DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FUNDAY
HTML https://funday.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Updates
*****************************************************
#Post#: 245--------------------------------------------------
NEW UPDATES
By: Admin Date: March 17, 2019, 8:48 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
KT BOUNDARY
Where is the Flood/post-Flood Boundary? (Mesozoic host sediments
are post-Flood)
HTML https://creation.com/images/pdfs/tj/j10_1/j10_1_101-106.pdf
The fossil record - Becoming more random all the time
HTML https://creation.com/the-fossil-record
The reality of the geologic column is predicated on the belief
that fossils have restricted ranges in rock strata. In
actuality, as more and more fossils are found, the ranges of
fossils keep increasing. I provide a few recent examples of
this, and then show that stratigraphic-range extension is not
the exception but the rule. The constant extension of ranges
simultaneously reduces the credibility of the geologic column
and organic evolution, and makes it easier for the Genesis Flood
to explain an increasingly-random fossil record.
Reliable data disconfirm a late Cenozoic post-Flood boundary
HTML https://creation.com/reliable-data-disconfirm-late-cenozoic-post-flood-boundary
post-Flood boundary lies deeper, likely at or near the K-Pg
boundary
#Post#: 246--------------------------------------------------
Re: UPDATES
By: Admin Date: March 23, 2019, 3:28 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
IMPACTS DURING FLOOD
What do impacts accomplish in the first hour?
HTML https://creation.com/images/pdfs/tj/j27_1/j27_1_90-98.pdf
p.92.
Larger impact craters on Earth, although almost destroyed, might
however have thinned the crust and raised the Moho. The amount
of crustal thinning and the height of the Moho above the average
are the main factors that determine the type and size of the
gravity anomaly. … The final crater shape is usually set within
about 400 to 800 seconds.21
p.93.
Planetary-scale properties can be changed. … Moreover, the
rebound is now thought to overshoot the original ground surface
and reach many kilometres higher (figure 7).26 During the
rebound, the rock acts like a fluid, but it is unknown how this
happens, although there are a number of mechanisms attempting to
explain this phenomenon.30 Based on the standard ratio of impact
depth to diameter, the large and very large impacts on the moon
should have blasted well down into the moon’s mantle. However,
mantle rocks exposed from impacts on the moon’s surface are
extremely rare.31 The conundrum of the missing mantle rocks
implies that the transient crater depth was much shallower than
expected. Basins on Mars between 275 and 1,000 km in diameter
are also shallower with less crustal thinning than expected.32
The puzzle is especially evident in an analysis of possibly the
largest impact basin in the solar system, the South PoleAitken
Basin on the moon. The diameter is 2,500 km, but there are no
mantle rocks. None of the mantle was tapped during such a huge
impact,33 and very little basalt flowed into this crater.
p.94.
_Impacts in water. Impacts in water of course are different from
those that strike land. If the impact is small compared to the
depth of water, there will be little cratering on the bottom.41
For asteroids with diameters about the depth of the water or
greater, the water will have little or no effect on the
cratering process. The rebound of the centre of the crater
immediately after impact would mostly be a pulse of water
shooting high into the air.
_The most significant effect of impacts striking water is that a
fair amount of water will be blasted up into the air42 and large
tsunamis will result. In the excavation of an oceanic crater, a
thin layer of water is ejected from the rim almost straight up,
which soon collapses and plunges onto the water surface (figure
8 ). So impacts cause water to shoot high into the atmosphere at
both the rim and the centre of the impact. Could this be what is
described in the Bible as “on the same day all the fountains of
the great deep burst open” (Genesis 7:11b)? Much water is also
vaporized during transport to the upper atmosphere: “Another
important difference between continental and oceanic impacts is
the vaporization of water expanding as a vapor cloud in the
upper atmosphere. Earth’s climate and atmospheric circulation
may be severely perturbed by the injection of a large amount of
vapor … .”43 The above statement was made assuming one impact.
However, with multiple impacts occurring simultaneously during
the very early Flood, a huge amount of water vapor, and probably
also liquid water, would be injected into the atmosphere and
above.44 The liquid and vapor would be spread all around the
earth by the upper winds and general circulation of the earth,
whatever that was before the Flood, and fall as torrential
worldwide rain early in the Flood. Such a rainfall would tend to
slow up as the number of impacts decreased early in the Flood.
But, it would still take many days before all the water fell out
of the atmosphere by gravity. Such an impact mechanism can
easily explain the 40 days and night[ s] of heavy rain over the
earth.
_Impacts in water cause tsunamis. The size of the tsunami wave
is related to the projectile diameter, but it will be different
than a tsunami resulting from a large earthquake. Tsunamis would
move at hundreds of m/sec away from the impact, and as they move
through deep water they are large swells that may not even be
detected on board a ship. It is only in shallow water that a
tsunami builds up to a giant wave. Impacts cause two groups of
tsunamis: one from the pushing outward of water at the rim and
the other from the collapse of the central uplift, which will
follow the rim wave (figure 8 ). Impact tsunamis decay much
faster than earthquake-induced waves. There are two reasons for
this weaker tsunami for the same amount of energy. First, a
resurge flow returning water back into the crater would diminish
the strength of the tsunami waves and also help fill up the
crater with debris.45 Second, since impact tsunamis are much
larger, the breaking of the wave in shallow water starts on the
edge of the continental shelf and not near the beach.46 Breaking
so far from shore dissipates much of its energy, and the roll up
on land would be much less than expected.
p.95.
nonrandom distribution of large impacts on the moon ... would
suggest that the largest impacts hit the near side before the
moon barely rotated one quarter of its axis. ... the
straightforward interpretation of the observations indicates
that the very large impacts struck the moon quickly before it
could rotate much.48 [One 4th of 29 days = 7+ days.]
p.97.
... if over 36,000 impacts occurred during the oneyear Flood
and mostly at the beginning, the bombardment would be much more
complicated. There would be additional geophysical and
geological effects, such as some areas of Earth becoming
saturated from multiple, simultaneous impacts; interference from
tsunami waves and atmospheric winds from different asteroids;
large areas of the earth losing variable amounts of its crust;
massive volcanism; etc. The concept of so many impacts striking
quickly is a major challenge to understand within a Flood model.
Nevertheless I am compelled to try, and any mistakes I make can
be corrected by other creationists. The idea of more than 36,000
craters greater than 30 km in diameter, all occurring within one
year, is a shocking idea to many creationists. But I believe the
deduction is sound, based on what we observe on other solid
solar system bodies, especially on the moon. I might add that
over the years a number of creationists have proposed that
impacts initiated the Flood or at least triggered catastrophic
plate tectonics (CPT), which caused the Flood. Carl Froede Jr
has conveniently referenced those creationist papers.67 There
certainly was enough energy to cause a Flood, produce the
sediments, create basins, cause vertical tectonics, etc. Tens of
thousands of impacts would help level high preFlood terrain by
blasting mountains to pieces, but other mountains would form as
a result of the central uplift and the uplifted rim. The debris
would tend to fill up low terrain, contributing to the leveling
of the earth. For a planet with so much water, such a leveling
would have the net effect of flooding the entire earth. This
could be the reason why the floodwater covered all the land by
Day 150.
