Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
10 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Flood not the Cause of the Grand Canyon -- Not a Biased Opinion
peaceharris
Member (Idle past 5596 days)
Posts: 128
Joined: 03-28-2005


Message 91 of 215 (208531)
05-16-2005 2:44 AM
Reply to: Message 80 by Bill Birkeland
05-14-2005 12:42 AM


Re: evidence?
Bill writes:
Generally, the larger the floc is, the more pore space there is in it. Therefore, the density of floc decreases with size, which means that the weight and settling velocity of a floc does not increase directly with size.
Maybe 'generally', but not neccessarily.
"If there is no surface repulsion between the particles, then every collision leads to aggregation and the process is called rapid flocculation. " - quote from Sheree's term project.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 80 by Bill Birkeland, posted 05-14-2005 12:42 AM Bill Birkeland has not replied

  
Randy
Member (Idle past 6247 days)
Posts: 420
From: Cincinnati OH USA
Joined: 07-19-2002


Message 92 of 215 (208568)
05-16-2005 8:30 AM
Reply to: Message 89 by peaceharris
05-16-2005 12:52 AM


Re: clear water, so what?
quote:
In other words, he is trying to say that iron content in groundwater is too low to cause flocculation.
I could be wrong but I don't think that natural iron in ground water is a very effective source of your speculated flocculation effect. Ferric ion is a very effective flocculant because it's trivalent and ferrous iron is quickly oxidized to ferric. The bad news for you is that ferric iron is not very water soluble at anywhere near neutral pH and precipitates as various hydroxide species. My inorganic chemistry is a little "rusty" but I think that even when soluble ferric ion is present in water it is in the form of hydroxides which have less charge and are thus less effective flocculants. I supposed you could figure it out for 30 ppm which is the highest concentration you have documented, though you would need to know something about the pH and the anionic species that were present. Once you figured out the concentration and charges of the cationic species present you could use DLVO theory to approximate the flocculation potential by making some assumptions about the surface charge on the clay that was being flocculated. I would probably use a Zeta Potential of about -58 mV but I cetainly don't have time to do the calculations and it is your speculation anyway so I think it is your responsibility to show its feasibility.
I suspect that the red color in the Hermit Shale is either from layers of precipitated iron oxide nodules or from clays that contain iron in their crystal structure. I think you were better off, though still wrong, with your initial speculation about flocculation from mixing fresh and salt water.
Now how did the plant fossils and animal tracks in the Hermit Shale get fromed when the "flocculated silt" was somehow settling out faster than the 10,000 cubic miles of sand that comprise the Coconino Sandstones and then how did the animal tracks get formed in the Coconinos as they deposited after the flocculated Hermit shale material? Unless you can answer these questions the rest of your speculations are meaningless.
Randy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 89 by peaceharris, posted 05-16-2005 12:52 AM peaceharris has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 93 by peaceharris, posted 05-16-2005 9:59 AM Randy has replied

  
peaceharris
Member (Idle past 5596 days)
Posts: 128
Joined: 03-28-2005


Message 93 of 215 (208587)
05-16-2005 9:59 AM
Reply to: Message 92 by Randy
05-16-2005 8:30 AM


water pH during the flood
Randy writes:
The bad news for you is that ferric iron is not very water soluble at anywhere near neutral pH and precipitates as various hydroxide species.
"Molten lava and sea water do react to make a mixture of hydrochloric acid and sea water called laze. This is a problem in Hawaii where lava has entered the ocean for 10 years. The steam at the lava entry has a pH of 1.5 to 2.5. " -quote from Steve Mattox
But sometimes groundwater can be alkaline too.
"Groundwater pH from 5.5 to 7.5 " - quote from Chemistry of Acids and Bases
Discussing the acidity of water above the Colorado plateau during Noah's flood might be speculative.
I think you were better off, though still wrong, with your initial speculation about flocculation from mixing fresh and salt water.
The distinct different color of the Hermit Shale clearly implies that iron played some role in the separation process.
This message has been edited by peaceharris, 05-16-2005 10:07 AM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 92 by Randy, posted 05-16-2005 8:30 AM Randy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 95 by Randy, posted 05-16-2005 10:30 AM peaceharris has not replied
 Message 96 by Percy, posted 05-16-2005 10:35 AM peaceharris has not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22391
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 94 of 215 (208592)
05-16-2005 10:17 AM


Flocculation Questions
I'm having trouble following why flocculation is an issue, maybe someone can explain. In some of the posts there seems to be a supposition that flocculation is required before suspended matter can fall out of suspension, and this doesn't seem correct to me.
--Percy

