|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,908 Year: 4,165/9,624 Month: 1,036/974 Week: 363/286 Day: 6/13 Hour: 1/2 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Exploring the Grand Canyon, from the bottom up. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 424 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined:
|
I don't want to get too far ahead of where we are now, but this site may help. Please don't use the site to jump beyond the two layers and four events we are dealing with so far.
I really want this thread to move slowly through the layers. Aslan is not a Tame Lion
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 424 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
the Vishnu Schist and Zoroaster Granite.
Aslan is not a Tame Lion |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 424 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
Please folk.
I would like to take this one very slow, layer by layer. Can we hold off ALL discussion of what happened to the Grand Canyon Supergroup until we get it laid out like a layer cake. I have heard that the lowest layer of the Grand Canyon Supergroup is the Bass Limestone layer. Limestone is yet another rock that hasn't been mentioned so far. Sticking to the Bass Limestone layer (leave out the white cliffs of dover) what can you good folk tell me about this layer? Aslan is not a Tame Lion |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 424 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
I don't think the time really matters much right now. Let's just go nice and slowly and stick to things we can definitely point to.
This message has been edited by jar, 03-15-2006 04:07 PM Aslan is not a Tame Lion
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 424 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
Thanks. I think if we work through this like those who first explored the geology that time will become a conclusion instead of an assumption.
Aslan is not a Tame Lion
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 424 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
Ratel has a question in Message 59
This message has been edited by jar, 03-15-2006 10:06 PM Aslan is not a Tame Lion
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 424 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
and see if that answers Ratels, questions.
I'd rather get all the questions answered. Aslan is not a Tame Lion
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 424 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
From all I can gather it was still sandstone, not wet at all, but not yet transformed to schist.
Aslan is not a Tame Lion
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 424 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
This relates to event timing.
Please correct this if there is a mistake, but I'm trying to outline this part for us laymen. If I can describe it in a way I can understand, then maybe other non-geologists like me will understand as well. The Vishnu Schist consists of transformed sandstone. To get sandstone you first need an earlier source of rock that was eroded down into small particles of sand. So we have three events so far, creating some kind of mountain or large rock source, long weathering and erosion to make sand, then the sand is transported to some basin where it is compacted into sandstone. Now Question 1. Does the accumulated sand need to be under pressure of an overlying layer to change from sand to sandstone, or is it simply that the lowest layers of sand are compressed by the weight of overlying sand? Would it simply be a layer that is sand at the top gradually turning to sandstone as the weight and pressure increase with depth. Question 2. Is it likely that the magma intrusion extended through the layer of sand--->sandstone and that what happened is the the softer protosandstone layers that also contained magma were what was eroded away before the Bass Limestone and other layers were laid down? Question 3. When did the sandstone become schist and the magma become granite? Wouldn't both have to be buried under lots of material to create the temperatures and pressures need for sandstone ---> schist and magma ---> granite? Aslan is not a Tame Lion
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 424 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
No problem. That'spretty close to what I thought. We'll need to get Roxrkool or one of the other geolgists to help firm things up.
But I would like to get this cleared up before we move on. see Message 75 Aslan is not a Tame Lion
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 424 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
The next layer to discuss is the Bass Limestone layer of the Grand Canyon Supergroup.
Please. When talking about the Grand Canyon Supergroup I don't want to get into anything that happened to it yet. I just want to try to stick to a layer by layer exploration of what it is composed of and what that tells us. So... Limestone is something we haven't mentioned yet. Question 1What is Limestone? Question 2What does the change from sandstone to limestone tell us? Aslan is not a Tame Lion
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 424 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
I personally find it easier to understand the big picture first before diving into the details, but that may not work best for non-geos. Let me know what you think. I'd like to hold off and move layer by layer. Here is the reasoning. I too find that the big picture is more than enough to be convincing, BUT... there are folk like Steve Austin and the others at ICR and AIG and the like that use the big picture to hoodwink and con the gullible into believing that the Grand Canyon could be the result of THE Flood. These folk claim to be scientists and as such should know better, yet they persist in trying their slight of hand to sell their books and videos. They are very good at it too; here is an example of the type of claim that Conmen such as Steve Austin use:
'The crystalline-basement rocks exposed deep within the Canyon (schist, granite, and gneiss) represent some of earth's oldest rocks, probably from early in Creation Week. Tilted, deeply buried strata (the "Grand Canyon Supergroup") show evidence of catastrophic-marine sedimentation and tectonics associated with the formation of an ocean basin midway through Creation Week, and may include ocean deposits from the post-Creation, but pre-Flood world. from Answers in Genesis which is one of the most active Creationist sites. Well, we have not yet even gotten beyond the very beginnings of the bottom layers of the Grand Canyon. We still have literally miles of rock layers to discuss, and we already have a scenario that simply can't be explained by the simplistic mutterings of the folk at AIG or ICR. What I hope to do here is to build a step by step history of what can be known about the Grand Canyon. Then anyone who thinks they can explain what is seen can step up to the plate and try to come up with their best argument. I would like to discuss though the Houta Conglomerate because it is essential for disproving the other major tool that folk like Walt Brown and Steve Austen drag out, hydrolic sorting. Can you speak a little bit about both the layer, and what a comnglomerate is as opposed to another rock formation we will likely come across, a breccia. Aslan is not a Tame Lion
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 424 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
Moose, I want to hold off on assigning dates to anything yet. I hope that the creationists can see this like those who first that we must abandon the idea of a Young Earth if we want to maintain and honesty. Let's not worry yet about how old something is and just stick to the things we can establish, like location, composition and ordering.
Aslan is not a Tame Lion
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 424 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
jar asked:
quote: to which Roxrkool replied
First, what sandstone are you referring to, jar? Remember, at this moment what is today the Vishnu Schist was still but sand and sandstone and the intrusions were still just magma. Please correct me if I'm wrong but I understood that there were several things needed to change rocks. To change sandstone into schist I understood that it took time, higher temperatures and pressure. To change the magma into granite I understood that it took time, long slow cooling and pressure. Since we are still at that point in time were the Vishnu layer has been laid down and the magma intruding into it, there has not been any time for the transformation. In addition, so far there are no layers on top of the Vishnu layer so no pressure to cause the metamorphose. Is that correct? Aslan is not a Tame Lion
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 424 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
Okay.
Then more questions from the laity.
Actually, the way a geologist would read the section would be that the sandstone was already a schist before the limetone was deposited. So, how do we turn sandstone into schist?
This is heralded by the presence of a major disconformity. Look at the section closely. So a couple questions. First, what is a disconformity?
And, no, I would say that the magma has long cooled before Bass time. Cooled enough to have become granite? Can you help explain to someone as slow as I am what needs to happen to change the sandstone to schist and the magma to granite? Aslan is not a Tame Lion
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024