#Post#: 247--------------------------------------------------
Re: UPDATES
By: Admin Date: March 23, 2019, 4:09 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Large cratonic basins likely of impact origin
HTML https://creation.com/large-cratonic-basins
… Phase change problem. The mechanism of phase change seems to
be the only viable uniformitarian mechanism for basin
subsidence. For instance, if basalt or gabbro subside, the
lithostatic pressure increases and the rock can change to
eclogite, which is 15% denser with 15% less volume. The required
pressure is that of the lower crust and upper mantle. So if
basalt and gabbro can subside to about 40–60 km depth, this
phase transformation can potentially occur and the basin will
subside more. This is a reasonable idea, except where does the
initial subsidence come from? Furthermore, the phase
transformation from gabbro to eclogite requires water,18 and
there is rarely any significant water at the depth of the lower
crust and upper mantle.
_Properties of basins. … Thick sedimentary rocks
Basins are almost always filled with sedimentary rocks, which
are sometimes extremely thick. Some depths will be given in the
examples of basins below, but other basins not mentioned are the
East Barents Basin in the Barents Sea, north of Norway, that has
about 20 km of sedimentary rocks; the West Siberian Basin with
about 8 km of sedimentary rocks; the Tarim Basin of central Asia
with 15 km of sedimentary rocks; and the Paranà Basin in South
America with about 7 km of sedimentary rocks.21
_Little deformation during sedimentation. An examination of
those rocks reveals that the sediments underwent little
deformation when deposited in the basin.13,22 Figure 1 shows
sedimentary rocks of the Precambrian Belt Supergroup, which are
typically undeformed within the bedding planes and formations,
but the whole supergroup is deformed as a single unit,
suggesting that deformation occurred after the whole supergroup
was deposited.
_The crust is commonly thinned in basins. It has been discovered
by seismic and gravity anomaly methods that the crust below a
basin is commonly thinned. Artyushkov states: “Considerable
thinning of the crystalline crust occurs under most deep basins
located on continents.”15 Along with a thinned crust, the Moho,
the boundary between the crust and mantle, is commonly raised
(see figure 2).
_Some basins uplifted and deformed. Another significant
observation on basins applies to sedimentary basins in which the
sedimentary rocks are uplifted and folded by compression and
differential vertical tectonics.22 Practically all uplift occurs
after the sediments have been deposited and turned to
sedimentary rock. During uplift, the sedimentary rocks are
folded and faulted with the top eroded. Such uplifted
sedimentary rocks form many of the mountain ranges of the world
today and would not impress anyone that they were once in a deep
basin.
_In the case of an impact origin, no subsidence is needed to
form the basin; an instant circular ‘hole’ in the ground is
blasted out. Subsidence or uplift may occur after the basin is
filled with sediments.
_... the Flood impact submodel postulates thousands of impacts
occurred early in the Flood. One major effect of such a large
amount of impacts is to blast a huge amount of debris up into
the air in the form of ejecta. All this sediment would end up in
the floodwater and would eventually be deposited. A second major
effect of so many impacts is that powerful currents would
develop, sometimes interfering with each other. So, the
combination of powerful currents and a huge amount of sediment
would be rapid sedimentation in deep basins where currents are
expected to be weaker and allow sedimentation. So, early Flood
impact craters are expected to rapidly fill with sediments,
since the crater acts like a sediment trap (see figure 8a).
Sedimentation was likely so rapid that the sediments were little
deformed by subsequent movements of the crater bottom and walls.
_Large basins of North America
There are five large basins on the stable craton of North
America that I will briefly discuss. These basins are the Belt,
Williston, Illinois, Michigan, and Hudson Bay Basins.
_Two basins of note on other continents. … The South Caspian
Basin. … The Congo Basin.
_The two largest recognized Precambrian impact features, the
Vredefort and Sudbury impact structures, have been eroded
anywhere from 5 to 10 km.70 In a Flood setting, with thousands
of impacts in a short time, turbulent currents would be expected
to create significant erosion that also would destroy shatter
cones, PDFs, and other impact features.
_Discussion. ... There are hundreds of cratonic basins that
could be discussed, some of which have been discussed
elsewhere.74 ... Tectonics, erosion, and sedimentation during
the Genesis Flood are expected to destroy much of the evidence
for impact craters. But, cratonic basins would be one of the
most obvious evidences of large, modified impact craters.
#Post#: 248--------------------------------------------------
Re: UPDATES
By: Admin Date: March 23, 2019, 7:43 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
FLOOD & FOSSIL RECORD
Can Flood Geology Explain the Fossil Record?
HTML https://creation.com/images/pdfs/tj/j10_1/j10_1_032-069.pdf
GEOLOGICAL COLUMN
1. Precambrian: Pre-Flood
2. Cambrian: Heavy rain ...; Erosion, deposition of ocean
sediments; formation of Precam/Cam. unconformity
3. Ordovician: Rising water; coarse to fine grading of sediments
4. Silurian: High water; deposition of thick shale & limestone
5. Devonian: Tidal & wave action; cyclothems; rhythmic
deposition
6. MS-PA: Water covers all land; formation of coal; lowland
forest burial
7. Permian: Rain stops, wind blows; cross-bedded sandstones
8. Triassic: Mountains rise; moving continents
9. Jurassic: Waters start to recede; Mountain-building
10. Cretaceous: Major erosion of new mountains; guyots
11. Paleocene: Fossilization of reptiles; coal formation; upland
forest burial
12. Eocene-Oligocene: Water continues to recede; fossilization
of mammals; continental margin sediment; less dense strata
13. Miocene: Major volcanism
14. Pliocene: Localized sediments & valley fills
15. Pleistocene: Post-Flood erosion; glaciation
16. Recent:
_THE PALAEOZOIC
_... the Palaeozoic cannot represent submarine deposition and
the Permo-Mesozoic the transgression of pre-Flood seas over the
land because the Palaeozoic itself represents that transgression
— the marine deposits of that era lie over continental deposits,
not Precambrian ocean floors.