Replies to this message:
 Message 97 by Randy, posted 05-16-2005 10:53 AM Percy has replied

  
Randy
Member (Idle past 6247 days)
Posts: 420
From: Cincinnati OH USA
Joined: 07-19-2002


Message 95 of 215 (208594)
05-16-2005 10:30 AM
Reply to: Message 93 by peaceharris
05-16-2005 9:59 AM


Re: water pH during the flood
quote:
"Molten lava and sea water do react to make a mixture of hydrochloric acid and sea water called laze. This is a problem in Hawaii where lava has entered the ocean for 10 years. The steam at the lava entry has a pH of 1.5 to 2.5. " -quote from Steve Mattox
But sometimes groundwater can be alkaline too.
"Groundwater pH from 5.5 to 7.5 " - quote from Chemistry of Acids and Bases
Discussing the acidity of water above the Colorado plateau during Noah's flood might be speculative
Since Noah's flood never affected anything on the Colorado Plateau it is more than speculative it is fantasy. But if you want to fantasize and go with runaway subduction you probably end up with a lot of sulfuric acid in the oceans and that would solublize ferric ions as ferric sulfate. It would also kill off all marine life thanks to the acid pH but that's another subject.
quote:
The distinct different color of the Hermit Shale clearly implies that iron played some role in the separation process.
It shows that iron oxides are there not what role they played in its "separation process".
Now even granting your fantasy about the Hermits separating from and depositing below the Coconino sands due to flocculation, how does flocculation lead to the deposition of animals tracks in the Hermit shales?
http://www2.nature.nps.gov/...eontology/pub/grd3_3/grca1.htm
The Hermit Shale ichnofauna includes the nearly ubiquitous temnospondyl track Batrachichnus delicatulus. Reptile tracks include Parabaropus coloradensis and Hyloidichnus bifurcatus (seymouriamorph or diadectid tracks) and the small pelycosaur track Gilmoreichnus hermitanus. Two other more problematical ichnotaxa are present in the Hermit Shale collections. Haubold (1971) named Ichniotherium gilmorei for a specimen (USNM 11707) originally described by Gilmore (1928a, pl. 1). Unfortunately the holotype of this specimen is now lost (Haubold et al., 1995a). Ichniotherium is common in Europe but very rare in North America (Haubold et al., 1995a; Hunt et al., 1995; Hunt and Lucas, 1998b). A second problematic specimen is USNM 11598, a specimen that Gilmore (1927b, pl. 17, no. 1; Haubold et al., 1995a, fig. 24B) assigned to Parabaropus coloradensis. Haubold et al. (1995a) noted that this specimen is different from P. coloradensis in possesing distinct plantigrade impressions, elongate pedal imprints and less diverging digit impressions. They concluded that this trackway represents undertracks of either a Dimetropus specimen that preserves prominent pads and reduced digit impressions or a large Limnopus specimen (e. g., Limnopus zeilleri). We prefer the second interpretation because of the large manual pad impressions and because the long axis of the manual imprints is inclined at a high angle to the direction of travel.
And how were the animals around to make tracks in the Coconino sandstones after all the lower layers had been deposited by a global flood and how did they make tracks in sand dunes as they were being deposited on top of the Hermit formation?
You seem to be avoiding these questions? Is it because they totally falsify your "speculations".
Randy
This message has been edited by Randy, 05-16-2005 10:31 AM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 93 by peaceharris, posted 05-16-2005 9:59 AM peaceharris has not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22391
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 96 of 215 (208596)
05-16-2005 10:35 AM
Reply to: Message 93 by peaceharris
05-16-2005 9:59 AM


Re: water pH during the flood
Randy writes:
The bad news for you is that ferric iron is not very water soluble at anywhere near neutral pH and precipitates as various hydroxide species.
peaceharris writes:
The distinct different color of the Hermit Shale clearly implies that iron played some role in the separation process.
One of the water problems we face in the northeastern United Stated is high iron content. Whatever the solubility of iron in water, even at neutral pH's it often appears at concentration levels sufficient to seriously stain sinks and clothes. Once while I was at work during the day a water hose hanging on the side of the house broke, and since I hadn't bothered to turn the water off when I hung up the hose water sprayed against the concrete foundation for several hours. This was sufficient to turn it a deep brownish maroon.
Our water comes from an underground well, so naturally there's no air. But once exposed to the air, iron suspended in the water combines with oxygen in the air to form iron oxide (rust).
The Hermit Shale was deposited during a period when the concentration of oxygen in the atmosphere was rising due to the increasing presence of microscopic lifeforms which produce oxygen as a byproduct. The iron suspended in the oceans and seas combined with the oxygen to precipitate out as rust and deposit on sea bottoms along with sand and organic material. This is what gives the Hermit Shale its color. The concentration of iron in oceans and seas was much higher then than now. The presence of high levels of oxygen in the atmosphere today makes high concentrations of iron impossible in any water exposed to the air.
If iron played some active role in creating the layers of the Hermit Shale, a role beyond merely precipitating out as rust, it was certainly no significant or essential role since we can see many other layers that were able to form with no particularly high concentrations of iron.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 93 by peaceharris, posted 05-16-2005 9:59 AM peaceharris has not replied

