tgamble

I think it's the guy who reffered to it only posted 45. it was always about 114. Through I can't be sure of that I guess. It's definitely the same page.

ps418

This is one of my favorite flood geology subjects. For the past few weeks Ive been collecting papers on marine hardgrounds and rock-boring bivalve traces (ichnogenus Gastrochaenolites) found in hardgrounds from the Pennsylvanian to the present. The morphology of these borings demonstrates that the bivalves attached to the hardgrounds as tiny larvae, and bored downward through the lithified substrate, and enlarged the boring as they grew in place, resulting in a vase-shaped boring with a tiny aperature at the hardgrounds surface through which the siphon protrudes.



Bivalve and sponge borings from Holocene, Dominican Republic:



An example from Glen Rose, TX.



One of the earliest examples: G. lapidicus, from the Pennsylvanian (Wilson and Plamer, 1998). The thin, cylindrical boring is Trypanites:



The bivalve borings would take about a year or so to reach the adult dimensions seen in most Gastrochaenolites, assuming that they grew at the fastest modern boring rates (Kleeman, 1996). In many hardgrounds there are demonstrably several generations of such borings.

You also have to take into account the fact that the hardground substrate was lithified before the boring was excavated, as indicated by the fact that the borings cross-cut and truncate solid shells and early cements in the substrate. Again, it would take at least a few years of exposure at the sediment-water interface for this to happen, at the fastest moden rates. At this is only the time to form a thin, lithified crust, whereas some hardgrounds are 20cm or more thick.

[Also, the lack of compaction in most carbonates also shows that the they were lithified before the weight of overburden became sufficient produce compaction.]

Another piece of evidence indicating that the hardground surfaces remained unburied at the sediment-water interface for many years is that hardground surfaces are often mineralized by glauconites or phosphates. This is happening today also, but only in marine environments where sedimentation is either nil or extremely slow.

So, the flood is too short to fit in even a single bivalve-bored hardground, much less the hundreds of such hardgrounds that have actually been described.

<a href="http://ftp.ngdc.noaa.gov/mgg/sepm/jsr/67.3/nicolaides.HTML" target="_blank">Journal of Sedimentary Research: SUBMARINE CEMENTATION AND SUBAERIAL EXPOSURE IN OLIGO-MIOCENE TEMPERATE CARBONATES, TORQUAY BASIN, AUSTRALIA </a>

<a href="http://www.ngdc.noaa.gov/mgg/sepm/palaios/9810/gibert.html" target="_blank">Entobia Ichnofacies in Fossil Rocky Shores, Lower Pliocene, Northwestern Mediterranean </a> Shows Pliocene bivalve borings.


Another thing I'm looking at now is stromatolites, which ruled the earth for billions of years. The precambrian geologic record is chock-full of huge stromatolites. There are accumulations that are 100's of meters thick. Studies of modern stromatolites show that they grow at rates of less than about a mm a year. Yet I've never heard any YECs explain how these things fit into a 1500 year preflood earth history.


Kleeman, K.H., 1996. Biocorrosion by bivalves. Marine Ecology 17, 145-158.

Wilson, M.A. and T. J. Palmer. 1998. The earliest Gastrochaenolites (Early Pennsylvanian, Arkansas, USA): an Upper Paleozoic bivalve boring? Journal of Paleontology 72: 769-772.

[ March 03, 2002: Message edited by: ps418 ]</p>

John Solum

I assumed that he added more since the numbering of the "reasons" is different. In any case, I agree that it's the same guy.

ps418

I read this paper the other day at the library. The paper shows photos of amazingly well-preserved bee nests and coleopteran pupal chambers in some late Cretaceous paleosols. These are by far the best examples of insect trace fossils I've ever seen.

Genise et al., 2002. Fossil bee nests, coleopteran pupal chambers and tuffaceous paleosols from the Late Cretaceous Laguna Palacios Formation, Central Patagonia (Argentina).Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology 177, pp. 215-235.

The Late Cretaceous Laguna Palacios Formation in Central Patagonia (San Jorge Basin), southern South America, is composed of tuffaceous deposits supplied by periodical volcanic ash falls partly reworked by rivers, on broad plains. Variations in ash-fall rates allowed the formation of stacked, mature paleosols, which are one of the most characteristic features of this formation. The mature paleosols show well-developed horizons, ped structure and bear an intricate network of trace fossils mostly produced by small roots and invertebrates.

