Skip to comments.The ‘Great Unconformity’ and associated geochemical evidence for Noahic Flood erosion
Posted on 10/13/2017 7:48:13 AM PDT by fishtank
The Great Unconformity and associated geochemical evidence for Noahic Flood erosion
by Harry Dickens
The Bibles Flood account describes the greatest rain event ever recorded. Forty days and nights of rain falling on the earth (Genesis 7:12) would have caused immense denudation of landmasses around the globe. Evidence for this is provided by a key stratigraphic surface and by associated geochemical signatures.
Nature and extent of the Great Unconformity
The term Great Unconformity was originally used to describe the prominent stratigraphic surface exposed in the Grand Canyon that separates the Lower Cambrian Tapeats Sandstone (of the Sauk cratonic sequence) from the underlying Precambrian strata (Granite Gorge Metamorphic Suite and tilted sedimentary rocks of the Grand Canyon Supergroup).1
SedimentPatterns Figure 1: Summary of major geochemical and sedimentary patterns derived from Upper Proterozoic to Phanerozoic strata (modified from Peters and Gaines).2 Click for larger view. The Great Unconformity can be traced across North America and globally, including most of todays southern hemisphere landmasses, along with Western Europe and Siberiathis makes it the most widely recognised and distinctive stratigraphic surface in the rock record.2
(Excerpt) Read more at creation.com ...
Figure 1: Summary of major geochemical and sedimentary patterns derived from Upper Proterozoic to Phanerozoic strata (modified from Peters and Gaines).
CMI article and image.
So, tell us how the Flood explains the tilted Grand Canyon Supergroup sedimentary rocks atop the Precambrian Vishnu Schist.
You do realize that you are using geological formations that illustrate and prove vast numbers of years in their formation. Great Unconformity in the Grand Canyon lends support to Huttons Unconformaty which led to his conclusions on deep time. I doubt you or the Creation Institute really want to go there.
I’ve noticed they do that a lot - point at one aspect of a geological feature as proof of their theory, while ignoring the implications of the rest of that feature.
That’s the game I think.
I don’t know why I click on these silly-assed creationist threads.
Oh, wait, yes I do. For the same reason people go to the zoo.
I believe in God and that He created all. But the timeline is man made and subject to massive error. “A day with god is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as a day”* was written for an audience to whom the terms millions and billions would have been confusing. Can God do it in the blink of an eye? Sure. Did He? Doesn’t look like it. And if he did so, why would he have made so many things appear so old? He hasn’t tried to fool us about other things.
*Verse from memory, now I’ll look it up to see if I remember correctly.
But do not forget this one thing, dear friends: With the Lord a day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like a day. - 2 Peter 3:8
Hi. One of the best places to start for modern understandings and explanations of catastrophic sedimentary deposits is from John Baumgardner.
Here’s a YouTube:
Catastrophic Plate Tectonics - Key to Understanding the Genesis Flood - John Baumgardner
And here’s an example of his published work:
“Role of a low-viscosity zone in stabilizing plate tectonics: Implications for comparative terrestrial planetology”
The earth doesn’t look old, just like it’s been through a short but VERY difficult and twisted life.
You know, kind of like Lindsay Lohan.
Dr. Baumgardner depends on a hypothesis that the slip-sliding geologic plates that cover the Earth might once have moved thousands of times faster than they do today. He is a sincere young earth believer that requires this hypothesis in order to fit plate tectonics into a Biblical time frame. It simply doesnt work because there is overwhelming evidence of great time required to explain what we see occurring and zero, zip, nada evidence to support his hypothesis.
Im sorry but I havent had time to look at his low viscosity zone in the mantle which would seem to address the it just cant move that fast objection to his rapid plate movement idea.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.