  
Randy
Member (Idle past 6247 days)
Posts: 420
From: Cincinnati OH USA
Joined: 07-19-2002


Message 97 of 215 (208605)
05-16-2005 10:53 AM
Reply to: Message 94 by Percy
05-16-2005 10:17 AM


Re: Flocculation Questions
quote:
I'm having trouble following why flocculation is an issue, maybe someone can explain. In some of the posts there seems to be a supposition that flocculation is required before suspended matter can fall out of suspension, and this doesn't seem correct to me.
Stokes' law predicts that the sand that forms the Coconinos should have settled out well before the silts of the Hermit Shale if they settled from the same global flood. PH seems to be claiming the flocculation of the particles of the Hermit caused them to become larger and settle out below the Coconinos. On an earlier post he wrote
Rainwater will sort them this way. But the saline seawater during Noah's flood sorted the Coconino sands above the Hermit shale.
This ignores the clear evidence that the Coconinos are Aeolian in origin and He ignores a lot about the Hermit Shale. It also ignores all the lower layers but he seems to have claimed that the lower layers formed later by erosion from the upper layers as absurd as that is. There are several posts from roxrkool and others that totally demolish that claim of course.
As an aside I am not even sure that Stokes' law applies here. One would assume that the "flood waters" would have to be moving to spread out 10,000 cubic miles of sand over thousands of square miles and if required flow velocities are such that the Reynolds number was much over 1 all bets are of on Stokes' law IIRC.
Randy
This message has been edited by Randy, 05-16-2005 11:12 AM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 94 by Percy, posted 05-16-2005 10:17 AM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 99 by Percy, posted 05-16-2005 11:43 AM Randy has not replied

  
roxrkool
Member (Idle past 988 days)
Posts: 1497
From: Nevada
Joined: 03-23-2003


Message 98 of 215 (208610)
05-16-2005 11:10 AM
Reply to: Message 87 by peaceharris
05-16-2005 12:25 AM


Re: Groundwater iron
Stream clarity can be the result of several things like:
1. lack of algae
2. how fast the stream is moving (related to gradient)
3. low sediment supply
4. lack of decaying plant material (which can impart brownish color to water)
So just because you think something is possible and post a few quotes showing support for your opinions doesn't make it so and neither does it refute anything.
We can go round and round on a bazillion things that are possible, but what you need to do is show how it's possible IN the Hermit Shale, Coconino Sandstone, etc., and then show evidence in support of your position.
You have been presented several lines of evidence refuting your positionS regarding the Tapeasts, Bright Angel, Hermit, and Coconino formations, perhaps you could show us why those are wrong.
This message has been edited by roxrkool, 05-16-2005 11:14 AM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 87 by peaceharris, posted 05-16-2005 12:25 AM peaceharris has not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22391
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 99 of 215 (208622)
05-16-2005 11:43 AM
Reply to: Message 97 by Randy
05-16-2005 10:53 AM


Re: Flocculation Questions
Oh, okay, now I get it. And now I understand why you keep raising the issue of tracks found in the layers, since that wouldn't be possible if the layers began with a deep column of water out of which the layers were deposited according to density of suspended material.
I thought one of the points about flocculated clumps was that they definitely don't obey Stokes law. I seem to recall a reference that made this very clear. The density of a flocculated particle could be more or less than the particles from which it forms, and the rate at which it falls out of suspension is correspondingly variable, in other words, difficult to predict. The point that being made seemed to be that one definitely shouldn't assume that flocculated particles fall out of suspension faster. Do I have this right?
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 97 by Randy, posted 05-16-2005 10:53 AM Randy has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 100 by peaceharris, posted 05-16-2005 12:59 PM Percy has replied

  
peaceharris
Member (Idle past 5596 days)
Posts: 128
Joined: 03-28-2005


Message 100 of 215 (208657)
05-16-2005 12:59 PM
Reply to: Message 99 by Percy
05-16-2005 11:43 AM


