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 seasmith » Wed Oct 26, 2016 2:08 pm

http://www.geologyin.com/2016/10/geolog ... cBebbwy.99

GaryN wrote:
Should be Fairy Tale story


What about the orogeny of the Rockies ?
I see lots of evidence on the ground for (cyclic) impetus(es) from the West,
but I'm not ready to publish. ;)

Do you, or any of you 'young-earthers' out there, have a favorite theory ?
I am seriously interested.
seasmith
 
Posts: 2573
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2008 6:59 pm

Re: Rock Strata Formation

Unread postby webolife » Wed Oct 26, 2016 11:01 pm

Not sure what your question is about the orogeny of the Rockies [and related ranges from Alaska to Chile], but the seismic model of mantle slabs provides imo some significant support for rapid continental drift... a primary objection to this notion has been that the frictional resistance would be impossibly high, but if the continents simply rafted upon sliding mantle blocks, this objection is overcome. Stacking blocks also provide another possible mechanism for subduction, which I think has been a weak position for SMers.
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.
User avatar
webolife
 
Posts: 2342
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 2:01 pm
Location: Seattle

Re: Rock Strata Formation

Unread postby seasmith » Thu Oct 27, 2016 8:41 am

...but the seismic model of mantle slabs provides imo some significant support for rapid continental drift... a primary objection to this notion has been that the frictional resistance would be impossibly high, but if the continents simply rafted upon sliding mantle blocks, this objection is overcome

I have no problem with RCD-rapid continental drift. The Andes and Himalayas seem to represent some of the most rapid movement currently evident, though in geology, "rapid" is a relatively relative term.
Yes more modern seismology technologies seem to support the concept of 'continental keels'.
So are you saying that in addition to a 'keel' motion, that continents can also slide ever the decks of the keels ?

Stacking blocks...

I think that is the model the linked article is trying to advance, if i read it correctly.

Not sure what your question is about the orogeny of the Rockies

Simply what is the, or an, impetus for the orogeny ?


https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q ... s_0I_cFX7A
seasmith
 
Posts: 2573
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2008 6:59 pm

Re: Rock Strata Formation

Unread postby webolife » Fri Oct 28, 2016 8:33 am

Simply...colliding continental masses.

No, especially with the seismic mantle data, the rafting continental plate is a much more viable model for RCD than the sliding plate, hydroplate, or whatever other contrivance is imagined. Not denying their possibility, just lacking evidential confidence. Now if the hydroplate model is modified to include a few layers of shifting mantle, then you've got something!
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.
User avatar
webolife
 
Posts: 2342
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 2:01 pm
Location: Seattle

Re: Rock Strata Formation

Unread postby GaryN » Fri Oct 28, 2016 10:09 am

@s.
'young-earthers'


I don't think anyone has any idea about the age of the Earth itself, but the surface surely shows signs of modification by E/M forces, and as Solon was informed by the Egyptians, it has happened before, and will happen again, and sometimes there is almost total destruction.

... rapid continental drift..


That kind of talk belongs in the NIAMI forums, surely? :D
What reveals itself to me ceases to be mysterious for me alone: if I unveil it to anyone else, he hears mere words which betray the living sense: Profanation, but never revelation.
~ Egyptian Proverbs
User avatar
GaryN
 
Posts: 2470
Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2008 8:18 pm
Location: Sooke, BC, Canada

Re: Rock Strata Formation

Unread postby seasmith » Thu Nov 03, 2016 1:18 pm

Image

Since the 18th century, geologists have struggled to explain how big magma chambers form in the Earth’s crust. In particular, it has been difficult to explain where the surrounding rock goes when the magma intrudes. Now a team of researchers from Uppsala University and the Goethe University in Frankfurt have found the missing rocks – and they look nothing like what they expected.


