[_ Old Earth _] Columnar Basalt/Lava Flows vs The Flood

[jwu]

Again, how do you account for this igneous activity in sedimentary strata

that had formed previously, without invoking the igneous intrusion

argument I used above? This is not a thin strat. The majority of the

intrusion would not have been in close proximity to the surface, even if the

other overlying start was not present at the time (which I don't think is the

case).

I don't understand your point. How is this supposed to be a problem for my line of reasoning with the columnar basalt? Intrusions happen all the time, and they can pierce a lot of strata. Else there wouldn't be volcanoes...

Are the Ar/Ar dates are available for each sequence? All
this igneous activity in such close proximity points to a single event or
"episode" of events, penetrating several strata in a short period of time
versus separate events spaced out over millions of years.

I'm not aware of any available datings on the internet at least. That's irrelevant to the subject at hand anyway though: That when these columnar basalts and welded tufffs formed the strata on which they are found were not covered by water, which falsifies the idea that these were laid down by a global flood. Or do you want to say that these basalts aren't actually in permian/carboniferous/whatever(respectively) strata andthe strata were misidentified?

 

[Charlie Hatchett]

I'm not aware of any available datings on the internet at least. That's irrelevant to the subject at hand anyway though: That when these columnar basalts and welded tufffs formed the strata on which they are found were not covered by water, which falsifies the idea that these were laid down by a global flood. Or do you want to say that these basalts aren't actually in permian/carboniferous/whatever(respectively) strata andthe strata were misidentified?

I think reviewing the dating of each of the igneous formation might shed

more light on what's happening in this region.

Mississippian, Pennsylvanian and Permian strata lay comformably upon one

another for the majority of the world wide sequence. Obviously some kind of

mechanism (like igneous activity) has caused a local uncomformity in the

geologic sequence.

 

[jwu]

How so? Due to the composition of the basalt it is clear that it wasn't the result of a subterraneous intrusion but that it was exposed to the surface and air when it formed. That's all that is relevant to its relation to the supposed noachian flood; that we pretty much know for sure that there was no global flood going on at the time when that layer of basalt was formed.

Obviously some kind of
mechanism (like igneous activity) has caused a local uncomformity in the
geologic sequence.

What kind of unconformity are you talking about, and how could it"save the flood"? Besides, such basalts and welded tuffs exist all over the earth, it's not a rare local irregularity.

 

[Charlie Hatchett]

jwu:

How so? Due to the composition of the basalt it is clear that it wasn't the result of a subterraneous intrusion but that it was exposed to the surface and air when it formed. That's all that is relevant to its relation to the supposed noachian flood; that we pretty much know for sure that there was no global flood going on at the time when that layer of basalt was formed.

charlie:

Obviously some kind of
mechanism (like igneous activity) has caused a local uncomformity in the
geologic sequence.

jwu:


What kind of unconformity are you talking about, and how could it"save the flood"? Besides, such basalts and welded tuffs exist all over the earth, it's not a rare local irregularity.

I think reviewing the dating of each of the igneous formation might shed

more light on what's happening in this region.

Mississippian, Pennsylvanian and Permian strata lay comformably upon one

another for the majority of the world wide sequence. Obviously some kind of

mechanism (like igneous activity) has caused a local uncomformity in the

geologic sequence.

I wonder if a review of each of the igneous formations Ar/Ar dates would

reveal the same age: Tertiary?

It's very plausible that each of these strata were penetrated by the same

igneous event. The columnar basalt and other igneous formations requiring

air to form could have been easily exposed to air, through the twisting and

buckling of the strata in response to the rapid upflow of massive amounts of

igneous material.

Remember also, the air requiring formations could have been

exposed from the side versus the top.

 

[jwu]

I wonder if a review of each of the igneous formations Ar/Ar dates would
reveal the same age: Tertiary?

Extremely unlikely as they could not possibly have formed in the tertiary.

The columnar basalt and other igneous formations requiring
air to form could have been easily exposed to air, through the twisting and
buckling of the strata in response to the rapid upflow of massive amounts of
igneous material.

I think you might be missing the point, It does not require air contact for some chemical reasons, but because of the shape and characteristic cooling speed of the layers. They have a flat surface, that's not what instrusions look like (these form bubbles and irregular shapes) but pools of lava which gathered at the surface. And furthermore they have to cool down slowly and from one direction. A bit of air somewhere down in a cave (which would be filled with basalt anyway, high pressure...) wouldn't have that effect.

Remember also, the air requiring formations could have been

exposed from the side versus the top.

No, even if air was present in sufficient quantities to ensure a slow cooling, this would not result in vertical columns then but horizontal ones.

 

[Charlie Hatchett]

Thought you might find this interesting:



http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news ... anoes.html


I'm still purusing it.