_ The Lower Cambrian quartzite above the unconformity also shows
evidence of rapid deposition.60 In Scotland there are two
unconformities below the Cambrian. The earlier separates the
Lewisian gneiss from the overlying Stoer and Torridon Groups;
the later unconformity comes between these and the Cambrian
quartzite. In Arizona, similarly, there is an unconformity
between the Vishnu Schist and the overlying Unkar and Chuar
Groups (consisting of limestone, shale, sandstone and
conglomerate) and a second between these and the Tapeats
Sandstone ('The Great Unconformity').61 The two regions bear
close comparison. The Torridonian Sandstone testifies, in its
'fluid evulsion structures', to sediment dumping on a massive
scale, just as do similar features in the Unkar Group. These
deposits above the metamorphosed rocks of the Precambrian —
regularly thousands of metres thick — constitute the rocks which
were eroded when the fountains of the deep broke open. The
horizontal surface of trans-gression at the later unconformity
marks the violent incoming of the sea some weeks later. Ager
remarks that an unfossiliferous quartzite lying conformably
below fossiliferous Lower Cambrian and unconformably above a
great variety of Precambrian rocks — exactly the situation in
Scotland — occurs 'very commonly around the world'. Indeed, 'It
is not only the quartzite, but the whole deepening succession
that tends to turn up almost everywhere, i.e. a basal
conglomerate, followed by the orthoquartzite, followed by
glauconitic sandstones, followed by marine shales and thin
limestones. '62 The lateral persistence of this succession is
striking enough. What is yet more striking is that it represents
an overall grading of particle sizes, from very coarse at the
bottom to very fine at the top. This is the sort of
'upward-fining' pattern which one often finds in a series of
beds, such as a cyclothem. In other words, the whole succession
has the unity characteristic of a single episode of erosion and
deposition, during which material is eroded by fast-moving
currents, held in suspension, and then water-sorted as current
velocity wanes — as a result, for example, of the water becoming
deeper. Commonly a coarse lithology prevails at the bottom of
the Cambrian succession (conglomerates and sandstones), a fine
lithology at the top (limestone and dolomite), while shales,
silts and mudstones occur in-between.63 Widespread carbonate
deposition continues until the end of the Lower Ordovician,
after which a surface of erosion marks an unconformity over much
of North America.64 Marking the end of one continuous sequence,
this would seem to represent, so far as North America is
concerned, the virtual completion of transgression over the
continent, followed by a steep increase in bioturbation as
current strength and sedimentation rates decreased.65
_Except over the Transcontinental Arch, Cambrian rocks are found
throughout the North American interior. Those regions where they
are absent were either source areas for deposition elsewhere or
eroded subsequently; there is no evidence of any pristine
topography. By the Upper Ordovician the process was complete:
the sea had spread eastwards and westwards across most, probably
all,74 of the continent — after the entire Precambrian land
surface had been broken up, inundated and redeposited. If we
adopt Austin's own estimate of the speed of transgression,
upwards of two metres per second, 500 miles would have been
covered in 4-5 days. If we halve this rate in order to take
account of higher elevations inland, the whole continent could
have been transgressed within four weeks. Cambrian rocks, often
with an unconformity at their base, are of worldwide occurrence,
making it possible that by the Upper Ordovician every part of
the earth was deluged.
_ ... there is no trace of a vegetated terrestrial surface at
that time anywhere. The spores and woody plant material
recovered from Cambrian strata76"79 occur in sedimentary
deposits and are not therefore in their original locations. ...
it seems clear that the Upper Precambrian to Lower Ordovician
transgression must be placed within the first 150 days of the
Genesis record. Accordingly, all Cambrian deposits must be Flood
deposits, and wherever they are found, the land must be already
under water. At that point the possibility of pristine land
surfaces comes to an end, until a new surface emerges out of the
Flood. ... In reality, although extensive regions may once have
been underwater shelves, in general the continents of today are
undoubtedly fragments of the supercontinent before the Flood. It
follows, therefore, that the Lower Palaeozoic marine animals
fossilised in, say, Iowa, hundreds of miles inland from the
pre-Flood shore, must have been transported enormous distances
(Figure 5). Because the whole Earth was under water well before
the end of the Lower Palaeozoic, it is impossible to explain
assemblages after the Lower Palaeozoic — including terrestrial
assemblages — as originating from nearby provinces which had not
yet been inundated.
_Did Animals Escape to Higher Ground? ... The Cambrian,
Ordovician, Silurian and Devonian deposits exposed on the Earth
today are marine and igneous deposits overlying a Precambrian
basement, and that basement is the scoured remains of the
primeval supercontinent. Strata at the pre-Flood boundary do not
represent the surfaces of pre-Flood sea bottoms, while none of
today's ocean floors are older than Mesozoic. The Atlantic
Ocean, for instance, originated in the Jurassic, when 'Pangaea'
rifted apart and new seafloor spread out from the Mid-Atlantic
Ridge.94 ... Terrestrial animals are totally absent from strata
of the Lower Palaeozoic because they were obliterated: 'In seven
days I will send rain upon the earth . . . and every living
thing that I have made I will blot out from the face of the
ground.' (Genesis 7:4)
_Again, it is important to keep in mind the violence of events
during the first six weeks of the Flood. In still waters the
corpses of most terrestrial animals will float on the surface,
and a few will sink to the bottom. In turbulent waters bodies
which are heavier than water take longer to sink, and in the
meantime are subject to processes which rapidly reduce them to
nothing: physical dismemberment through continual buffeting,
consumption by scavengers and predators (sharks, marine
reptiles, carnivorous fish), abrasion and pulverisation in
churning sediments, chemical and bacterial decomposition. In the
conditions of the first 40 days — beginning with the stripping
of the original land surface to depths of thousands of metres —
it is difficult to imagine that any remains of land animals
could have survived in recognizable form. With its widespread
volcanism and metamorphism, the Upper Precambrian record
suggests that land animals were annihilated almost instantly, by
processes other than drowning and decay.
_ The advantage of the fishes, which also would have been borne
along by the currents, was that they could swim away once the
currents slackened and their sediment loads began to settle. It
is this circumstance which explains why they scarcely ever
appear in Cambrian strata. Fish that were already dead when the
currents slackened would tend to have been buried higher up than
the invertebrates because of their greater buoyancy. The mass
burials of fish which, in the Palaeozoic, occur in Devonian
strata were mostly the result of shoals being overwhelmed by
epicontinental landslides while they were still alive. Since the
conditions most favourable for such burials were shallow waters
near emerging land, they are evidence that by the early Devonian
the Flood was already waning.98
_... temporary surfaces were being colonised during the Flood
itself, sometimes by creatures that had come into existence
during the Flood. It is unlikely to be the case that a broken
brachiopod in some Silurian deposit was spawned on a preFlood
seafloor and then transported hundreds of miles to its burial
place; it might have been spawned on an Ordovician surface which
was several months later eroded away, by the same powerful
currents that broke its shell.
_There were in fact earlier orogenies, notably the stupendous
Caledonian and Variscan orogenies of the Palaeozoic, and these
were followed by a period of relative stability during the
Triassic, Jurassic and much of the Cretaceous. In the Mesozoic
there is no juncture where the whole Earth could be said to have
been thenceforth under water. That juncture is to be found only
in the Ordovician, whereas as we shall consider presently,
dry-land structures occur all through the Mesozoic: subaerially
deposited basalts, aeolian red beds, root beds, bird and animal
tracks, dinosaur nests and so on. Nor is there a juncture still
higher in the Mesozoic where it is possible to claim that the
first surfaces began to emerge from the water. That juncture is
to be found much earlier at the end of the Silurian.