Uppsala University 2016-11-02
https://www.uu.se/en/media/news/article ... el&lang=en
seasmith
 
Posts: 2573
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2008 6:59 pm

Re: Rock Strata Formation

Unread postby webolife » Sat Nov 05, 2016 9:37 am

I love how science writers change "proposed" into "found" and then into "solved"!
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.
User avatar
webolife
 
Posts: 2342
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 2:01 pm
Location: Seattle

Re: Rock Strata Formation

Unread postby seasmith » Sat Nov 05, 2016 10:28 am

Yeah, me too.
Most 'science' writers are like NY Times writers: prone to disingenuous hyperbole and sensational half-truths. The effete journalism of today is reflected in our superficial society, as chronicled by the shallow Facebook Generation.
What the geologist actually says in her paper is :

The described process of frothing can generally be expected to be most pronounced at low pressures and when the xenolith is volatile-rich (Fig. 5). These conditions are often met in upper–crustal magma reservoirs and conduits where different types of magma intrude into sedimentary, or into altered igneous or metamorphic rocks containing up to several wt.% of volatiles (cf. Fig. 5; e.g. ref. 43). Once a volatile-bearing crustal rock gets entrained into a magma, the xenolith magma will be oversaturated in volatiles and vesicles will form44.
...
To synthesise, the combined observations on frothy xenolith samples and our numerical model results imply that the plutonic record may simply not contain the complete amount of xenolith evidence. A portion of xenoliths may in fact have risen towards the magma-reservoir roof from where they were eventually erupted, either as frothy xenoliths or in form of assimilated solids and liquids in lava and pyroclastic deposits.


http://www.nature.com/article-assets/npg/srep/2016/161102/srep34566/images_hires/m685/srep34566-f5.jpg

http://www.nature.com/articles/srep34566
seasmith
 
Posts: 2573
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2008 6:59 pm

Re: Rock Strata Formation

Unread postby webolife » Tue Nov 08, 2016 9:23 am

Excellent pairing and contrast between actual science and journalist scientism. Hope casual [non-science-trained] readers take note!

Evidences of "honest" science writing found in the actual geologist report:
"can generally be expected..."
"numerical model results imply..."
"plutonic record may simply not contain..."
"a portion of xenoliths may..."
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.
User avatar
webolife
 
Posts: 2342
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 2:01 pm
Location: Seattle

Re: Rock Strata Formation

Unread postby Grey Cloud » Tue Nov 08, 2016 12:51 pm

'Ifs and buts and maybes' as we say over here. If these scientists give a final answer then the grant money dries up so they keep it open-ended. You don't kill the cash-cow that lays the golden egg. :roll:
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 » Tue Nov 08, 2016 5:30 pm

~
At least real geologists have rock to show for it ...
seasmith
 
Posts: 2573
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2008 6:59 pm

Re: Rock Strata Formation

Unread postby Robertus Maximus » Fri Nov 18, 2016 12:21 pm

Is the K-T Boundary Layer a Coal Seam?

This may seem unusual but what I am proposing is a non-catastrophic explanation for a supposed catastrophic geological feature- the K-T Boundary Layer.

The idea that a titanic meteorite impact occurred some 65 million years ago removing the dinosaurs and thus paving the way for the subsequent evolution of mammals and eventually humans has, over the last 35 years gained popularity amongst lay and scientific people alike.

So exciting is the idea that the media and Hollywood have soaked it up and seemingly every dinosaur documentary or movie must have a dramatic computer generated, special effects impact scene.

The meteorite impact theory is but one in a long line of theories some catastrophic, some not, that brings an end to the reign of the dinosaurs and other life forms at the end of the Cretaceous Period some 65 million years ago. The idea, in its latest form, was developed by Professors Luis and Walter Alvarez and dates back to 1979. In an effort to measure how long it had taken for a thin layer of clay at the K-T boundary (this is the geological layer dividing the Cretaceous Period from the Tertiary Era) to be deposited, the Alvarez team opted to use concentrations of the element iridium, which is relatively rare at the Earth’s surface, as a benchmark. It was subsequently found that the clay contained unusually high concentrations of the metal. To account for this anomaly the team initially suggested that a nearby supernova was the cause but later this was changed to a meteorite impact when other suspected supernova products were not found. Subsequent samples, taken later, from 50 to 80 sites around the globe also displayed the iridium concentration.

An early challenge to the theory was proposed. The iridium, critics said, could have come from volcanic eruptions, which are known to bring iridium up from deep within the Earth.

However, in the mid 1980’s chemists Jeffrey Bada and Nancy Lee at the Scripps Research Institute in California found traces of the amino acid, alpha-aminoisobutyric acid, in the K-T layer. This amino acid is virtually non-existent on Earth and led to suggestions that the meteorite was of a type known as a carbonaceous chondrite; amino acids and other organic (carbon based) compounds are found in abundant quantities in such objects. More recently a rare isotope of helium- He3- has been found, in steady quantities, in rocks spanning the K-T layer. Again, according to Sujoy Mukhopadhyay of the California Institute of Technology, this finding rules out volcanism and confirms that a meteorite was responsible.

Carbon is also associated with the K-T layer, impact enthusiasts refer to this carbon as the ‘fireball’ layer formed when vegetation caught fire following the impact, roasting some of the dinosaurs alive while others perished in the ‘nuclear winter’ that followed as the earth was blanketed in a thick smog.

The same chain of reasoning has been applied to other mass extinction events including the late Permian period extinction some 251 million years ago. In recent years, carbon molecules, helium and argon were found in rocks from this period. Researchers at the University of Washington State in Seattle suggested that they were evidence of an impact event but this time due to a lack of iridium in the rocks, a comet was suggested as the cause.
Already we can see a pattern emerging. Carbon, amino acids or bio- molecules, helium isotopes, iridium or other rare earth elements, occurring globally, concentrated in some areas and strata but not others, can a terrestrial process account for these observations?

A theory does exist and it describes in detail a process that can account for the features seen globally in the K-T boundary layer and other strata. That theory is the Deep Earth Gas theory, proposed by the late Professor Thomas Gold of Cornell University, in 1977.

(Note: The Anhydride Theory by C. Warren Hunt also claims an abiogenic origin for natural gas, petroleum and coal but places a bigger role on bacteria living deep in the Earth’s crust during the formation of hydrocarbon deposits. In the years shortly before Gold’s death, Hunt and a number of scientists claimed Gold had plagiarised their theories and claimed them as his own; although Gold had acknowledged the work of pioneering scientists in this field in his 1993 USGS paper ‘The Origin of Methane (and Oil) in the Crust of the Earth’ and most of the elements of Gold’s theory were in place long before the alleged plagiarising took place).

The theory offers an alternative explanation as to the origin of ‘fossil fuels’. That idea in itself is not new, as long ago as the 1870’s the Russian chemist Dmitry Mendeleev, who formulated the periodic table of the elements, was among the first to suggest a non- biological origin of the earth’s hydrocarbons. In the 1960’s the chemist Sir Robert Robinson commented “It cannot be too strongly emphasised that petroleum does not present the composition picture expected from modified biogenic products, and all the arguments from the constituents of ancient oils fit equally well, or better, with the conception of a primordial hydrocarbon mixture to which bio-products have been added.”

According to the theory the hydrocarbons which result in the formation of natural gas (methane), crude oil and coal deposits originate deep (100-300km) within the Earth’s mantle. Vast quantities of such volatiles exist at such depths, they are among the primordial constituents from which the Earth formed and for the last 4,000 million years of Earth’s history (conventional dating) have been slowly migrating, or upwelling, toward the surface. Evidence that primordial volatiles still exist at great depth within the mantle has been confirmed with the discovery of elevated levels of the light isotope of xenon (an inert gas) in deep wells in the U.S. and Australia.

The theory can explain some puzzling features associated with the accepted view, it accounts for petroleum’s association with helium. Helium-He3- is welling up from even deeper levels in the mantle as it does so it encounters hydrocarbons from shallower levels and continues to the surface with them- forming concentrations where the hydrocarbons settle. It can account for the phenomenon of oil-field recharging, hydrocarbons continue to upwell in vast quantities today. It also accounts for the fact that high levels of iridium are found in oil wells. Migrating hydrocarbon fluids leach metals, present in trace quantities, from the surrounding rocks transporting them to the surface strata.

As hydrocarbons approach the surface they experience a sequential loss of hydrogen. As Gold writes: ‘Vast methane deposits at the greatest depth, lighter oils higher up and the heaviest oils on top (though each pocket may be capped with some amount of methane). In some fields, the most carbon-rich and top most hydrocarbon is not crude oil; crude oil is not always the end of the sequence. Rather, above the oil layers may be black coal. The blacker the coal, the greater the loss of hydrogen and the greater the resulting carbon-to-hydrogen ratio.’

But what of the bio molecules found in ‘fossil fuels’? Here, in 1992 Professor Gold introduced a new idea one hinted at in Robert Robinson’s words. Called the Deep Hot Biosphere it states that the porous rocks of the earth’s crust are populated by primitive hyperthermophilic archaebacteria, down to a depth of perhaps 10km, it is traces of these bacterial communities that provide the biological content of primordial hydrocarbons. It is interesting to note that although coal and crude oil are supposedly reworked ferns and algae, bacteria exclusively use the high carbon number molecules found in both hydrocarbons.