Two different insect trace fossils could be recognized in this formation: sweat bee nests and coleopteran pupal chambers. Fossil bee nests are composed of inclined tunnels with cells attached to them by means of short necks, a typical construction of bees of the subfamily Halictinae. Similar halictine constructions were reported from the Cretaceous of the USA.

Coleopteran pupal chambers are discrete, ovoid structures, having an internal cavity with a smooth surface, and an outer wall of lumpy appearance composed of different layers of soil material. They are commonly constructed by the larvae of different families of Coleoptera.

Similar trace fossils were previously reported from the Asencio Formation (Late Cretaceous-Early Tertiary) of Uruguay and from the Djadokhta Formation of Mongolia (Late Cretaceous). . .

Ecological preferences of Halictinae, as well as some features of the nests, suggest a temperate, seasonal climate and an environment dominated by low vegetation for the Laguna Palacios Formation, which is also compatible with sedimentologic and pedogenic evidence. The morphology of the nests, typical of North American halictinae, adds more evidence to the hypothesis of the existence of faunal interchange between North and South America by the Late Cretaceous.

Coragyps

That's wonderfully ironic somehow, don't you think? Plese tell me they dug it up when they took the tires off the Creation Science Museum!

[ March 03, 2002: Message edited by: Coragyps ]</p>

ps418

This is another one of my favorite examples of the "almost complete absence of animal activity" in the geologic record. There are several dozen of these giant termite nests weathering out of the Morrison Formation in the San Juan area, some up o 40 meters tall (note: much or most of this would have been below ground level.) According to the press release from 1997:

The pillars were built in ancient sand dunes by the insects, which used their saliva, feces and partially digested woody material to bond the sand grains together. The fossilized nests resemble and rival the size of modern giant termite nests found in Africa and Australia today, he [Hastiotis] said.

Simple and compound “galleries,” or tunnels radiate out from the central nest chambers, which are as large as Frisbees, he said. There even is evidence of ancient fungal gardens in the nests as large as softballs. Fungal gardens found in termite nests today are known to regulate nest heat and humidity.

Hasiotis, S. T. 1997. Gigantic termite (Insecta: Isoptera) nests from the Upper Jurassic Morrison Formation, northwestern New Mexico: New implications to isopteran evolution and environmental settings: Geological Society of America, Abstracts With Programs, v. 29, no. 6, p. A-461.

[ March 03, 2002: Message edited by: ps418 ]

[ March 03, 2002: Message edited by: ps418 ]</p>

gravitybow

(6) The purpose of the flood was to destroy all human beings. This could only refer to a worldwide flood.
(16) An analysis of population growth statistics confirms that there was zero population at the estimated time of the end of the flood. This indicates the global demise of humans by Noah's flood.

vs.

(13) There is a worldwide tradition among natives of a global flood.

Where did all the natives come from?

(edited to add #16)

[ March 03, 2002: Message edited by: gravitybow ]</p>

Quetzal

Did y'all happen to notice on the website John referenced that over 50% of the "evidence" is based solely on the bible? Even a fair number of the so-called "logical" evidences are pure biblical (where they're not simply circular). A couple of my favorites:

(6) The purpose of the flood was to destroy all human beings. This could only refer to a worldwide flood. Gee, I guess it's logical to infer this IF you accept that there was a flood in the first place...

#8-11 all assume that an Ark existed. Since an Ark existed, the only reason that it would have been needed was if there was a Flood. Does this sound more than a bit circular to anyone? And this is from the "logic" section.

Number 12, however, wins my vote as the most illogical statement in the whole thing: "(12) If God made a promise based on a lie (ie. that the flood being local rather than global), then he can't be trusted to save us from our sins. Guess that means if there wasn't a flood, God doesn't exist. It's great that God disappeared in such an insightful flash of logic - and from a creationist no less...

tgamble

I think this is more of an argument that the flood in the bible wasn't a local one as some Christians claim.

Boro Nut

To the total bemusement of Eskimos floating on the pack-ice presumably.

Boro Nut