Summations Only

You are going to drive me to an early grave. Not that I'd mind, I'm ready to go. but the deeper the rock the drier it will be by compaction, the higher it is in the stack the more wet and malleable. I don't think it would be COMPLETELY dry if under water, however, no matter how much weight was on it.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

I haven't been talking about angular unconformities at any point in this discussion and I didn't know anyone else was either.This thread became one of those familiar EvC nightmares of miscommunication and weird interpretations some time back that I just want out of, period.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

The point I'vfe been making for days now is that erosion occurs to stacks or blocks or units of strata and not between layers; also that deformation occurs to stacks or blocks or units of strata and not between layers. Sometimes I forget to say the whole thing which seems to leave it open for you all to think I'm saying something entirely differen, which is weird and frustrating but not unexpected. If only I was always able to expect it before I post it but unfortunately I tend to assume a continuity that obviously doesn't exist.The point of those photos I posted is to demonstrate that the strata were all in place before the erosion or the deformation occurred. Sometimes as in the Smith diagram the whole range of time periods is present and eroded or deformed as a complete block; but usually it's a partial stack where the rest of it is no longer present and what is present is eroded or deformed as a unit or block by itself. This demonstrates something really very very simple: that the strata are not time periods.ABE (I'm aware that that last sentence is likely to lead to another flurry of weird ideas, but in this case I think I'll just leave it and try to be entertained by the weirdness).Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Oy

Edited by Admin, : Fix the embedding of the YouTube video.

Percy, you'll just say I'm complaining again etc etc etc, but I really can't cope with your voluminous posts which come days after my own and others' on that subject in many cases, after the thread has moved on to other things, and then you really do make some very strange misinterpretations of what I was saying, even keep insisting on them after I've answered them, which makes it all the harder to try to answer you. Here and there you raise some interesting points but I feel like if I answer them I'd be asking for another thankless round of miscommunication and I'm not up to it, Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

I believe I've not said NONE of the contacts, but VERY FEW, VERY VERY VERY FEW, and I believe they can be explained as having occurred after the strata were deposited. As for missing "time," no, missing layers that often occur at a location but didn't in a particular case, yes. Again the point is that deformation or erosion as a unit is just one of the many ways it can be shown that the Time Scale is false, and yes of course it's another way of saying all disturbances occur after all the strata were in place and no you have not proved anything to the contrary, what a silly thought, it's obvious in a million places.Actually the Paleozoic strata deformed as a unit in that they all rise over the uplift. The Supergroup deformed in two blocks of strata. Since I think all these things occurred at the same time in a sense the whole thing deformed as a unit.--->>>>But if you might remember, I also said that angular unconformities are the single exception to this rule of deformation as a unit which would resolve your "contradiction." ."A very big improvement, thank you very much.I hope you enjoyed the Twilight Zone theme, it so fits the circumstances.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Explained it many times. See Message 419 The Grand Canyon itself. Various layered formations. The Monument Valley buttes, the hoodoos, the Grand Staircase etc etc etc.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Yes

No.

​

Oops, depends on what you mean by "unchanging." They are what they are, they don't change. So if that's what you mean the answser is yes they are unchanging. Realized I don't know what you mean by "unchanging." I'm sure they will go on eroding but that's the only change I can think of.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Yes that is my theory/hypothesis of how angular unconformities are formed: that tectonic pressure buckles or tilts a lower section of strata beneath the strata above which remain horizontal, which in the case of the GC remained intact up to the Permian/Kaibab level, while strata above that level broke up and washed away; though in other cases they got broken up at a much lower level, such as at Siccar Point. I think this was a worldwide event, this tectonic pressure and it caused all the angular unconformities everywhere and most of the deformation of strata everywhere and even the major erosion events that left isolated buttes standing. Because it occurred at the same time as the receding of the Flood water. It's a nice theory really. Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

No, I've specifically said that angular unconformities are NOT a block, specifically said that more than once. Angular unconformities are the ONLY exception to the rule I keep talking about, that LLhe strata were laid down before being eroded or deformed as a whole block or unit; said that many times, I guess you missed it. Angular unconformities are an exception. NOT a block/unit. ONLY exception. The splitting of the ocntinents was a worldwide event, that's what I'm talking about. A lot of tectonic bashing and crashing going on. The breaking up must have been fairly jolting, but then there was the subduction on the west side of the Americas that pushed up mountains etc. I happen to think it occurred in conjunction with the beginning of the receding of the Flood, because of the effects like the cutting of the Grand Canyon and Grand Staircase and the other massive erosion events in that area; and the dramatically deformed rocks in other places would be a natural result of such a tectonic bashing.Yes a very nice theory. Puts together a lot of phenomena in one nice neat elegant package. Yes, cute.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Why on earth would I think I'm an expert, I merely know the basics of how meanders form from reading descriptions and watching videos and animations. It's not rocket science. I certainly said nothing about them "popping into existence" for pete's sake. Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

So you've got a mechanism for the rising and falling of the sea floor, and you recognize that "stratigraphic mega sequences" are "global events," and all that is really interestingly suggestive of a worldwide Flood and all there is against it is your assumption of millions of years....

If it's invisible it isn't evidence of erosion.;