Skip to main content

TR Memescape

  • Talk Rational: Or don't. Whatever.

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - Dave Hawkins

1
Where have you shown anything about extraordinarily thin, vast, fine, flat or uniform?

"extraoardinarily", relative to what?

Look at all theses states it's found in ...
Quote
Historically the name "Potsdam sandstone" was also applied to various other North American sandstone bodies that directly overlie Precambrian crystalline rocks, including sandstones in Canada, Pennsylvania, Virginia, Iowa, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Michigan, and Indiana, and attempts were made to identify or correlate various rocks with the Potsdam formation.[23][24][25]
Do you see the problem here?
Yes I see the problem quite clearly. No mainstream geologist wants to look at the big picture because of the obvious implications.
2
There's plenty of sandstone but no extraordinarily thin, vast, fine, flat uniform layer.
Sure there is. I've just shown you it for the northeast and central usa...
No. You haven't.

Where have you shown anything about extraordinarily thin, vast, fine, flat or uniform?

"extraoardinarily", relative to what?

Look at all theses states it's found in ...
Quote
Historically the name "Potsdam sandstone" was also applied to various other North American sandstone bodies that directly overlie Precambrian crystalline rocks, including sandstones in Canada, Pennsylvania, Virginia, Iowa, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Michigan, and Indiana, and attempts were made to identify or correlate various rocks with the Potsdam formation.[23][24][25] The basal Cambrian sandstone formation in much of the upper Mississippi Valley and southern Great Lakes region is now designated the Mount Simon Sandstone and is, in turn, assigned to the Potsdam Supergroup, which takes its name from the Potsdam Sandstone.[24] Similar quartz arenite sandstone found in Wyoming was also identified historically as the "Potsdam sandstone."[25][26] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Potsdam_Sandstone
I count 8 states in this para plus Canada

Add 4 more states from this para
Quote
Correlation: The Mount Simon Sandstone is known by this name in Illinois, Wisconsin, Michigan, Ohio, and Kentucky and is the equivalent of the Lamotte Sandstone of Missouri (Droste and Shaver, 1983 Shaver and others, 1985). https://igws.indiana.edu/compendium/comp0i04.cfm

And we haven't looked at the American West yet.

When we get done, I'm pretty sure we'll have about 2000 miles across and an average thickness of about 1500 feet.

That's vast and incredibly thin ... then we will look at the flatness.
3
Oh, wasn't it the St Peter sandstone that was supposed to be "extraordinarily fine"?

But that isn't even in the same megasequence I don't think....

Basically, when you google anything to do with a vast area of sandstone covering most of North America, you end up in a creationist site.

They are simply lying.

There's plenty of sandstone but no extraordinarily thin, vast, fine, flat uniform layer.
Sure there is. I've just shown you it for the northeast and central usa... just gotta correlate the rest of the country
4
Yes Peez I know. You are like that Junior High kid I told about who was laughing at the joke he didn't understand.
5
All the sandstones I've posted about so far are CORRELATED.  That means they are THE SAME sandstone ...
Says who?
The articles I posted say that they are correlated and that they are stratigraphically equivalent.
sample statement from material I have posted recently which you apparently missed...

Quote
Correlation: The Mount Simon Sandstone is known by this name in Illinois, Wisconsin, Michigan, Ohio, and Kentucky and is the equivalent of the Lamotte Sandstone of Missouri (Droste and Shaver, 1983 Shaver and others, 1985).
6
Where it suits him, Dave is all about how you get more erosion - and thus more sediment - when there's reduced plant cover.

However, when it suits him otherwise, Dave is all about how past sedimentary formations HAVE TO BE FORMED by some process HAPPENING TODAY and AT THAT SCALE, even at a time when there was NO terrestrial plant cover because terrestrial plants hadn't even evolved yet.

And no, it doesn't matter that Dave doesn't actually believe that there was such a time, because that would make his argument circular.


