|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Formations really do match detailed lab expts of sorting under rapid currents | |||||||||||||||||||||||
Tranquility Base Inactive Member |
Why not post an excerpt from your 30 yo book?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
edge Member (Idle past 1736 days) Posts: 4696 From: Colorado, USA Joined: |
quote: Actually, I think I have. But I will try to find it again soon. It is on the same pages as one of TC's quotes from Blatt and others. For some reason, TC didn't seem to read this part or paid it little heed because he found something to support his just-so story and dropped everything. It states something to the effect that we know sands can be deposited more rapidly than silts and muds. This has been known for a long time as I have seen pictures of trenches in sand deposited by storm surges.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
TrueCreation Inactive Member |
"Actually, I think I have. But I will try to find it again soon. It is on the same pages as one of TC's quotes from Blatt and others. For some reason, TC didn't seem to read this part or paid it little heed because he found something to support his just-so story and dropped everything. It states something to the effect that we know sands can be deposited more rapidly than silts and muds. This has been known for a long time as I have seen pictures of trenches in sand deposited by storm surges."
--Oh really? Please cite this reference and the post where I made the quote or even a quote like it, I have no text authored by a 'Blatt'. Until then this is completely false. ------------------ [This message has been edited by TrueCreation, 12-17-2002]
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Tranquility Base Inactive Member |
Edge
I am the one who has read Blatt et al. I am still intereseted in the quote if you can find it but yor summary of it does in no way detract from the novelty of Bertahult and Julien's work! You are incredibly biased Edge. Their work shows step by step the mechanisms of sorting by which layers of differnet compositons can be simultaneously and rapidly laid down under varied regimes of particle size and currents. You are like the party poopers at the departmental coffee table where you tell them about a new paper and they say 'Oh but that's been known for years'. And then I say: 'Funny how it got into PNAS this week then isn't it?' They say 'Oh?'. And I say, 'Maybe their work significantly added to the field'? Then they don't say anything. It's nothing short of jealosy. [This message has been edited by Tranquility Base, 12-17-2002]
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
edge Member (Idle past 1736 days) Posts: 4696 From: Colorado, USA Joined: |
quote: Sheesh! A little bit of a chip on the shoulder here? I was pretty sure it was you, but I guess it was TB. After all, you both have the same stubborn streak with a liberal delusion of grandeur.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
edge Member (Idle past 1736 days) Posts: 4696 From: Colorado, USA Joined: |
quote: Well it isn't going to say that exactly. It just points out that some deposits occur rapidly. Since it doesn't say exactly what you need to hear, I will not post it. I should know better than to deal with absolutists on things like this. It starts out saying, "Some strata must have been deposited very rapidly..."
quote: There is nothing really new here. If it was so ground breaking, Berthault would be cited in every publication and textbook about sedimentation. Nothing biased about it. Just a fact.
quote: Or amusement. Actually, there are a lot of publications that don't really break ground. They simply rehash old experiments or data. In fact, have one like that... old stuff, but it got some press. [This message has been edited by edge, 12-17-2002]
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Tranquility Base Inactive Member |
^ I'm sorry I'm not as cynical about mainstream publication as you. There are too many papers and journals but PNAS is not one I would be removing.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
TrueCreation Inactive Member |
"Sheesh! A little bit of a chip on the shoulder here? I was pretty sure it was you, but I guess it was TB. After all, you both have the same stubborn streak with a liberal delusion of grandeur.
" --Well you have made this exact mistake quite a few times now edge. I wasn't actually very vitriolic in my response, just stated that it was false. Also, it isn't very sufficient to display your thoughts [pertaining to the 'you both have the same stubborn streak with a liberal delusion of grandeur'] when it is only supported by what is (unbeknownst to the world) in your mind. --Don't you think scientists get upset when their work is misquoted? -------------------
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
TrueCreation Inactive Member |
"There is nothing really new here. If it was so ground breaking, Berthault would be cited in every publication and textbook about sedimentation. Nothing biased about it. Just a fact."
--I would expect there is isotopic analysis of the formation and its inclusions. I don't think that even if Berthault is right on the ability to rapidly deposit such strata that it would be excepted by the mainstream. -------------------
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
edge Member (Idle past 1736 days) Posts: 4696 From: Colorado, USA Joined: |
quote: What? What formation? Why would there be an isotopic analysis of it? Actually, we do except Berthault's experiment. It works for some sandstone, except it is not universally applicable. And no, we categorically do accept rapid sedimentation. Just not in EVERY case. You have been told this repeatedly by several of us. I think you are well into the 'willful ignorance' category at this point.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
TrueCreation Inactive Member |
"What? What formation? Why would there be an isotopic analysis of it?"
--The Tonto group. I have no specific reason, though it is a very large slab of the geologic column and I simply stated that it is likely that it has been subject to some dating work. "Actually, we do except Berthault's experiment. It works for some sandstone, except it is not universally applicable. And no, we categorically do accept rapid sedimentation. Just not in EVERY case. You have been told this repeatedly by several of us. I think you are well into the 'willful ignorance' category at this point."--Your still confusing me and TB(or at least your thoughts on TB).. I never argued against anything. I understand that Berthault's experiments are accepted on small isolated scales. That it wouldn't be 'universally applicable' is exactly what I was getting at. We disagree on nothing here and you've accused me of willful ignorance? -------------------
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
edge Member (Idle past 1736 days) Posts: 4696 From: Colorado, USA Joined: |
quote: Maybe your statement,
quote: wasn't very clear. Perhaps if you didn't abuse the word 'accepted', it might help.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
TrueCreation Inactive Member |
"wasn't very clear. Perhaps if you didn't abuse the word 'accepted', it might help."
--Not really, I think it was that 'such strata' segment which would need the clarification if anything because I made my statement in reference to the Tonto group. ------------------
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Tranquility Base Inactive Member |
Hey, TC, do you realize that you use 'excepted' when you mean 'accepted'? That's what Edge is talking about and I have to agree that you seem to be competing with Brad in lack of clarity on occasions.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
derwood Member (Idle past 1906 days) Posts: 1457 Joined: |
I'm a little late in the discussion here, but just a quick question - did Berthault's (sp?) demonstrate that this layering can produce cyclical laminae?
Here is what I mean.Each number represents a type of material. Were the sediments like this: 12 3 4 or like this: 12 1 2 1 2 ? just curious.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024