Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


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


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Depositional Models of Sea Transgressions/Regressions - Walther's Law
herebedragons
Member (Idle past 858 days)
Posts: 1517
From: Michigan
Joined: 11-22-2009


Message 431 of 533 (727980)
05-22-2014 10:10 AM
Reply to: Message 429 by Admin
05-22-2014 9:17 AM


Re: Summation Time?
I don't know Percy, when I get involved in threads like this I always hope to find out more about what DID happen, but end up getting sucked into discussing fantasies about what COULD NOT have happened. I may have missed it, but I would have liked to see how the Transgressions/Regressions model actually fits into what we see in the GC.
So I guess if anyone else would like to discuss the topic and ignore the B.S., then I wouldn't mind continuing this thread. Otherwise, shut it down.
HBD

Whoever calls me ignorant shares my own opinion. Sorrowfully and tacitly I recognize my ignorance, when I consider how much I lack of what my mind in its craving for knowledge is sighing for... I console myself with the consideration that this belongs to our common nature. - Francesco Petrarca
"Nothing is easier than to persuade people who want to be persuaded and already believe." - another Petrarca gem.
Ignorance is a most formidable opponent rivaled only by arrogance; but when the two join forces, one is all but invincible.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 429 by Admin, posted 05-22-2014 9:17 AM Admin has seen this message but not replied

  
herebedragons
Member (Idle past 858 days)
Posts: 1517
From: Michigan
Joined: 11-22-2009


Message 482 of 533 (730504)
06-28-2014 4:31 PM
Reply to: Message 473 by Faith
06-28-2014 12:34 PM


River as it now is couldn't have created the canyon, which I do think is intuitively obvious but that won't do it for you will it.
Do you mean the river as it is NOW, or the river as it was before it was dammed and diverted?
Current average discharge is about 58 m3/sec.
Historic average discharge about 640 m3/sec (about 11 times current rate)
It had a historic peak flow of 2,800 m3/sec during the summer season (about 48 times current average)
Maximum recorded flow was 10,900 m3/sec in 1884 (about 188 times current average flow)
Roughly 90% of the Colorado's discharge comes from snowpack melt, mostly from the Rockies. I seem to remember there was supposed to be a couple ice ages during the time that the GC was being carved, which would have contributed significantly to the Colorado's flow. I don't think it unreasonable to estimate discharge rates to be double average historic flow. That would be a flow rate of 5,600 m3/sec, about 100 times current flow rates.
That would not be the "river as it is now" would it? Could a river 100 times larger than the current Colorado carve the GC in 5 million years?
Source
HBD

Whoever calls me ignorant shares my own opinion. Sorrowfully and tacitly I recognize my ignorance, when I consider how much I lack of what my mind in its craving for knowledge is sighing for... I console myself with the consideration that this belongs to our common nature. - Francesco Petrarca
"Nothing is easier than to persuade people who want to be persuaded and already believe." - another Petrarca gem.
Ignorance is a most formidable opponent rivaled only by arrogance; but when the two join forces, one is all but invincible.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 473 by Faith, posted 06-28-2014 12:34 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 489 by Faith, posted 06-29-2014 10:10 AM herebedragons has replied

  
herebedragons
Member (Idle past 858 days)
Posts: 1517
From: Michigan
Joined: 11-22-2009


Message 484 of 533 (730507)
06-28-2014 4:59 PM
Reply to: Message 473 by Faith
06-28-2014 12:34 PM


Anyway we're getting off the fact that massive erosion occurred after all the strata were in place rather than during their laying down, and that part is demonstrable despite all the weird ways it's getting obfuscated here, and that order of things, again, is evidence that the whole Old Earth scenario is a crock.
So, archaeological evidence suggests that the GC has been inhabited by humans for 4,000 years. Evidence for these civilizations is found in Redwall limestone caves, which is quite far down in the canyon.
Ancestral Pueblos moved into the area about 500BCE (about 2,500 years ago) and had established stable settlements by 500CE. The most accessible of these was built about 1185.
The first Europeans reached the GC in 1540, only 3,800 years after the flood.
Source
SO... how long DID it take the flood waters to carve the GC? 300 years? 1,800 years? As much as 3,800 years?
And a followup question ... where is all that sediment now?
HBD
Edited by herebedragons, : typo

