idea about this cold nucleosynthesis theory by the anomalous Flatnes of Hydrogen-derivate in the hight of 110-120 km;
https://www.researchgate.net/publicatio ... _derivates
and the noctilucent clouds are telling me that the Material flow is indeed from the Space to the Earth.

There is even some studies, which isotopic distribution of Calcium in rainwater supports this idea that it's synthesized in space, Table 1;
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/An ... fa5933.pdf

There is more lighter isotope of Calcium in rainwater than in Seawater. The Calcium in seawater might thus be "older" and has thus captured more Neutrons.
JouniJokela
 
Posts: 89
Joined: Mon Mar 28, 2016 6:34 pm
Location: Swiss

Re: Rock Strata Formation

Unread postby seasmith » Sat Nov 26, 2016 9:06 am

Rings are larger and twice as abundant above Phanerozoic than Precambrian bedrocks. Rings are also six times more likely to occur over glaciomarine and marine deposits, rather than organic, glaciolacustrine and till deposits. Rings are least likely to occur over fluvial, glaciofluvial and bedrock deposits, although they sometimes do.
Ontario Geological Survey

Shape and electrical characteristics might indicate mini salt-domes underlying the Canadian rings.
seasmith
 
Posts: 2572
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2008 6:59 pm

Re: Rock Strata Formation

Unread postby seasmith » Sat Nov 26, 2016 10:28 am

Sorry, that post was meant for Robertus' Tektonics thread. Too late to delete, will repost.
seasmith
 
Posts: 2572
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2008 6:59 pm

Re: Rock Strata Formation

Unread postby infinity engine » Sun Dec 25, 2016 10:18 am

Hello again, I have a (hopefully) quick question.

At the Christmas party last night, I saw this and was fascinated. It appears to be made of the common high iron clay mud around here. He did not remember the exact location but, in a creek bed probably south west Oregon. My first thought was it was man made, by machine somehow. Is this a geologic formation or some kind of industrial waste?

About 3 inches long, as perfect as my eye could tell, and being a technical artist i was flabberghasted, quite frankly.
Rounded ends from wear, looks easily broken, just like unfired clay.
Owner is an avid rock hound I have known for a few years, so I am leaning toward believing his story.

Image

Image
infinity engine
 
Posts: 7
Joined: Sat Mar 21, 2015 6:13 am

Re: Rock Strata Formation

Unread postby kell1990 » Wed Dec 28, 2016 3:40 pm

Looks like a Buckyball to me, except that your object has more facets.

https://www.google.com/#q=buckyballs

My guess is that an electrical discharge of a very high voltage created it. The high iron content clay is probably the key here. Just my guess, though.
kell1990
 
Posts: 53
Joined: Wed Jun 01, 2016 10:54 am

Re: Rock Strata Formation

Unread postby kell1990 » Fri Dec 30, 2016 9:55 pm

kell1990 wrote:Looks like a Buckyball to me, except that your object has more facets.

https://www.google.com/#q=buckyballs

My guess is that an electrical discharge of a very high voltage created it. The high iron content clay is probably the key here. Just my guess, though.


On second thought, I think this is a man-made object and not a "buckyball" (C60, or buckminsterfullerene).

Buckyballs usually have a combination of pentagons and triangles which make up the shell of the object. This one seems to be made up exclusively of triangles. The size of the object is also very large for a buckyball.

I don't doubt the veracity of your friends story that he picked it up in a creek bed. It's where it was before that that bothers me.

I have spent many hours online trying to find an equivalent to this object, but without success.

On the other hand, if it's a real object, created by nature, then it would be priceless.
kell1990
 
Posts: 53
Joined: Wed Jun 01, 2016 10:54 am

Re: Rock Strata Formation

Unread postby The Great Dog » Sat Dec 31, 2016 12:12 pm

Looks like an intricate pierced ceramic sphere carving.

https://weareclayinhishands.files.wordp ... -26-pm.png
There are no other dogs but The Great Dog
User avatar
The Great Dog
 
Posts: 202
Joined: Thu Apr 02, 2009 4:58 pm

Re: Rock Strata Formation

Unread postby Grey Cloud » Sat Dec 31, 2016 3:17 pm

The Great Dog wrote:Looks like an intricate pierced ceramic sphere carving.

https://weareclayinhishands.files.wordp ... -26-pm.png

Nice find. I actually thought of Islamic art when I saw the original image from infinity engine. Acid heads do a similar level of detail/intricasy.
If I have the least bit of knowledge
I will follow the great Way alone
and fear nothing but being sidetracked.
The great Way is simple
but people delight in complexity.
Tao Te Ching, 53.
Grey Cloud
 
Posts: 2451
Joined: Sun Apr 13, 2008 5:47 am
Location: NW UK

PreviousNext

Return to Electric Universe - Planetary Science

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests