Joined: Sep. 2009
|Quote (forastero @ Nov. 15 2011,15:19)|
|Quote (OgreMkV @ Nov. 15 2011,12:53)|
|Quote (OgreMkV @ Nov. 15 2011,09:13)|
|I still want to know where to look for the flood material. |
Interestingly, if forastero were to pick a coal bed between two igneous layers, then we could date that coal bed within a fairly tight range.
What do you think forastero? What do you estimate the likelihood of us finding a coal bed that can be dated to within 50,000 years of the present time? What range of error in dating techniques would be required to get that coal bed to your estimate of error?
And don't give me any guff about geological columns and "I didn't say anything about coal beds". You said it, you claimed it, these are the consequences.
I think I'm hurt. Forastero skipped right past my question. sigh... how will I ever go on?
BTW: I still want to know how a global flood can carve a meandering channel in limestone and then deposit 17,000 feet of sediment on top of it.
Shall I add this and the varve question to your outstanding list? I know you'll explain exactly what exploded to cause the Big Bang any time now. Oh, and don't forget the cal bed that covers the Earth. I really want to know about that one.
Think about it a coal bed that's on the order of 17,000 feet thick and covers the entire Earth. Talk about being a billionaire. Just tell me where to look forastero.
The same the Flood piled up over 2200 feet in Carboniferous Texas
THE MISSISSIPPIAN BARNETT FORMATION:
A SOURCE-ROCK, SEAL, AND RESERVOIR PRODUCED BY EARLY CARBONIFEROUS FLOODING OF THE TEXAS CRATON
forastero, i finally had time to read the paper on the Barnett shale. It is obvious that you didn't read it and I quote from the conclusion:
"the section is composed primarily of siliciclastic mudrocks of the
Barnett Formation. These rocks were deposited in below wave base conditions in a deep
water platform to slope setting." These rocks ain't no flood deposits.