_The Coal Measures Coal does not occur in the geological column
until the Upper Devonian. On northern continents it is most
abundant in the Upper Carboniferous, on southern continents (the
original Gondwana) it abounds in the Permian, and in both cases
the deposits are nearly all located on the then continental
margins. A second concentration of coal deposits begins in the
Cretaceous and climaxes in the Tertiary (see Figure 3). Since
this pattern of distribution is worldwide and can hardly be
fortuitous, it requires an explanation.
_The answer, so far as the Permo-Carboniferous is concerned,
must be that the measures represent forests of aquatic
vegetation — thick platforms of interlocking roots and entangled
debris, covering thousands of squares of miles —which were
grounded as the waters continued to drain off the land after the
Flood year. Successive currents washed the vegetation (including
flotsam) into deepening offshore basins, while prograding
sediments from the land spread out under the water and thereby
anchored the forests.120 ... Soon after a raft of vegetation
became anchored in shallow-water sediments, the progressive
sinking of the sediments pulled the vegetation below water level
in advance of the next prograding cycle. Such processes clearly
require time. Within the 800 m thick succession of Pennsylvanian
deposits in the Eastern Interior Basin of Illinois and Indiana
no less than 51 separate delta advances have been
distinguished.121 Together with other evidences of time in the
Upper Carboniferous, the cyclothems cannot be satisfactorily
explained as the deposits of a few months.
_It is noteworthy that in many places Devonian strata constitute
the uppermost rocks of the Appalachian Plateau.125 Elsewhere the
record ends with the Lower or Upper Carboniferous, for example
in Virginia, Indiana and Tennessee. Far from showing increasing
inundation, the Devonian was the time when the Appalachian
Mountains began to be uplifted — a process which continued into
the Triassic. Drainage off the emergent slopes resulted in the
formation of coarse-grained meander-belts below, above and at
the same level as the coalfields immediately west of the
Appalachians, until the conditions for sedimentary deposition in
the area ceased.126 Similar drainage channels have been reported
from the British coalfields.127
#Post#: 258--------------------------------------------------
Re: UPDATES
By: Admin Date: September 15, 2019, 8:53 am
---------------------------------------------------------
CG & MC SHOW FLOOD AT UNDER 6,000BP
1. Goals
2. Letters
3. Falls of Blood from Venus
4. On the Orientation of Ancient Temples and Other Anomalies
5. When Was the Lunar Surface Last Molten?
6. Venus Before Exodus
7. Comets and the Bronze Age Collapse
1. Goals: 1. Popularize optimum scientific method & scholarship
(See TB Forum).
a. Improve Mike Fischer's model.
b. Add 2 articles (Ancient Maps & Scientific Evidence) that
support a date of just over 4k years ago for the Great Flood &
Meteor Bombardment (See TB Forum) to correct Mike Fischer's
date.
c. Add JB's article on Noah's Flood to prove that the Flood
caused the geological column (seen in 24 or more basins) of 6
megasequences caused by an orbiting body, like the Moon, on a
briefly elliptical orbit.
d. Add Creation article evidence that basins were formed by
impacts before the Flood.
e. Add that the breakup of the Saturn system produced the
meteors and dust that produced impacts and destroyed much of the
biosphere (See Saturn Theory).
f. Add that the Moon and Mars were impacted at about the same
time as Earth (Saturn Theory).
g. Add that the impacts caused electrical effects, including
radioactivity, on Earth (See WB, TB and CC's Astrophysics).
-----
Scientific Evidence for A Major World Catastrophe About 11,500
Years Ago: A Preliminary Selection [SIS C&C Review]
PARTIALLY SIMPLIFIED VERSION
1.vein: lead (+fossil) --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
--- --- --- --- --- Derbyshire, UK
2.cave: iron-oxide (+fossil) --- - --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
--- --- --- --- --- Gailenreuth, Germany
3.breccia: iron-ore (+fossil) --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
--- --- --- --- --- Kesslerloch, Switzerland
4.rock-fissures: iron-ore (+fossil) (up to 720 ft deep) -- ---
--- --- --- --- --- Carniola, Austria
5.caves: ore cement (+fossil) --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
--- --- --- --- --- Wellington Valley, Australia
6.cave breccia: iron stain (+fossil) --- - --- --- --- --- ---
--- --- --- --- --- Tea Tree Cave, Queensland, Australia
7.drift sand & gravel: metal (+fossil) --- --- --- --- --- ---
--- --- --- --- --- Turnham Green +Acton, Middlesex, UK (1800s)
8.iron-sand: iron patina/stain (+fossil) --- - --- --- --- ---
--- --- --- --- --- Vilyui, Siberia, Russia
9.glacial deposits: iron-oxide stain (+artifact) --- - --- ---
--- --- --- --- --- Nampa, Idaho, (late 1800s)
10.drift stones and sand grains: iron oxide stain --- --- ---
--- --- --- --- --- South Yorkshire +Wiltshire +Humberside, UK
(=<15 ft thick)
11.drift gravels: manganous stain --- ---- --- --- --- --- ---
--- --- --- --- --- Radley, UK +other places around Abingdon, UK
(formation of 'brief duration')
12.drift deposits: iron-oxide stain +gold +platinum +diamonds
---- --- --- --- --- France +Germany +Poland +western Russia
+other European +near-eastern countries
13.drift: iron-oxide stain +manganese +copper +asphalt +oil ---
-- --- --- --- --- Israel +Jordan
14.drift: gold flakes +platinum +lead +zinc +iron ore ---- ---
--- --- --- --- --- Indiana +Michigan +Minnesota +Virginia +the
Carolinas (sometimes at great depths occupying the uneven
surfaces of the underlying bedrock)
15.drift: nickel +nearly pure copper pieces +metals --- -- ---
--- --- --- --- --- Sudbury, Ontario
16.irony-clay deposits: copper pieces (one 3,000 lb) +good
quality diamonds -- --- Ontario to Ohio
17.drift: diamonds (in silicate rocks associated with volcanism)
--- - --- --- --- southern margins of Hudson Bay (where no
recent volcanic activity has occurred)
18.loess: manganese nodules (Pisolites) --- --- --- -- --- ---
--- --- --- --- --- Northern China
19.loess: metal nodules --- -- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
--- --- --- --- --- other regions, China
20.loess: silica +heavy minerals +up to 20.26% aluminium +up to
7.80% iron --- --- Nebraska
21.drift gravel: manganese +cobalt +iron +lead +zinc +copper ---
- --- --- --- --- mouth of Fraser River, British Columbia
22.fossil beds: immense banks +lenses of frozen volcanic dust
+ejecta: fossil ---- Siberia +Alaska fossil beds
23.sea bed clays +muds: much oxidised ferric iron particles ---
-- --- --- --- --- the Arctic
24.sea bed clays +muds: much manganese oxide - --- --- --- ---
--- --- --- --- --- White Sea +Barents Sea, Siberian coast
25.floor sediments: volcanic ash +much nickel +radium (both rare
in sea water) --- Pacific Ocean
26.patchy young radioactive clays in much of the ocean floor:
much radioactive ferromanganese nodules +cobalt +nickel +copper
+other heavy ores --- oceans
_Oceanographers concluded that the nickel and iron in sea floor
deposits were of meteoric origin
----------
Re: Evidence of Ancient Global Cataclysm
by Lloyd » Mon Sep 02, 2019 7:45 pm
The Major Cataclysms Occurred Less Than 5,000 Years Ago
An article by C. Ginenthal about Ancient Maps shows that
Antarctica was apparently largely ice-free 6,000 years ago,
based on drill cores at the Ross ice shelf and probably other
measurements. If it's true that it was ice-free at that time, I
think this means the Shock Dynamics impact and rapid continental
drift occurred shortly before that, like within years, because
the Arctic lands and Antarctica moved toward the frigid poles
due to the impact, and the ice sheets built up soon after. An
ancient map also shows Greenland without its ice sheet.
The article is at:
HTML http://www.catastrophism.com/intro/search.cgi?zoom_query=%22Common+Sense+About+Ancient+Maps+Charles+Ginenthal+In+1984&zoom_per_page=25&zoom_and=1&zoom_cat%5B%5D=-1
_Here's the quoted portion:
"Not only do these cartographers say the map is accurate, but
they point out that, during the 1957 to 1958 Geophysical Year,
other teams of seismic scientists, like that of Paul Emile
Victor, went into Antarctica and made soundings of the
topography under the ice, and that these soundings confirmed the
accuracy of the Oronteus Fineus map. Therefore, we have the Piri
Re'is map of Antarctica confirmed as accurate by the U.S. Navy
Hydrographic Office and the Norwegian-British-Swedish Expedition
of 1949, and the Oronteus Fineus map of Antarctica confirmed as
accurate by Strategic Air Command's map office and the
International Geophysical Year teams of 1957 to 1958. These
findings are further corroborated by other evidence. According
to Hapgood: During the Byrd Expedition of 1947-1948, Dr. Jack
Hough, then of the University of Illinois, took three cores from
the bottom of the ocean off the Ross Sea, and these were dated
by the ionium method of radioactive dating, of the Carnegie
Institution in Washington, by Dr. W. D. Urry, ... one of those
to develop this method. The cores showed alternations of types
of sediments.... There was a coarse glacial sediment, as was to
be expected, and fine sediments of semiglacial type, but there
were also layers of finer sediments typical of temperate
climates. [These were the sort ...] carried down by rivers from
ice-free continents. Here was the first surprise, then.
Temperate conditions had evidently prevailed in Antarctica in
the not distant past. The sediment[s indicated that, no fewer
than three times during the Pleistocene Epoch, a temperate
climate had prevailed in the Ross Sea. Then, when this material
was dated by Urry, it was revealed that the most recent
temperate period had been very recent indeed. In fact, it ended
only about 6,000 years ago. Hough wrote: "The log of core N-5
shows glacial marine sediment from the present to 6,000 years
ago. From 6,000 to 15,000 years ago, the sediment is
fine-grained, with the exception of one granule at about 12,000
years ago. This suggests an absence of ice from the area during
that period, except for a stray iceberg 12,000 years ago." (19)
This evidence is further corroborated by Reginald Daly, who
informs us that "[carbon-14] dating has shown that Antarctica's
ice is less than 6,000 years old. (Emphasis added.) [Arthur
Holmes writes: `Algal remains dated at 6,000 BP [Before Present]
have been found on the latest terminal moraines.'" (20) Thus, in
addition to the accuracy of the Piri Re'is map and the Oronteus
Fineus map of Antarctica, we have measurements from cores in the
Ross Sea and from the last glacial deposits containing a
temperate species of algae that also show that Antarctica was
not covered by ice 6,000 years ago. The evidence indicates that
the Piri Re'is and Oronteus Fineus maps of Antarctica, published
in the 16th century, are accurate and authentic representations
of the continent as has been confirmed by scientists in the
fields of seismic soundings and cartography. This shows that
Antarctica was largely ice-free 6,000 years ago and is
corroborated by evidence of cores from the Ross Sea and by the
dating of algae in terminal moraines. The only way that such
accurate maps could have been made prior to the 16th century is
if Antarctica was not buried under thousands of feet of ice,
when its climate had to be tremendously different."
_End of quote.
(Note: I assume that the object found at "12,000" years ago was
not from an iceberg and the sediment dated older than 6,000BP
was not older than that. See below.)
Mike Fischer of
HTML http://NewGeology.us
proposed that the Shock
Dynamics impact event (in which an asteroid from 33 to 78 miles
in diameter struck the former supercontinent, Pangaea, north of
Madagascar, and caused the continents to split off rapidly to
their present locations) occurred shortly before the time of the
Younger Dryas impact maybe 11,000 years ago, though he said
privately that it could have occurred as recently as 4200 years
ago. So if Antarctica was ice-free less than 6,000 years ago,
the Shock Dynamics event must have occurred shortly before that.
And the Younger Dryas impact must have occurred about the same
time, i.e. less than 6,000 years ago.
I've since read Melvyn Cook's article, Earth Tectonics Viewed
from Rock Mechanics at:
HTML http://www.catastrophism.com/intro/search.cgi?zoom_query=%22Tectonics+Viewed+from+Rock+Mechanics+By+Melvin+A.+Cook&zoom_per_page=25&zoom_and=1&zoom_cat%5B%5D=-1
_Here's the relevant part.
"Dating the Rupture of Pangaea, Continental Drift, and the EGRR
[Earth-girdling rift and ridges]
Farrand and Gajda determined, by the equilibrium radiocarbon
method [10] that the beginning of the 'uplifts' in Canada
occurred 7,500 to 10,500 years ago (8700 +/- 765 years before
present: this date is the average value read from the 'isobases'
surrounding Hudson Bay, the maxima for these uplifts). To obtain
this result they used the equilibrium radiocarbon values of
Libby [33] who at first found a value of 0.78 for C14/C.o14 [C14
is the biospheric radiocarbon concentration and C.o14 is the
expected value based on the known intensity of galactic cosmic
rays. Libby interpreted the difference simply as lost
radiocarbon. In 1963, Lingenfelter [34] of the Libby school
reduced this value to 0.73 and in 1964 he and Flamm [35] found a
still lower value of 0.675. If Farrand and Gajda had used the
1964 result, the maximum equilibrium radiocarbon date for the
uplifts in northeastern Canada would have been 7550 +/- 655
years BP. However, this date would have been only 4740 years BP
if they had used the 1964 result and interpreted it, not by the
equilibrium radiocarbon method, but by the non-equilibrium
radiocarbon dating model [36], dictated by the actual
observations of 1964 without assuming C14 loss from the
atmosphere and oceans. Heiskanen and Vening-Meinesz studied the
uplifts in Fennoscandia [11] by the observed gravity anomaly,
which they found obeys the same exponential decay law as
radioactivity. They found for the uplifts in the Bay of Bothnia
... [that] The beginning of the uplifts was ... about 4300 years
before the date of their investigation, or about 4345 BP."