Whoever calls me ignorant shares my own opinion. Sorrowfully and tacitly I recognize my ignorance, when I consider how much I lack of what my mind in its craving for knowledge is sighing for... I console myself with the consideration that this belongs to our common nature. - Francesco Petrarca
"Nothing is easier than to persuade people who want to be persuaded and already believe." - another Petrarca gem.
Ignorance is a most formidable opponent rivaled only by arrogance; but when the two join forces, one is all but invincible.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 473 by Faith, posted 06-28-2014 12:34 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 492 by Faith, posted 06-29-2014 10:24 AM herebedragons has replied

  
herebedragons
Member (Idle past 858 days)
Posts: 1517
From: Michigan
Joined: 11-22-2009


Message 486 of 533 (730516)
06-28-2014 6:03 PM
Reply to: Message 483 by Dr Adequate
06-28-2014 4:50 PM


The way I figure it, the hoodoos of Monument Valley must have been carved by runoff as the flood waters receded. Since the waters began receding on day 150 and the land was completely dry by day 371, this sets the upper limit of the amount of time it took to carve the area. So, the area was carved in less than 221 days.
Monument Valley is about 28.73 square miles and some hoodoos stand 1000 feet above the canyon floor. This amounts to 5.44 cubic miles of material that needs to be removed.
So we have 5.44 cubic miles of material to remove in 221 days. This converts to an erosive rate of 3.62x109 ft3 /day.
The hoodoos of Monument Valley must have been carved from Sept, 2348 BCE until March, 2347 BCE at the rate of 3.62x109 ft3 /day.
quote me someone who sets an age on an individual hoodoo
** Faith can quote me as a source for the age of the hoodoos and the rate of erosion required to produce them.
But if this person exists only in your head
I'm real, I assure you.
HBD
ABE: I mistakenly attributed hoodoos to Monument Valley.
Edited by herebedragons, : No reason given.

Whoever calls me ignorant shares my own opinion. Sorrowfully and tacitly I recognize my ignorance, when I consider how much I lack of what my mind in its craving for knowledge is sighing for... I console myself with the consideration that this belongs to our common nature. - Francesco Petrarca
"Nothing is easier than to persuade people who want to be persuaded and already believe." - another Petrarca gem.
Ignorance is a most formidable opponent rivaled only by arrogance; but when the two join forces, one is all but invincible.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 483 by Dr Adequate, posted 06-28-2014 4:50 PM Dr Adequate has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 495 by Faith, posted 06-29-2014 10:54 AM herebedragons has replied

  
herebedragons
Member (Idle past 858 days)
Posts: 1517
From: Michigan
Joined: 11-22-2009


Message 493 of 533 (730581)
06-29-2014 10:40 AM
Reply to: Message 489 by Faith
06-29-2014 10:10 AM


Not the breadth of the canyon, no, the depth probably.
So, if the Colorado carved the canyon, it should be 1 mile deep and only 2 miles wide?
But cutting the canyon was not the original reference for the Colorado River. We're talking about the water I think would have scoured the plain around the monuments in Monument Valley and I don't know how we got off onto the Grand Canyon.
Sorry, my bad. It may have been this comment that confused me ...
Faith writes:
River as it now is couldn't have created the canyon, which I do think is intuitively obvious but that won't do it for you will it.
I don't think anyone supposes the Colorado river carved the plains of Bryce Canyon or Monument valley. I could be wrong, but as far as I know, the Colorado is supposed to have carved the GC, not the surrounding features.
HBD

Whoever calls me ignorant shares my own opinion. Sorrowfully and tacitly I recognize my ignorance, when I consider how much I lack of what my mind in its craving for knowledge is sighing for... I console myself with the consideration that this belongs to our common nature. - Francesco Petrarca
"Nothing is easier than to persuade people who want to be persuaded and already believe." - another Petrarca gem.
Ignorance is a most formidable opponent rivaled only by arrogance; but when the two join forces, one is all but invincible.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 489 by Faith, posted 06-29-2014 10:10 AM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 496 by Faith, posted 06-29-2014 10:56 AM herebedragons has replied

  
herebedragons
Member (Idle past 858 days)
Posts: 1517
From: Michigan
Joined: 11-22-2009


Message 494 of 533 (730582)
06-29-2014 10:51 AM
Reply to: Message 492 by Faith
06-29-2014 10:24 AM


To carve the canyon? Oh not long at all, maybe a hundred years max but really probably much less.
Have you really thought about that??? 5.45 trillion cubic yards removed in 100 years???? That is 150 million cubic yards per day!!!
Park Statistics
I don't know ... is that really within the realm of reason???
I haven't been able to find much information about the Geology of Southern California. But you're good at finding that sort of stuff.
Yea, I'll try Googling it later.
HBD