Fossil tracks
Observations
1) "Out of the hundreds of trackways that have been observed, almost all of them are going up the slopes of the crossbedded layers (Gilmore 1927)" - quote from Footprints in the Grand Canyon
2) Some dinosaur tracks at Flitner Ranch Dinosaur Tracksite have very clear toe prints without heel impressions. "Interestingly, these animals seem to have walked on their toes as heel impressions are lacking." - quote from FRDT
Interpretation
The animals were walking uphill because the water level was rising. This is the natural thing to do to save your life. As the footprints were being made, particles from the water were being sedimented.
In the rare cases where only toe impressions are seen, the water level had already reached their neck. It was natural to stand on their toes for their last breath of air.
Why didn't the footprints get washed away? We know footprints made at the beach last only until the next wave. Footprints made in the desert last only until the next wind.
Eventhough waves would have existed, the water velocity at the feet of these animals were small.
When a fluid flows over a stationary surface, e.g. the bed of a river, or the wall of a pipe, the fluid touching the surface is brought to rest by the shear stress at the wall. The velocity increases from the wall to a maximum in the main stream of the flow.
- quote from Boundary Layers
Due to the velocity being zero at their feet, there was nothing to wash away their impressions. New particles were deposited on top of these footprints. After the flood, the layers were cemented.
4500 years later, erosion of these layers have enabled us to witness their tracks.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 99 by Percy, posted 05-16-2005 11:43 AM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 101 by Randy, posted 05-16-2005 1:19 PM peaceharris has not replied
 Message 102 by Percy, posted 05-16-2005 1:58 PM peaceharris has replied
 Message 103 by roxrkool, posted 05-16-2005 2:34 PM peaceharris has not replied
 Message 109 by JonF, posted 05-16-2005 8:10 PM peaceharris has not replied

  
Randy
Member (Idle past 6247 days)
Posts: 420
From: Cincinnati OH USA
Joined: 07-19-2002


Message 101 of 215 (208665)
05-16-2005 1:19 PM
Reply to: Message 100 by peaceharris
05-16-2005 12:59 PM


Re: Fossil tracks
How were they walking at all in water deep enough to have deposited these sediments and how were there any animals alive to make tracks after the
Tapeats Sandstone,
Bright Angel Shale,
Muav Limestone,
Grand Wash Dolomites,
Temple Butte Limestone,
Redwall Limestone,
Surprise Canyon Formation,
Supai Group (Esplanade, Wescogame, Manakacha, and Watahomigie)
Were deposited below them. Your not so humble opinion that they were deposited after the Hermit and Coconino formations has been thoroughly demolished.
quote:
Eventhough waves would have existed, the water velocity at the feet of these animals were small.
Waves would have existed alright. What sort of waves do you think would have been required to spread 10,000 cubic miles of sand over thousand of square mile and form it into steep cross-bedded dunes 30 feet high? How would animals large or small have been walking around in those waves? How would they have climbed the sand dunes that were being deposited by those waves? Why didn't they get buried by all this sand to leave body fossils as well as or more likely instead of tracks? How were insect tracks and raindrop impression left by these waves? Have you ever sat down and thought about how little sense this interpretation makes?
Are you now abandoning your idea that the Hermit Shales flocculated and thus deposited faster than the Coconinos? I don't think the Hermit Shales show any indication of being deposited by massive waves. How did animals make tracks in the Hermit formation as the Coconinos were forming?
I think I already explained how tracks could form in aeolian dunes. The Navajo sandstones contain abundant dinosaur tracks and AFAIK even YECs admit that they are aeolian and thus attribute them to post flood deposits.
Randy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 100 by peaceharris, posted 05-16-2005 12:59 PM peaceharris has not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22391
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 102 of 215 (208677)
05-16-2005 1:58 PM
Reply to: Message 100 by peaceharris
05-16-2005 12:59 PM