...Unlike volcanic activity at mid-ocean ridges, island arc volcanoes can remain fixed over their magma sources for thousands of years, allowing them to sometimes grow above water level and become islands...

Here's another interesting link:

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news ... ume_2.html

...The new data on hydrothermal fields and megaplumes underscores the fact that volcanic activity on the ocean floor remains a largely mysterious phenomenon.

"Ninety percent of the Earth's volcanic activity takes place underwater," Murton said. "Just because we can't see it doesn't mean it's not there..."

Here's a cool movie of an underwater vent:

http://www.oceanexplorer.noaa.gov/explo ... _wm320.wmv

Another type of cone formed within the Galápagos archipelago is called a welded tuff cone. Tuff is the name designated for volcanic rock that is formed by the consolidation of very small pyroclasts. Welded tuff is only formed when a particular eruption occurs at extremely high heat. The pyroclasts actually fuse together, to form large sloping peaks. One particularly good example of a welded tuff cone comes from around the island of San Cristóbal, called Leon Dormido (also known as Kicker Rock). The shoe like appearance as seen in this photograph taken from our ship at dusk, helps to explain why the formation is called "Kicker Rock". It is debated that this particular formation may have also formed underwater, in which case it would be categorized as palagonite.

Another type of cone formed within the Galápagos archipelago is called a welded tuff cone. Tuff is the name designated for volcanic rock that is formed by the consolidation of very small pyroclasts. Welded tuff is only formed when a particular eruption occurs at extremely high heat. The pyroclasts actually fuse together, to form large sloping peaks. One particularly good example of a welded tuff cone comes from around the island of San Cristóbal, called Leon Dormido (also known as Kicker Rock). The shoe like appearance as seen in this photograph taken from our ship at dusk, helps to explain why the formation is called "Kicker Rock". It is debated that this particular formation may have also formed underwater, in which case it would be categorized as palagonite.

http://www.geol.umd.ed[img]u/~jmerck/galsite/research/projects/kase/volcano.html

[/quote]


[img]http://www.hawaii.edu/environment/ainakumuwai/assets/src_images/stage3.1.jpg

One explanation of how columnar basalt is exposed beneath other strata.




I'll reply to your points more formally this weekend. I just thought you'd find

these interesting.

 

[jwu]

One explanation of how columnar basalt is exposed beneath other strata.

What exactly do you mean? How would a landslide affect the current situation with flat layers of columnar

Another type of cone formed within the Galápagos archipelago is called a welded tuff cone. Tuff is the name designated for volcanic rock that is formed by the consolidation of very small pyroclasts. Welded tuff is only formed when a particular eruption occurs at extremely high heat. The pyroclasts actually fuse together, to form large sloping peaks. One particularly good example of a welded tuff cone comes from around the island of San Cristóbal, called Leon Dormido (also known as Kicker Rock). The shoe like appearance as seen in this photograph taken from our ship at dusk, helps to explain why the formation is called "Kicker Rock". It is debated that this particular formation may have also formed underwater, in which case it would be categorized as palagonite.

Palagonite structures (the result of basaltic lava making contact with water) is one thing, a large flat layer of welded tuff as the result of a pyroclastic cloud a different one.

The former look like those on the video - a atructure which forms exactly where the lava ejects, but that's not like the remains of such a cloud at all:

A flat layer, not some oddly shaped structure.

 

[Charlie Hatchett]

jwu:

Palagonite structures (the result of basaltic lava making contact with water) is one thing, a large flat layer of welded tuff as the result of a pyroclastic cloud a different one.

jwu:

Welded Tuffs are a similar case. They are rock which formed as the remains of a pyroclastic flow - grains baked together by lots of heat.
It's easy to see that this won't work underwater, for there no such flows can form. Yet tuffs are found in pretty much all strata.

Another type of cone formed within the Galápagos archipelago is called a welded tuff cone. Tuff is the name designated for volcanic rock that is formed by the consolidation of very small pyroclasts. Welded tuff is only formed when a particular eruption occurs at extremely high heat. The pyroclasts actually fuse together, to form large sloping peaks. One particularly good example of a welded tuff cone comes from around the island of San Cristóbal, called Leon Dormido (also known as Kicker Rock). The shoe like appearance as seen in this photograph taken from our ship at dusk, helps to explain why the formation is called "Kicker Rock". It is debated that this particular formation may have also formed underwater, in which case it would be categorized as palagonite.

subaerial

Deep underwater.


Also, underwater flows have been documented up to 73 km. The flows travel

in a "bubble" of vaporized water. This means there's some pretty darn high

temperatures going on in these sub-zero waters.


As to how columnar basalt can become exposed:

 

[jwu]

Source?