Whoever calls me ignorant shares my own opinion. Sorrowfully and tacitly I recognize my ignorance, when I consider how much I lack of what my mind in its craving for knowledge is sighing for... I console myself with the consideration that this belongs to our common nature. - Francesco Petrarca
"Nothing is easier than to persuade people who want to be persuaded and already believe." - another Petrarca gem.
Ignorance is a most formidable opponent rivaled only by arrogance; but when the two join forces, one is all but invincible.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 492 by Faith, posted 06-29-2014 10:24 AM Faith has not replied

  
herebedragons
Member (Idle past 858 days)
Posts: 1517
From: Michigan
Joined: 11-22-2009


Message 498 of 533 (730612)
06-29-2014 12:32 PM
Reply to: Message 495 by Faith
06-29-2014 10:54 AM


And by the way, the monuments in Monument Valley are not "hoodoos" -- those are at the top of the Grand Staircase in the Claron Formation which is quite a bit higher than Monument Valley.
Ooops, that's right. Bryce Canyon is more appropriate to hoodoo formations. Bryce Canyon has a larger area (56 square miles), but I am not clear on what the volume of material that needed to be removed was. Just change reference to hoodoos to buttes.
OK, and in the Grand Canyon-Grand Staircase area also, a huge amount of material from above the Kaibab for thousands of square miles.
Monument Valley only covers .02% of the Colorado Plateau, which all needs to be eroded at generally the same kind of rates.
What? The hoodoos were not CARVED by the Flood, they weren't carved until after the Flood abated and then slowly by erosion.
After the flood waters abated, you would have erosion of the type that we can identify with and can understand based on other known flood sources such as the Channeled Scablands being scoured by Lake Missoula floods. Erosion would have quickly settled into the kinds of processes we can relate to.
quote:
And it came to pass in the six hundred and first year, in the first month, the first day of the month, that the waters were dried up from the earth; and Noah removed the covering of the ark and looked, and indeed the surface of the ground was dry. And in the second month, on the twenty-seventh day of the month, the earth was dried.
Gen 8:13 - 14
The ground was dried. The flood was over. If there were standing bodies of water left over from the flood, they would now operate in ways we can relate to today. The vast majority of the erosional work needs to be done as the flood waters drained.
Or was this only a local drying? Or maybe a metaphor?
that doesn't mean there weren't parts of the world where the water was still standing in basins, or still running in very large or broad rivers and that sort of thing before settling down to today's levels.
Sure, there definitely would be. And then erosion would begin to operate in ways that we relate to. These extreme rates of erosion that can carve features so rapidly could not have formed by these processes, they need to be done by the actual flood waters running off.
But you have it all wrong about the hoodoos. Please see Percy's estimates and my responses and let's try to get this all coordinated.
Because I am trying to imagine it from a "flood geology" perspective. I am not sure there is any way to "get all this coordinated."
HBD

Whoever calls me ignorant shares my own opinion. Sorrowfully and tacitly I recognize my ignorance, when I consider how much I lack of what my mind in its craving for knowledge is sighing for... I console myself with the consideration that this belongs to our common nature. - Francesco Petrarca
"Nothing is easier than to persuade people who want to be persuaded and already believe." - another Petrarca gem.
Ignorance is a most formidable opponent rivaled only by arrogance; but when the two join forces, one is all but invincible.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 495 by Faith, posted 06-29-2014 10:54 AM Faith has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 501 by Tanypteryx, posted 06-29-2014 1:14 PM herebedragons has not replied

  
herebedragons
Member (Idle past 858 days)
Posts: 1517
From: Michigan
Joined: 11-22-2009


Message 499 of 533 (730614)
06-29-2014 12:36 PM
Reply to: Message 496 by Faith
06-29-2014 10:56 AM


I have in mind one humongous Flood you know, so whatever cubic feet or miles of stuff that was removed I'd just assume a sufficient volume of water to remove it. If the Flood laid it down, the receding Flood could remove it.
A lot of assumptions that have no basis in naturalistic explanations.
HBD

Whoever calls me ignorant shares my own opinion. Sorrowfully and tacitly I recognize my ignorance, when I consider how much I lack of what my mind in its craving for knowledge is sighing for... I console myself with the consideration that this belongs to our common nature. - Francesco Petrarca
"Nothing is easier than to persuade people who want to be persuaded and already believe." - another Petrarca gem.
Ignorance is a most formidable opponent rivaled only by arrogance; but when the two join forces, one is all but invincible.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 496 by Faith, posted 06-29-2014 10:56 AM Faith has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024