Re: Brown Chases Tail Again In Stinking Mud

On Aug 19, 12:32 pm, Day Brown <daybr...@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Day Brown <daybr...@xxxxxxxxxx > wrote:
I dont know what Ballard knows Doug.
Presumably, he knows about
the *land grasses* preserved in the mud,
which would not be there if the
water level came up gradually.
If you have some other explanation for
how that could be there, I'd be grateful.
I just cannot think of any.
<snip>
For the land grasses to be in the sapropel,
<snip>

Day Brown keeps making this false claim over and over again.
He has not repsonded to requests for
a specific reference to the source of his claim.
I have not been able to obtain a description of
evidence of "land grasses", other than
a brief mention in Ryan's and Pitman's popular book,
which does not contain any futher reference.
That description leaves open the possibility that
what was found was not evidence of grasses
growing where evidence of grasses was found, but rather
bits of grass drifting in from somewhere else.
The evidence might have been seeds.
The evidence might have been an isotopic ratio
characteristic of terrestrial vegetation rather than of
marine life, suggesting that otherwise indescribable
vegetative remains might once have grown above
the water line.

The proof that Day Brown does not know
what he is talking about regarding "Land Grasses"
being found in Black Sea sediments is that he
continually misrepresents what he calims to have read
regarding Black Sea sediments.
Ryan and Pitman said that the supposed evidence of
"land grasses" was found in cracks in mud
underneath the sapropel, not _in_ the sapropel,
as Day Brown would have us believe.
A sapropel is a jelly-like organic-rich mud that forms
over centuries at the bottom of a stagnant water body.
Land grasses in a sapropel are evidence of transport of
remains of land grasses into a marine environment
unable to support the growth of any grasses at all.

Day Brown would also have us believe that these
"land grasses" immediately predate a catastrophic flood,
but no dates on the evidence of "land grasses"
have ever been reported. Or rather, I and numerous
search engines and databases have been able to
locate such a report over the decade since
that brief mention of "land grasses" was published.
Day Brown is simply assuming that
the cracks in which the "land grasses" were found
were not from the last known lowstand of
the shoreline of the Black Sea about five millennia
before the supposed catastrophic flood.

As for Day Brown being "grateful" for more ideas,
from his repeated failure to recognise
other ideas on the subject,
that would be a mis-statement.

Day Brown is not a reliable reporter.

- Daryl Krupa

.

Quantcast