Ignoring for the moment that hilarious idea of plants evolving themselves, let's just give you your bare land surface.  How the hell are you going to get a 2000 mile wide Sandstone layer that averages 1000 feet thick?
7
All the sandstones I've posted about so far are CORRELATED.  That means they are THE SAME sandstone ...
Says who?
The articles I posted say that they are correlated and that they are stratigraphically equivalent.
8
All the sandstones I've posted about so far are CORRELATED.  That means they are THE SAME sandstone ... just given different names by region.
No, it doesn't. It means they're about the same age. It does not mean that they're part of the same basin.
Hahahahahaha

Dave thinks there were all these little basins all over North America where sand accumulated individually and that's why they have all these different names.
9
All the sandstones I've posted about so far are CORRELATED.  That means they are THE SAME sandstone ... just given different names by region.
12
Since Chairman Xi Jingpin and KJU are in the news, it makes me think of "Capitalism vs. Communism" ...

My opinion is that both of these are similar in important ways ... I'm not sure what you would call my preferred "ism" ... but I'm pretty sure that there will be no true freedom in the world until we have ...

"Universal Land Access"
13
They're connected, dude.
14
Dave, you could just copypaste all this from the Zombie TR threads.

You are not treading new ground.
Oh yes I am.  Just watch.
15
Quote
Mount Simon Sandstone
(JBD & JBP)
Potsdam Supergroup,
Cambrian System
Type locality and use of name: In a provisional classification given by Walcott (1914, p. 354), the Mount Simon Sandstone was credited to a manuscript by E. O. Ulrich. General consensus indicates that the name is taken from an escarpment called Mount Simon near Eau Claire, Eau Claire County, Wis. Walcott described about 235 feet (72 m) of coarse-grained to conglomeratic sandstone overlying Precambrian granite and underlying fine-grained sandstone of the Eau Claire Formation. The term Mount Simon Sandstone is generally used for the basal Cambrian formation in the upper Mississippi Valley and southern Great Lakes areas, including in Indiana.

Description: The Mount Simon Sandstone, the oldest known post-Precambrian unit in Indiana and the basal unit in the Potsdam Supergroup, is recognized only in the subsurface and was described in some detail by Becker, Hreha, and Dawson (1978). It consists of poorly sorted fine-grained to very coarse grained sandstones that are generally poorly consolidated. A general color change occurs downward from white to yellowish gray to grayish red below. Gray and maroon shale is present throughout the formation in beds ranging from less than a foot to tens of feet in thickness, and another prominent shale zone, as thick as 60 feet (18 m), occurs in the upper part of the Mount Simon in northwestern Indiana. A basal arkosic sandstone interval, as thick as 50 feet (15 m), is known from several wells that penetrate Precambrian rocks in Indiana.

The known thickness of the Mount Simon Sandstone ranges from more than 300 feet (91 m) in eastern Indiana to more than 2,000 feet (610 m) in northwestern Indiana. Although wells in southwestern Indiana have not reached Precambrian rocks, wells in Illinois and Kentucky indicate that the Mount Simon thins to about 750 feet (229 m) in that part of the state (Droste and Patton, 1985). The Mount Simon is overlain conformably by the Eau Claire Formation and is underlain, insofar as known, unconformably by Precambrian rocks.

Correlation: The Mount Simon Sandstone is known by this name in Illinois, Wisconsin, Michigan, Ohio, and Kentucky and is the equivalent of the Lamotte Sandstone of Missouri (Droste and Shaver, 1983 Shaver and others, 1985). https://igws.indiana.edu/compendium/comp0i04.cfm
16
Quote
The Potsdam Sandstone was named by Emmons in 1838 (p. 214-217, 230) for Potsdam, St. Lawrence County, N.Y. It was then considered to consist of sandstones lying above primary (Precambrian) rocks. The name Potsdam has since been applied widely, at least in the correlative sense, to many bodies of sandstones occupying a somewhat similar stratigraphic position in Canada, Pennsylvania, Virginia, Iowa, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Michigan, and Indiana. https://igws.indiana.edu/compendium/comp1hgk.cfm
17
For no particular reason, I started my research with the Potsdam Sandstone ...

Quote
Stratigraphic equivalents and related units
Stratigraphically equivalent and lithologically similar sandstone extends across the international border into Canada, although stratigraphic boundaries and nomenclature can differ.[11][12] In Ontario, the Nepean Sandstone was formerly called "Potsdam" and is regarded as a stratigraphic equivalent to the Potsdam Sandstone.[21][22][23] In Quebec, the Potsdam Group is recognized, consisting of the Covey Hill Formation and the Cairnside Formation, both of which are sandstones.[12]

Historically the name "Potsdam sandstone" was also applied to various other North American sandstone bodies that directly overlie Precambrian crystalline rocks, including sandstones in Canada, Pennsylvania, Virginia, Iowa, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Michigan, and Indiana, and attempts were made to identify or correlate various rocks with the Potsdam formation.[23][24][25] The basal Cambrian sandstone formation in much of the upper Mississippi Valley and southern Great Lakes region is now designated the Mount Simon Sandstone and is, in turn, assigned to the Potsdam Supergroup, which takes its name from the Potsdam Sandstone.[24] Similar quartz arenite sandstone found in Wyoming was also identified historically as the "Potsdam sandstone."[25][26] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Potsdam_Sandstone

Note the correlations mentioned.
18
Here's the relevant para from Bill Hoesch's article ...
Quote
By the way, the rock layer called the Tapeats Sandstone is not restricted to Grand Canyon. The same rock layer in central Utah is known as the Tintic Quartzite; in northeastern Utah it is the Lodore Quartzite; in Wyoming and Montana it is the Flathead Sandstone; in Colorado it is the Sawatch Sandstone; in South Dakota it is the Deadwood Quartzite; in the Midwest it is the St. Simon Sandstone; in the Ozarks it is the Lamotte Sandstone; and in northern New York state it is the Potsdam Sandstone. The confusion of names should not obscure the fact that it is one continuous sandstone layer; the Potsdam Sandstone of the Northeast is unbelievably similar to the Tapeats Sandstone of Arizona, complete with the Great Unconformity at the base and worm burrows near the top!

http://www.icr.org/article/geological-provincialism/
19
In fact ... I'll fill you in on my approach ...

Step 1 ... Use Bill Hoesch's article on Geologic Provincialism as a research outline ...

Step 2 ... Research the various sandstones named in his article and see if they correlate stratigraphically with one another ...

Step 3 ... use TR members for undergrad research and award honorary PhD's from AF Dave University if they do good work!

20
Go on, then, Dave. Show us this thing won't you?
Yes!  I will!  Patience!
21
Yeah!
What if you did?
Would it qualify as "continent-sized"?
Would it qualify as "incredibly flat"?
Would it qualify as "super duper thin"?

Would it qualify in any way as evidence for your Sunday School fable, or as evidence against standard science?  :dunno:
Well Yes, I'd say that 2000 miles across is pretty much continent-sized. And yeah if it's an average of 1000 feet thick that's incredibly thin. To put it in perspective it would be analogous to the thickness of a sheet of regular bond paper 39 in wide. Pretty sure it's super duper flat too. I'll let you know.
22
And there's no way anyone with a brain could possibly extrapolate the process we see operating at a beach over millions of years to imagine a continent sized, incredibly flat, super duper thin sandstone layer.

You'd have to have a frontal lobotomy to think that could happen.

Which is exactly why I say you guys have frontal lobotomies.
Try having a discussion without this juvenile resort to ridiculous insulting obvious bluster and bravado.
You know that ~ 100% of geologists (you know scientists who are NOT "Life" scientists, who have spent entire careers studying this stuff) conclude that the processes we see, extended over millions of years DO account for sedimentary rock. You know damn well they are not all brain damaged.

And - one more time -

there is no "continent sized, incredibly flat, super duper thin sandstone layer"

This is a LIE


Is it?

So what if I show you a sandstone layer that's 2000 miles across and averages 1000 feet thick?
23
As I said I'm interested in Sahara history ... check this out ... Lake Chad was the largest freshwater lake in the world UNTIL ONLY 1000 YEARS AGO.

I had not realized it was that large so recently.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3143617/Scientists-discover-Sahara-Desert-contained-world-s-largest-lake-named-Mega-Chad-1-000-years-ago-evaporated-just-years.html

24
So let me repeat my question Dave, as you seem to have misunderstood it:

So what data do you think are consistent with the first and NOT with the second?

And no, the mythical North American continent-sized "pancake-thin" "Tapeats sandstone" is NOT an answer.  It's a LIE.
No it's not.  It's right there.  In ground.

How do you know?

Specifically, how do you know its extent and thickness?
let's talk about it in the other thread
25
So let me repeat my question Dave, as you seem to have misunderstood it:

So what data do you think are consistent with the first and NOT with the second?

And no, the mythical North American continent-sized "pancake-thin" "Tapeats sandstone" is NOT an answer.  It's a LIE.
No it's not.  It's right there.  In ground.