_End of quote.
Note: the uplifts began when the ice caps were removed.
The reason I said above that the sediments below the less than
6,000 year old sediments were not older than that is because the
sediments must have mostly all been deposited at about the same
time, as I explained in this thread 2 years ago at
HTML http://www.thunderbolts.inf
o/forum/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=16025&start=720#p119437
in a post I titled: Sedimentary Rock Strata Prove Catastrophism.
There I said: "Re: Sedimentary Rock Strata: What brief
explanation is there for the fact that sedimentary rock strata
covering large continental areas are generally sorted into
different rock types, i.e. esp. sandstones, claystones, and
limestones? I.e., assuming that millions to billions of years of
erosion and deposition occurred, how was it possible for only
one rock type to be deposited over large areas for thousands of
years, followed by thousands of years of another rock type, etc?
The only plausible means I know of for separation of strata into
such individual rock types is by major flooding over short time
spans, as demonstrated by Guy Berthault. The geologic column is
said to consist of 6 megasequences worldwide, each containing
many conforming sedimentary strata, and each megasequence
occurring over an unconformity. The best explanation seems to be
that each megasequence was deposited during major flooding over
a short time span of days or weeks. Since the unconformities
between the megasequences seem to show mainly only sheet
eroision, there must have been only short time spans of days,
weeks or months between each megasequence deposit."
Early in this thread I showed evidence that major cataclysms
occurred about 4240 years ago, including a Great Flood. The
Shock Dynamics event seems to have been the cause of the flood
and of rapid continental drift and of mountain building and most
fossil formation and extinctions and it now appears that the
best evidence is that it occurred less than 5,000 years ago and
the Younger Dryas event occurred after that. Only one large
asteroid caused the Shock Dynamics Pangaea splitting event etc,
but that asteroid was accompanied by numerous other objects,
many of which also struck the Earth and the Moon at that time,
maybe over a period of centuries. And the Ancient Maps article
by Ginenthal above suggests that civilization was highly
advanced before the event and for some time after.
Comments?
Re: Evidence of Ancient Global Cataclysm
by moses » Mon Sep 02, 2019 8:55 pm
I am pretty sure now that all those 10,000 BC, or so, datings
are in error and should be around 4,000 BC. This is because of
Noah's flood event which introduced a large amount of carbon to
Earth and changed from a 360 day year to the 365.24 year
commemorated in the Great Pyramid.
Thus Gobekli Tepe would then be just before the Sumerian
civilisation and things make a lot more sense.
Re: Evidence of Ancient Global Cataclysm
by Lloyd » Tue Sep 03, 2019 5:58 pm
Thanks, Mo. Yes, Gobekli Tepi makes more sense at just over
4,000 years ago because of familiar astrological symbols used
there, I think, which may refer to a date. As for the Flood
event adding C14 to the Earth, can you provide any authoritative
references for that? Maybe I'll have time to look for info on
that before long myself.
By the way, I think the mythological evidence etc for the Saturn
Theory is also something that needs to be incorporated into the
ancient global cataclysm model. Maybe it will help us identify
the source of the meteor stream/s etc that caused the
cataclysms. Maybe the unusual minerals mentioned in one article
came from the meteor stream or one of the planets of the polar
configuration. I'll check out the relevant article I just read
lately real quick.
Maybe this article: "Scientific Evidence for A Major World
Catastrophe About 11,500 Years Ago: A Preliminary Selection D S
Allan" at:
HTML http://www.catastrophism.com/intro/search.cgi?zoom_query=%22Scientific+Evidence+for+A+Major+World+Catastrophe+About+11%2C500+Years+Ago%3A+A+Preliminary+Selection+D+S+Allan&zoom_per_page=25&zoom_and=1&zoom_cat%5B%5D=-1
And this article: "The Flood" at:
HTML http://www.catastrophism.com/intro/search.cgi?zoom_query=%22Flood+Charles+Ginenthal+One&zoom_per_page=25&zoom_and=1&zoom_cat%5B%5D=-1
Re: Evidence of Ancient Global Cataclysm
by Lloyd » Tue Sep 03, 2019 7:20 pm
The first article I listed in the previous post is the one with
the info about minerals. Following is a quote.
"The Metal Factor
Especially noteworthy are the numerous instances of 'drift'-age
animals and plants found agglutinated by, embedded within, or
unexpectedly associated with, certain ores. Examples include a
nearly complete rhinoceros skeleton entombed in a vein of lead
in Derbyshire [35], thousands of agglutinated bones in a cave at
Gailenreuth, Germany [36], many more cemented together in red
iron-oxide stained breccia at Kesslerloch, Switzerland [37],
those within nearly pure iron-ore infilling rock-fissures
descending to 720 ft [220m below ground level in Carniola,
Austria [38] and ore-agglutinated masses of bones occupying cave
after cave in Australia's Wellington Valley [39]. Many cave
breccias are strongly ferruginised. That of Tea Tree Cave in
Queensland is an outstanding example [40]. Animals remains from
'drift'-age sands and gravel also often exhibit external
metalliferous staining. Typical examples were the mammoth and
other mammal bones found at Turnham Green and Acton, Middlesex,
last century 'loaded with manganous oxide' [41]. Molluscs
possessing a pronounced ferruginous patina occurred in blue-grey
iron-sand overlying the celebrated frozen rhinoceros carcass of
Vilyui in Siberia [42]. Even a small soapstone idol exhumed from
'glacial' deposits over 280 feet (86m.) below ground level at
Nampa, Idaho, late last century was found invested with reddish
iron oxide [43]. At many localities the stones and sand grains
constituting much of the 'drift' itself have been similarly
ferruginised."
Numerous examples of metal or mineral staining or contents in
the "drift" is mentioned in addition to the above. The paragraph
after that says "loess" also contains such things and appears to
have originated at the same time as the drift etc. Drift is
defined as: "In geology, drift is the name for all material of
glacial origin found anywhere on land or at sea, including
sediment and large rocks (glacial erratic). Glacial origin
refers to erosion, transportation and deposition by glaciers."
Loess is defined as: "Loess, an unstratified, geologically
recent deposit of silty or loamy material that is usually buff
or yellowish brown in colour and is chiefly deposited by the
wind. Loess is a sedimentary deposit composed largely of
silt-size grains that are loosely cemented by calcium
carbonate."
Charles Ginenthal had another article about so-called glacial
deposits actually being flood deposits, often over a fractured
ice sheet, if I understood him correctly.
So I hope to come to understand better how the staining etc came
about in the drift and loess etc.
#Post#: 259--------------------------------------------------
Re: NEW UPDATES
By: Admin Date: October 9, 2019, 5:54 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Tilted Lakes
HTML http://www.sis-group.org.uk/news/tilted-lakes.htm
Archaeology
2 Oct 2019
Gary sent in this link to
HTML https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-7520961/
...
archaeologists claim that a range of mysterious man made stones
submerged beneath the surface of Lake Constance, on the Swiss
side, are 5000 years old. They have done some exploratory C14
dating, they say, and confirm (roughly so) that they were
constructed around 3000BC (or thereabouts). Do they have a
connection with the drowned pile dwelling on Swiss lakes? These
were overwhelmed in a catastrophic manner - but it has been all
quiet on this front in recent years (or at least as far as the
UK is concerned). That is a trifle surprising as it has been
recently confirmed that crannogs and lake dwellings in the UK go
back as far as the Neolithic - and we even have a well known
excavation of such a pile dwelling in the Fens. The
archaeologists say the stones go back to the Neolithic period
but it is not clear what they are. It has been suggested they
might be cairns (a row of them) minus the earth (washed out by
the lake waters). Basically, what is left is a pile of stones -
and they stretch some distance as if following a former contour
... [[See 2 Images.]]
... They are currently 15 feet below the surace of Lake
Constance. Geologically, the stones rest on post glacial banded
lake deposits and are situated above the underlying upper edge
of a morraine (presumably dating back to the Late Glacial
Maximum). A source described them as cairns which is interesting
as in the UK earthen mounds sometimes contain a stone
(megalithic) construct - such as the chamber at West Kennet.
Cairns are usually a more solid type of structure with an
outward facia of stones (big and small) without the earth cover.
THe piles of stones appear to run parallel with the shoreline.
Finally, we are told that lake dwellings may be much deeper
under the water. They may exist out in the lake or they may have
been eroded away by water action.
PS ... Velikovsky in 'Earth in Upheaval' mentioned lake
dwellings (erected on wooden piles driven into the ground).
Remains of them exist in Scandinavia, Germany, Switzerland and
northern Italy he told us and at some point a 'high water'
catastrophe occurred and the villages were overwhelmed and
covered in sand and silt etc. They remained abandoned for
centuries until rebuilt during the Bronze Age - until they were
overwhelmed once again at the end of the LB period. Velikovsky's
dating is well out of sync with modern dating. The book was
published in 1955 but the research was carried out in the 1940s.
Gams and Nordhagen made a survey of German and Swiss lakes (and
fens) and they concluded that strong tectonic movements were
involved. The lakes suddenly lost their horizontal position, one
end often being tilted upwards - and the opposite end of the
lake, downwards. The old strand line, they said, ran obliquely
to the horizon. The water level of Lake Constance rose by 30
feet - and there is evidence of the lake tilting. The high water
catastrophe, they proposed, was accompanied by climatic change.
These shifts in climate are known to have occurred at the back
end of the 4th millennium, mid to late 3rd milllennium, and
towards the end of the 2nd millenniums BC.
Note ... Velikovsky's dates often go back prior to the
development of C14 methodology and it is a fact that he favoured
dates of 1500BC and the 8th century BC in order to comply with
his timeline in 'Worlds in Collision'. Once C14 dating came in
things changed and Velikovsky's 1500BC became 2300BC in the
articles of Euan MacKie (and taken up subsequently by Moe
Mandelkehr). The 1500BC date was derived from Biblical numbers
and was never a purely archaeological or scientific date. In
spite of this both side may be wrong if the stones go back as
far as 3000BC - pushing it further back in time. We know there
was considerable uplift in the Alps at that point in time as
Oetzi was left stranded on top of the mountains and engulfed in
a glacier as temperatures plummeted.
#Post#: 260--------------------------------------------------
Re: NEW UPDATES
By: Admin Date: October 9, 2019, 6:04 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
The day the sea invaded the Sahara
HTML http://www.sis-group.org.uk/news/day-sea-invaded-sahara.htm
Geology
10 Jul 2019
At
HTML https://phys.org/news/2019-07-ancient-saharan-seaway-earth-climate.html<br
/>... in the Bulletin of the American Museum of Natural History
(summer of 2019) we have a paper based on an accumulation of 20
years of research in what is now the Sahara desert. It is set
between 100 and 50 million years ago = the Late Cretaceous and
the early Paleogene (on the geological ladder). It concerns what
is described as a sea way and the blame is placed squarely on
rising sea levels. It is an established fact of mainstream that
the Cretaceous period was extremely warm as trees are known to
have been growing near the North Pole. It is assumed the poles
have not shifted - even though an asteroid crashed into the
Yucatan at the K/T boundary. The easiest way to get trees
growing at the current North Pole is to have the pole situated
elsewhere in the Cretaceous - which gets rid of the problem of
trees growing where it is darkness for six months of the year. A
pole shift might even explain why the sea invaded what is now
the Sahara - a redistribution of the geoid and its ocean water.
However, the article doesn't touch that possibility and works
within the mainstream gradualist model - which one would expect
they would. This is not an article about rocking the boat it is
primarily a classification of the fossils found in the process
of three separate expeditions to the Sahara (primarily with a
focus on Mali). As it included a great number of marine animals
the logical explanation is that the sea invaded the land - and
as geologists and others think the Cretaceous was inordinately
warm they have the perfect mechanism - global warming in the
dinosaur era. In the modern world we have a self regulating
atmospheric system that has evolved to shunt excess heat out
into space. Did the atmosphere behave differently in the
Cretaceous?
Three expeditions, mainly to Mali, in 1999, 2003 and 2008,
looked at rock exposures in West Africa. Giant sea snakes and
catfish were recorded (but gigantism was a feature of the late
dinosaur era). Giant fish of various kinds, tropical
invertebrate and long snouted crocodilians are mentioned, and
various mammals and even mangrove forest (all buried in the
rocks). The seaway is said to have changed in size and geography
on several occasions - which may indicate different channels of
water. However, the feature I found most striking is the fact
the K/T boundary event is smack in the middle of the period in
question. As such the impact could have created huge tsunami
waves on the opposite side of the pond. In this instance, West
Africa. Is the seaway a relic of uniformitarianism? Was the
seaway, and its fossils, the result of massive tidal waves
generated by the asteroid - or by pole shift (or any other
factor)? Were the sedimentary layers at the K/T boundary event
laid down quickly rather than over millions of years? By
avoiding catastrophism mainstream loses out on a lot of out of
the box thinking - and alternative explanations. Merely keeping
the uniformitarian paradigm alive and kicking seems to be a
primary motive of certain kinds of research. This is not the
case with this article. The researchers are working within the
geological model they have been bequeathed. This is no different
to oil explorers working within the system to search for
possible new sources of the black stuff. How the layers were
laid down is neither here nor there as it doesn't affect the oil
deposits, as such, or the fossil classification. They are simply
there and that is all there is to it. However, if oil is
produced by vegetation that has been super heated and by other
processes one can get an even better picture of catastrophism in
the rocks.
