Lake Varve Sediments and the Great Flood

But it is consistent with it. However, you are the one with the problem, since you can't show any observations over millions of years that they were layed down annually. Nothing that is, but your imagination.You also can't account for the smoothness of the varves. Not consistent with errosion, or other disturbances, that surely would have happened if they were layed down over millions of years.And, of course, you still have the problem of the fossils, which experiments have shown will decay or break down even if protected from oxygen or scavengers. I've already shown you experiments that prove this can be done quickly, but you either didn't understand the evidence or you rejected it out of hand. Very scientific of you. But here is another attempt: Experiments on Lamination of Sediments | Answers in Genesis http://geology.ref.ac/berthault/Donate | The Institute for Creation Research Really? A couple of well know geologists disagree with you, since they found it rather inconsistent with your theory. Your theory doesn't agree with my theory, so your theory is wrong approach is not very scientific. Again catstrophic events. Turbidity currents, etc. That is not based on science but assumptions. As has been shown, experiments prove otherwise.

Sorry , wrong link. It can be found here:H.P. Buchheim and R. Biaggi,”Laminae counts within a synchronous oil shale unit: a challenge to the “varve” concept’. Geological Society of America Abstracts with Programs 20:A317, 1988Can't link it for obvious reasons.Edited by Creationist, : No reason given.

But the water is still. Also, no one suggests that catastrophic events continue forever. They do stop and when they do, the silt settles.
Experiments on Stratification of Heterogeneous Sand Mixtures | Answers in Genesis Edited by Creationist, : No reason given.

All you've proven is that you can't think outside the uniformitarian box. Nothing you have is any proof of what you believe. You believe it because you think the earth is old. None of the evidence you suggest really says that.

Ok, so you have fine layer, course layer, fine layer, and coarse layer. And you are saying that the only way this could have settled down on the bottom is annually. There is no other way? Experiments have shown (I have linked these) that the same sedimentation layers are layed down quickly. It is based on the size of the grains. Bigger going to the bottom and smaller going to the top. Flood geology explains this perfectly. Strata - CreationWiki, the encyclopedia of creation science [qs]This is not sand but silt and we can deal with how to make silt after someone explains Thread How to make sand., but for now, you need to present the model that explains over 4 million layers of finer silt then coarser silt, lighter silt then darker silt.[qs] I just did. No body said it took 4 million catastrophic events. Again, Mount St. Helens produced 100 of the layers in one day. So it would not take nearly as many as you claim. No, events such as these combined with a world wide flood would be enough to produce most of what we see. Again, no one says that they don’t happen yearly. Just that all that we see did not happen yearly. Once again it can be done by a self sorting mechanism explained here, and in a Nature article. Silt is still made up of small particles and will eventually settle out. Sedimentation Experiments: Nature Finally Catches Up! | Answers in Genesis

Experiments on Stratification of Heterogeneous Sand Mixtures | Answers in Genesis Oh, I think it can be explained.http://www.creationinthecrossfire.org/.../VarvesProblems.htm

Morton has a way of being loose with his facts.http://www.creationinthecrossfire.org/.../VarvesProblems.htm

quote:

---

Inconsistent Varve Counts
Buchheim and Biaggi (1988) measured Green River Formation "varves" between two volcanic tuff beds each two to three centimeters thick. Geologists consider each tuff bed a synchronous layer, i.e., every point on that tuff bed has the same age. The two tuff beds thus represent two different reference times. If the laminations in between these two beds are annual layers, the same number of layers should be present everywhere between the two beds. Buchheim and Biaggi found the number of laminae between the tuff beds ranged from 1160 to 1568. Lambert and Hs (1979) measured "varves" in Lake Walensee, Switzerland and found up to five laminae deposited during one year. From 1811, which was a clear marker point (because a newly built canal discharged into the lake), until 1971, a period of 160 years, they found the number of laminae ranged between 300 and 360 instead of the expected one per year or 160.

---

It is very difficult to determine what is a real varve and what isn’t. It is not exact. From the same source:

quote:

---

In the fall 1994 issue of Science Speaks, Don Stoner (1994) stated that the Green River Formation of Utah, Colorado and Wyoming "contains more than four million annual layers." He then says, "Obviously, this means that the lake existed for millions of years before it disappeared." Our discussion here will address the question of varve chronology or clock and shows that laminar deposits (sediment in thin sheets) do not necessarily indicate seasonal deposits. A true varve consists of a couplet of summer silt and winter clay, a period that is difficult to demonstrate. (Quigley, p. 150) The abstract in Michael Oard's series on varves states:
Varves have been used to set up the first "absolute" chronology, which significantly exceeds the Scriptural time scale from Genesis. Observations of modern glaciers and recent climate simulations show that the ice sheets during the Ice Age melted rapidly, much faster than indicated by varves. A further investigation of varves demonstrates that other mechanisms deposit varve-like couplets in a short time. Therefore, "varves" are not necessarily annual. A method to distinguish between annual depositional sequences and other mechanisms is difficult to apply. (Oard, p. 72)

---

And, of course, Michael Oard is a professional. Not that you could recognize one.

