Re: Erosional rates
- From: "Eigenvector" <m44_master@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 25 May 2006 16:36:22 -0700
<rjtrembgeologist@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1148581099.031510.182860@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Your question depends on many complex geologic variables. However, IBut what about if the earth was expan......Nope, not going to say it. Don't
think its safe to say that over geologic time the denudation rate and
sedimentation rate is equal. When you think about it, there is no
other conclusion that would be valid. Matter can neither be created or
destroyed.
Sediments just get shifted around.
want to give the EE'ers any more opportunities to fuel their arguments.
I guess on the suface that seems to make sense, I think some guy made a glib
remark to the same effect earlier in this thread only I think your statement
was much more descriptive and thoughtful.
Perhaps what I was referring to was the overall *roughness* of the surface
of the earth rather than anything, but erosion covers that too. You're
right, if it sinks under it has to pop back up somewhere, I guess I"m
envisioning a giant global shallow sea filled with sediment and a broad flat
archipeligo of islands in a few billion years.
Hmm, I probably shouldn't beat this horse, I certainly don't have the
knowledge to argue with so I guess I'll read more about geomorphology and
see what happens.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Erosional rates
- From: Carsten Troelsgaard
- Re: Erosional rates
- From: J. Taylor
- Re: Erosional rates
- From: don findlay
- Re: Erosional rates
- References:
- Erosional rates
- From: Eigenvector
- Re: Erosional rates
- From: rjtrembgeologist
- Erosional rates
- Prev by Date: Re: Erosional rates
- Next by Date: Re: Erosional rates
- Previous by thread: Re: Erosional rates
- Next by thread: Re: Erosional rates
- Index(es):