One problem for catastrophism and not for the mainstream
position is the presence of mangrove forest in the rocks in
central West Africa. Mangroves grow on the coast. Were they
growing in Mali or had they been uproooted by a wall of water
and transported to Mali?
#Post#: 261--------------------------------------------------
Re: NEW UPDATES
By: Admin Date: October 9, 2019, 6:28 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Asteroids and Meteors
HTML http://www.sis-group.org.uk/news/asteroids-and-meteors.htm-1
… Gary sent in a link to
HTML http://www.sciencealert.com/evidence-of-ancient-meteorite-impacts-have-been-found-in-clam-fossils<br
/>... it seems that scientists researching the Tamiami Formation
in Florida came across a lot of fossilised clams - and tiny
silica rich glass spheres up to 5mm in size, even inside the
clam shells. They are thought to have got into the clams as they
keep their mouths open and filter the sea water passing across
them. These clams were clammed shut and were prised open in a
lab. They were forged in heat (no wonder the clams pulled the
shutters down) and they can be created by volcanoes and even by
industrial processes. In this case there is no volcanic rock in
the vicinity of the Tamiami Formation and human activity is
discounted as the formation is prior to the Holocene. It is said
to possibly go back as far as the Pliocene or Pleistocne,
somewhere between 5 million years ago and 12,000 years ago. The
researchers have drawn the conclusion that the most likely
explanation is that an impact event was responsible. Or perhaps
an atmospheric explosion. Something capable of ejecting lots of
debris into the air.
... The glass spherules are, in effect, mini tektites - but
therein lies a problem as uniformitarian geochronology insists
the formation was lain down in a number of layers - and the
fossilised clams were found in four different locations. The
implication, in the gradualist model, is that there were four
impact events - which seems a trifle unlikely. No doubt if a
nearby volcanic source had been found they could point a finger
at multiple eruptions - as volcanoes tend to blow at irregular
intervals. In this case that is not possible and as Gary says,
the evidence appears to be that the sedimentary layer was laid
down quickly and in one go. This is itself unsurprising as
impact events would involve a lot of sediment production - and
this even occurs with big volcanoes. The researchers are of
course trapped in the uniformitarian straightjacket and are
forced to think in terms of more than one impact - at the same
spot on earth.
#Post#: 262--------------------------------------------------
Re: NEW UPDATES
By: Admin Date: October 9, 2019, 6:54 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Volcanic Hot Spot, Australia
HTML http://www.sis-group.org.uk/news/jurassic-volcanism.htm-0
At
HTML https://archaeologynewsnetwork.blogspot.com/2019/08/jurassic-world-of-volcanoes-found-in.html<br
/>.... a previously unknown 'Jurassic World' of about 100 ancien
t
volcanoes buried deep in the Cooper-Eromanya Basin of central
Australia, where oil and gas are produced (but at a somewhat
lower level in the rocks), has been uncovered. The volcanism is
said to date back 180 to 160 million years ago and is found
underneath hundreds of feet of sedimentary rocks. In other
words, lots of things have been happening since the volcanism.
However, it seems that although volcanoes are usually associated
with plate boundaries, on this ocassion they are not. Instead, a
volcanic hot spot is being invoked and the volcanism is being
compared to the Deccan Traps. See also
HTML https://wattsupwiththat.com/2019/08/18/hidden-jurassic-world-buried-underneath-australia/<br
/>... which is written by a very mainstream thinking geologist w
ho
spent most of his career in the oil industry. The first link
doesn't really get into the hot spot but this link does.
...
At
HTML https://archaeologynewsnetwork.blogspot.com/2019/08/researchers-study-largest-impact-crater.html<br
/>... where we have a big impact crater beneath Chesapeake Bay
attributed in this news release to an asteroid strike - at 35
million years ago.
#Post#: 264--------------------------------------------------
Re: NEW UPDATES
By: Admin Date: October 10, 2019, 6:49 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Chicxulub Crater
HTML http://www.sis-group.org.uk/news/chicxulub-crater.htm
Catastrophism
13 Sep 2019
William sent in a couple of nice links to the following story -
go to
www.yahoo.com/news/eyewitness-asteroid-killed-off-dinosaurs-1614
49999.html
and
HTML https://www.yahoo.com/finance/m/c16bf09f-f24d-315d-af0b-b1a5f4e63fb0/scientists-discover-new.html<br
/>...which concerns the K/T impact that contributed to the
extinction of the dinosaurs - and 75 per cent of life on Earth
(an estimate). Rocks near the asteroid crater tell a story after
being analysed by scientists. Geologists are saying that a mile
high tsunami wave, wild fires, and the release of many tons of
sulphur (blotting out the Sun and creating a nuclear winter
scenario) came in the wake of the asteroid strike. The Chicxulub
asteroid was around 6 miles wide. Within a minute it had bored a
hole 100 miles wide on what is now the sea floor - creating a
bubbling pit of molten rock and hot gases. The contents of that
fiery cauldron shot into the sky, creating a large plume. Within
further minutes the plume collapsed and solidified into rippling
peaks of lava and rocky material. These peaks were then mothered
my more rocks, along with traces of the scorched landscape, and
charcoal.
The space rock most likely vapourised the surrounding land and
sent ocean water rushing from the impact point at the speed of a
jet aeroplane. Although many animals did die at the impact site
it is evident that the mass extinction was caused by what
happened in the atmosphere (gases such as sulphur). See also
HTML https://www.wsj.com/articles/scientists-discover-new-evidence-of-the-asteroid-that-kiilled-off-the-dinosaurs-11568055601<br
/>... where we learn that in the Chicxulub crater geologist foun
d
that hundreds of feet of sediments built up rapidly - 130m in a
single day. It ocurred on the scale of minutes and hours (and
this is a geologist telling us). As the hours passed a backwash
of waves added more and more finely graded debris.See also
HTML https://archaeologynewsnetwork.blogspot.com/2019/09/rocks-at-asteroid-impact-site-record.html<br
/>... evidence of all this comes from small pieces of charcoal
embedded in rocks, jumbles of rocks brought in by the tsunami
back flow and an absence of sulphur (denuded at impact and blown
into the sky).
*****************************************************
DIR Next Page