Nothing makes my scenario better. It is another interpretation which you can’t seem to fathom. And as YEC’s keep showing it is not verified again and again. Yelling louder does not make you right. Sure, any time. The Wright brother used real operational science that was proven out by experimentation. You haven’t. I hope so.

Well, it is really quite simple. The two ash layers represent to different episodes in time. Two different eruptions. Now if the layers that are between them had been put down annually, then they ought to be consistent wouldn’t you think? They are not. They range from 1160 to 1568. http://www.creationinthecrossfire.org/.../VarvesProblems.htm Well, that’s the way most geologist see them. Maybe you should take that up with them. No, but the two ash layers, being uniform as they are suggests that it was two different events in time. An ”event horizon’ I believe is the term used. See above. It doesn’t. Not necessarily anyway. What it does show is that these layers couldn’t possible be annual events. Thanks for the definition. I do indeed have a theory since it is testable. Uniformitarians, on the other hand, seem to be lacking. I have indeed heard of this. Yet, can you show an example of where it occurs with fish or birds? Experiments have shown that birds and fish don’t hold up to well.http://www.answersingenesis.org/.../v19/i3/greenriver.asp#f8

quote:

---

Experiments by scientists from the Chicago Natural History Museum have shown that fish carcasses lowered on to the muddy bottom of a marsh decay quite rapidly, even in oxygen-poor conditions. In these experiments, fish were placed in wire cages to protect them from scavengers, yet after only six-and-a-half days all the flesh had decayed and even the bones had become disconnected.8

---

You’re missing the point. Organic things don’t just lay on the ground for thousands of years without either decaying or being eaten by scavengers. Unless they have been buried quickly. Not at all, but Dr. Adequate obviously doesn’t know any creationists. How so? What a way to completely avoid the question.

First of all, that is not an observation of 50000 years, but an inference of that time based on radiocarbon dating. Which itself is based on assumptions. Perhaps you can explain why traces of carbon can be found in diamonds. Because there is no way to test it. Were you around 50000 years ago? Do you know anyone who was? Are there any eyewitnesses? You’re being kind of inconsistent in your uniformitarian views aren’t you? Do you really believe these layers could lay there for thousands of years and to not have been disturbed by either corrosion or, say, a storm? No traces? The fossils themselves are traces. No, the problem is that you have fossils at all. Footprints are not organic. However, footprints are subject to erosion. I haven’t been shown any such thing. Perhaps you could elaborate. Because it is a legitimate experiment that hasn’t been proven wrong. What is there to address? Nature did similar experiments and came up with the same results.http://www.answersingenesis.org/TJ/v11/i2/nature.asp Well, I cannot link the actual document, but here is one you might find interesting.http://www.creationinthecrossfire.org/.../VarvesProblems.htm

quote:

---

Buchheim and Biaggi (1988) measured Green River Formation "varves" between two volcanic tuff beds each two to three centimeters thick. Geologists consider each tuff bed a synchronous layer, i.e., every point on that tuff bed has the same age. The two tuff beds thus represent two different reference times. If the laminations in between these two beds are annual layers, the same number of layers should be present everywhere between the two beds. Buchheim and Biaggi found the number of laminae between the tuff beds ranged from 1160 to 1568. Lambert and Hs (1979) measured "varves" in Lake Walensee, Switzerland and found up to five laminae deposited during one year. From 1811, which was a clear marker point (because a newly built canal discharged into the lake), until 1971, a period of 160 years, they found the number of laminae ranged between 300 and 360 instead of the expected one per year or 160.

---

I doubt if any amount of evidence will convince you. You’re too engrained in your uniformitarian beliefs. Strong faith indeed. No, why would you think so? I don’t think the Bible talks about varves at all. But perhaps you should read it anyway. Because it is an eyewitness account. Written by Someone who claims to have been there. Not sure what that is. Only, when they can’t be proven. It has caused me difficulties in my life. Well, at the moment, I’ll take his over yours. No offense.