Re: Fossil tracks
peaceharris writes:
The animals were walking uphill because the water level was rising. This is the natural thing to do to save your life. As the footprints were being made, particles from the water were being sedimented.
You're talking about the Coconino, the third layer from the top of the Grand Canyon. In other words, it's more recent than all the layers beneath it. You're still ignoring all the evidence that this layer was deposited by eolian processes, but let's examine your proposed scenario. You're claiming that all the layers of the Grand Canyon were deposited by the same flood. So before the flood could deposit the layers of the Coconino, it first had to deposit all these layers first:
  • Hermit shale
  • Supai group
  • Redwall limestone
  • Temple Butte formation
  • Mauve limestone
  • Bright Angel shale
  • Tapeats sandstone
So this flood had already been around for quite some time depositing all these layers before it could deposit the Coconino. And the waters would have been deep and turbulent in order to transport all the sedimentary material and deposit it more than a half mile deep. You're asking people to believe that in the midst of this huge flood land animals were still traipsing around getting caught by the flood waters on layers that were still being deposited beneath the water?
The Coconino is not a thin layer. In some places it is 600 feet thick. Let's consider the case of some Coconino footprints found near the top of the layer. Sticking with your proposed scenario, if this layer was flood deposited, then after depositing 590 feet of sand, where are land animals going to come from? Think about this. The water is deep and turbulent enough to have already deposited 590 feet of sand. Where are the land animals going to come from?
In the rare cases where only toe impressions are seen, the water level had already reached their neck. It was natural to stand on their toes for their last breath of air.
Buoyancy would have caused the footprints to become more and more shallow as the water became deeper and deeper, since less and less of the creatures weight would have been borne by the sand. There's no indication of this.
Footprints made in the desert last only until the next wind.
Almost all footprints everywhere disappear, but some become fossilized. It takes special circumstances. But footprints in the desert are not as ephemeral as you seem to believe. Desert tracking is done by hunters all the time.
After a rainstorm creatures leave very clear footprints. Once covered over by drifting sand they would be preserved unless reexposed. I imagine there are other scenarios.
Eventhough waves would have existed, the water velocity at the feet of these animals were small.
Next time you're at the beach, at low tide go out into shallow still water and try leaving a clear footprint in the sand. Even an unclear one. It can't be done. The best you can do is a shallow undifferentiated depression.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 100 by peaceharris, posted 05-16-2005 12:59 PM peaceharris has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 110 by peaceharris, posted 05-16-2005 10:19 PM Percy has replied
 Message 141 by peaceharris, posted 05-20-2005 1:20 AM Percy has replied

  
roxrkool
Member (Idle past 988 days)
Posts: 1497
From: Nevada
Joined: 03-23-2003


Message 103 of 215 (208690)
05-16-2005 2:34 PM
Reply to: Message 100 by peaceharris
05-16-2005 12:59 PM


Re: Fossil tracks
peace writes:
Origins writes:
1) "Out of the hundreds of trackways that have been observed, almost all of them are going up the slopes of the crossbedded layers (Gilmore 1927)" - quote from Footprints in the Grand Canyon
The animals were walking uphill because the water level was rising. This is the natural thing to do to save your life. As the footprints were being made, particles from the water were being sedimented.
So what? Did the organisms then start swimming for their lives once they reached the top of the huge, oscillating, wrongly oriented ripples (ripple/dune orientation and morphology indicates transport from the north, NOT the west, which would be consistent with ALL the other water-lain formations in the Grand Canyon) that are found complete with spherical frosted quartz grains and sharp crests/steep lee slopes that are not found in water-formed ripples?
peace writes:
FRDT site writes:
2) Some dinosaur tracks at Flitner Ranch Dinosaur Tracksite have very clear toe prints without heel impressions. "Interestingly, these animals seem to have walked on their toes as heel impressions are lacking." - quote from FRDT
In the rare cases where only toe impressions are seen, the water level had already reached their neck. It was natural to stand on their toes for their last breath of air.
Okay, dinos are all walking up the dune/ripple face on their toes to keep their heads above water and then apparently start swimming at that point.
Apart from what else has been mentioned above, that still does not explain:
1. complete lack of marine fossils
2. impressions of rain drops
3. walking, running, and resting insect, reptile, and small mammal(?) tracks (see No webpage found at provided URL: http://hoopermuseum.earthsci.carleton.ca/canyon/wanda17.htm
This message has been edited by roxrkool, 05-16-2005 02:56 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 100 by peaceharris, posted 05-16-2005 12:59 PM peaceharris has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 104 by jar, posted 05-16-2005 3:25 PM roxrkool has replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 104 of 215 (208709)
05-16-2005 3:25 PM
Reply to: Message 103 by roxrkool
05-16-2005 2:34 PM


Re: Fossil tracks
I'm sorry but this is rapidly approaching the birds perching on dinosaur heads to avoid the flood waters level of ridiculousness.

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 103 by roxrkool, posted 05-16-2005 2:34 PM roxrkool has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 105 by roxrkool, posted 05-16-2005 3:53 PM jar has not replied

  
roxrkool
Member (Idle past 988 days)
Posts: 1497
From: Nevada
Joined: 03-23-2003


Message 105 of 215 (208719)
05-16-2005 3:53 PM
Reply to: Message 104 by jar
05-16-2005 3:25 PM


Re: Fossil tracks
ditto!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 104 by jar, posted 05-16-2005 3:25 PM jar has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 106 by Percy, posted 05-16-2005 4:46 PM roxrkool has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024