Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 13/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Coastal dominance & catastrophic geology
Tranquility Base
Inactive Member


Message 1 of 2 (362568)
11-08-2006 6:10 AM


In a related 2005 thread:
http://EvC Forum: Recolonization Flood/Post-Flood model -->EvC Forum: Recolonization Flood/Post-Flood model
we attempted to discuss a post-Flood Mesozoic model I raised but ended up getting caught up on whether the sedimentary geological column was generated primarily at the coasts or not. Here, I'd like to re-visit that issue & also see what it could mean for catastrophic geology if that is indeed true.
Firstly why is this interesting? Simply, if the (sedimentary) geological column was primarily generated at the coasts then it raises fascinating questions within both mainstream and catastrophic geology. Like: if the deposition really occurred primarily at the coasts then could that mean that so-called non-marine beds might not be in fact marine catastrophes (e.g. mega-tsunami) that just happen to bury non-marine habitats? It doesn't (otherwise) make sense to find all of these non-marine 'environments' but only near the coast! From a creationist point of view that is interesting because it could lead to a post-Flood understanding of generation of the post-Permian or more of the geological column as well as a post-Flood understanding of fossil successions including recolonization, refuge and in-kind evolutionary snapshot mechanisms of stratigraphic segregation.
Secondly, what material do I have to demonstrate that the sedimentary geological record was generated primarily at the coasts? (1) In the previous thread I used 'sequence stratigraphy', and it's observation of continental-level unconformities to indicate that ”when the seas retreat’ there is ”little or no deposition’. I'll briefly summarize those findings/quotes. (2) But here's a quote from the famed paleontologist ”Jack’ Horner that really makes it quite clear:
quote:
“The duckbills [dinosaurs] appeared in the late Cretaceous.... In whatever part of the globe they were, they lived on the coastal plains of one sea or another. (As did all the dinosaurs.) We don’t know whether they, or any other dinosaurs, also lived in inland areas, because there are no geological formations that preserve inland habitats from the dinosaurs’ time.” Horner, John R. and James Gorman. (1990) Digging dinosaurs. Harper and Row, New York., p72,196
The ”dinosaurs time’, the Mesozoic, represents the part of the geological column I am most interested in and (mainstream) went on for 180 million of the 550 million year Phanerozoic record.
Hopefully, we can accept that most of the sedimentary geological column really was generated at ancient (shifting) coasts and then discuss the consequences this has for catastrophic geology and geology in general for that matter.
Edited by Tranquility Base, : Added 'otherwise' to clarify.

AdminJar
Inactive Member


Message 2 of 2 (362829)
11-09-2006 9:26 AM


Thread copied to the Coastal dominance & catastrophic geology thread in the Geology and the Great Flood forum, this copy of the thread has been closed.

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024