A typical K-T section is capped by a layer of carbon, impact enthusiasts call this layer ‘soot’ which supposedly formed from burning vegetation around the globe but in some areas - for example New Mexico- the layer of ‘soot’ is sufficiently thick enough to be recognised as a coal seam (recall that coal is often the end result for ascending hydrocarbons).

But what of the occurrences of amino acids in the K-T layering?

As we have seen within the Earth’s crust there exists an immense population of primitive hyperthermophilic archaebacteria thriving on an abundant supply of primeval hydrocarbons. Is it any coincidence then that the amino acid isolated by Bada and Lee is also found in two rare types of bacteria?

Studies of K-T boundary clay mineralogy from samples at four different localities found ‘the boundary clay is neither mineralogically exotic nor distinct from locally derived clays above and below the boundary. The significant ejecta component in the clay that is predicted by the asteroid-impact scenario was not detected.’

The validity of the impact theory relies on the presence of carbon and iridium as there is no mineralogical boundary. However, all the ingredients are present to explain the features seen at the K-T boundary; primordial Helium from deep within the mantle; carbon- the final stage for upwelling hydrocarbons; amino acids- traces of a bacterial ecosystem deep within the Earth and iridium- leached and transported to the surface by the very same upwelling hydrocarbons. The layering at the K-T boundary is due to upwelling hydrocarbons, it has all the hallmarks of a mini coal seam. No extra-terrestrial influences are required to account for its origin.

The deposition of hydrocarbons in Earth’s surface rocks is an on-going process and in view of this the features found at the K-T boundary are probably fairly recent- geologically speaking (some sources suggest an age of 1,240 years old for some oil deposits, I suspect some deposits are MUCH younger). But what of the billions of animal and plant remains found in the Phanerozoic rock record? These remains are testament to a global cataclysm far larger than scientists (or a Hollywood special effects department) currently dare to imagine.

References:

1. Gold. T. 1999. The Deep Hot Biosphere. Springer-Verlag New York Inc.
2. Rampino. M.R and Reynolds. R.C. 1983. Science vol. 219, p495
3. Bada. J and Lee. N. 1986. Science Digest. May 1986 p30- 31
4. Hecht. J. 1991. New Scientist. April 6 1991, p19
5. Caffee. M. 1999. Science vol. 285, p2115
6. Becker. L. 2001. Science vol. 291, p1530
7. Mukhopadhyay. S. 2001. Science vol. 291, p1952
Robertus Maximus
 
Posts: 101
Joined: Mon Sep 02, 2013 6:16 am
Location: Liverpool, UK

Re: Rock Strata Formation

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

Thank you. I enjoyed that, very interesting.
(I'm in Salford by the way).
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 » Sun Nov 20, 2016 10:34 am

Grey Cloud wrote:Thank you. I enjoyed that, very interesting.
(I'm in Salford by the way).

Thanks Grey Cloud, good to hear from a fellow Lancastrian.
Robertus Maximus
 
Posts: 101
Joined: Mon Sep 02, 2013 6:16 am
Location: Liverpool, UK

Re: Rock Strata Formation

Unread postby webolife » Sun Nov 20, 2016 12:22 pm

Robertus Maximus,
Great synopsis of Gold's and others' work on the abiogenesis of hydrocarbons.
I also endorse Gold's [et.al.] work on deep carbonaceous [primarily methane] upwelling for the geologically rapid formation of hydrocarbons [particularly coal, shale oil, and others] catalyzed, as it is in the laboratory, by a clayey matrix. The impacts structures [astroblemes] we see accompanying all of the major strata, not only the Cretaceous and Permian, suggest the extraterrestrial factor in helping to destabilize the crust in such a way as to allow these deep seeps to break out onto the surface now and again during the entire period of the cataclysm. That fossils or fossil environments are included in and or associated with some of these carboniferous layers [particularly coal], is only to be expected in the scenario of a biologically devastating deluge. 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.
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.
User avatar
webolife
 
Posts: 2342
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 2:01 pm
Location: Seattle

PreviousNext

Return to Electric Universe - Planetary Science

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest