Re: Owen's Two-Phase Model of Earth Expansion
From: Carsten Troelsgaard (carsten.troelsgaard_at_mail.dk)
Date: 03/06/05
- Next message: Stuart: "Re: Owen's Two-Phase Model of Earth Expansion"
- Previous message: Eugene Griessel: "Re: How do I buy a good geological hammer?"
- In reply to: Matt: "Re: Owen's Two-Phase Model of Earth Expansion"
- Next in thread: George: "Re: Owen's Two-Phase Model of Earth Expansion"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Sun, 6 Mar 2005 20:10:02 +0100
"Matt" <matt.edwards@utoronto.ca> skrev i en meddelelse
news:e25c654e.0503060747.4df7393a@posting.google.com...
> "George" <george@wtfiswrongwithyou.com> wrote in message
> news:<3q6Wd.32835$r55.30379@attbi_s52>...
>> "Matt" <matt.edwards@utoronto.ca> wrote in message
>> news:e25c654e.0503041137.2c2bc04e@posting.google.com...
>
>> > The decline in sea level shows a gradual drop going over the last 500
>> > million years at least. Egyed drew this from various sources. He
>> > used it as evidence for a slow EE model.
>>
>> Where do you get this information? That is utter crap. Sea level has
>> risen and
>> fallen hundreds of times (if not thousands) in the last 500 million
>> years, and
>> has many causes. That is a blanket statement like that demonstrates
>> clear lack
>> of direct field expereince. Fact: sea level changes are determined in
>> the rock
>> record by trends in sediment grain sizes and facies changes, trends which
>> only
>> tell you about regional changes. You can almost never correlate these
>> changes
>> from region to region. Many have tried. It doesn't work. There are too
>> many
>> facies changes, to many tectonic movements, too many unconformities to
>> say that
>> a specific change in sediment properties in China correlate to specific
>> sediment
>> changes in Wisconsin in the Mississippian, for example. Sometimes, you
>> can for
>> immediately adjacent basins, but very rarely. You need to learn how to
>> interpret stratigraphic columns. You should also learn two terms:
>> transgression, and regression, and two other concepts: coarsing/fining
>> upwards/downwards.
> I believe Egyed drew from biogeographical studies. Why would you not
> use the presence or absence of fossils of marine species to determine
> which parts of the Earth were underwater at a given time?
It's as little straightforward as you seem to imply through your attitude to
very different ages of the Scandinavian shield.
Far below the bottom of the North Sea (2-4 km) you find the same successions
as on land here - the interim has been very different for the two regions
though both are continental. Sifting out local & regional tectonic and
glacial events is needed. Vail et. al 1991 did that and came up with a
result that contradicts what you present
> The general
> emergence of the continents has been considered a given from the early
> days of geology.
Sources? I didn't know that, and I don't belive it.
> I don't see why you're making this more complicated
> than it need be. Every rendition of Pangaea or its supposed forbears
> that I've seen shows large segments submerged. Are you really
> implying that the continents are not now more exposed than ever
> before?
The ups and downs is a never ending story.
- Next message: Stuart: "Re: Owen's Two-Phase Model of Earth Expansion"
- Previous message: Eugene Griessel: "Re: How do I buy a good geological hammer?"
- In reply to: Matt: "Re: Owen's Two-Phase Model of Earth Expansion"
- Next in thread: George: "Re: Owen's Two-Phase Model of Earth Expansion"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|