And besides, that then produces an underwater lava flow with distinct shape with palagonites where it made contact to the water. It does not produce square kilometres of even "fallout" of hot ashes and with nothing else present. That's a completely different thing.

As to how columnar basalt can become exposed:

Exposed, ok, nice...but how did it form? That's the relevant question!

 

[Charlie Hatchett]

jwu:

Source?

Another type of cone formed within the Galápagos archipelago is called a welded tuff cone. Tuff is the name designated for volcanic rock that is formed by the consolidation of very small pyroclasts. Welded tuff is only formed when a particular eruption occurs at extremely high heat. The pyroclasts actually fuse together, to form large sloping peaks. One particularly good example of a welded tuff cone comes from around the island of San Cristóbal, called Leon Dormido (also known as Kicker Rock). The shoe like appearance as seen in this photograph taken from our ship at dusk, helps to explain why the formation is called "Kicker Rock". It is debated that this particular formation may have also formed underwater, in which case it would be categorized as palagonite.

Another type of cone formed within the Galápagos archipelago is called a welded tuff cone. Tuff is the name designated for volcanic rock that is formed by the consolidation of very small pyroclasts. Welded tuff is only formed when a particular eruption occurs at extremely high heat. The pyroclasts actually fuse together, to form large sloping peaks. One particularly good example of a welded tuff cone comes from around the island of San Cristóbal, called Leon Dormido (also known as Kicker Rock). The shoe like appearance as seen in this photograph taken from our ship at dusk, helps to explain why the formation is called "Kicker Rock". It is debated that this particular formation may have also formed underwater, in which case it would be categorized as palagonite.

http://www.geol.umd.edu/~jmerck/galsite ... lcano.html

 

[Charlie Hatchett]

As to how columnar basalt can become exposed:

jwu:

Exposed, ok, nice...but how did it form? That's the relevant question!

In the neck of the structure.

Then a landslide removes the material surrounding the neck.

 

[jwu]

In the neck, ok...but how does this account for the formation of large flat layers of columnar basalt. I don't understand how this relates to each other.

 

[Charlie Hatchett]

In the neck, ok...but how does this account for the formation of large flat layers of columnar basalt. I don't understand how this relates to each other.

Necks, vents and fissures can twist and turn vertically and horizontally, winding

their way toward the surface.

 

[jwu]

That can explain how things which can only form deep in the earth can make it to the surface, but not vice versa (and it'd leave tons of traces). It does not explain how things which can only form at the surface can get down there (with untouched overlying strata)

 

[Charlie Hatchett]

That can explain how things which can only form deep in the earth can make it to the surface, but not vice versa (and it'd leave tons of traces). It does not explain how things which can only form at the surface can get down there (with untouched overlying strata)

You can actually see this twisting and turning to a certain degree in the photo

we were referring to above.

and this one also:

Why would a vent, neck or crack in the earths crust have to go up vertically

only.

These necks, vents and fissures occured, and then further

igneous activity...say a month or two later, would cover the deposit of

columnar basalt....and then again, and again....This is how many islands

are formed.

 

[jwu]

Why would a vent, neck or crack in the earths crust have to go up vertically

only.

They do open like that, but only rarely will the result be horizontal columnar basalt - as it simply flows out instead of waiting in there to cool.

However, what does this have to do with the subject at hand?

These necks, vents and fissures occured, and then further
igneous activity...say a month or two later, would cover the deposit of
columnar basalt....and then again, and again....This is how many islands
are formed.

And when exactly did those fissures occur? Before the flood or during the flood?

And besides most/many examples of columnar basalt are the result of pools of lava which did flow out of some crater or opening and collected in some valley, not just some magma filled necks which hit the surface.

 

[Charlie Hatchett]

And when exactly did those fissures occur? Before the flood or during the flood?

Mississippian, Pennsylvanian and Permian strata lay comformably upon one

another for the majority of the world wide sequence. Obviously some kind of

mechanism (like igneous activity) has caused a local uncomformity in the

geologic sequence.

In short, after the flood...

 

[jwu]

This looks like a desperate ad-hoc rationalization.

Due to the type of this igneous rock however that cannot possibly have happened. That was the whole point of the thread. It requires these strata to be exposed to the surface, to air - but according to the flood model it wasn't.
Events after the flood cannot account for the many layers of nice strata above it, it is very clearly not the result of landslides but sedimentary and igneous strata just like elsewhere. Or do you claim that geologists cannot distinguish landslide rubble from limestone?

And these aren't rare "exceptions". There are tons of instances of this all over the geologic column.

Do you even consider the possibility that your flood model might be incorrect?

 

[Charlie Hatchett]

This looks like a desperate ad-hoc rationalization.

Due to the type of this igneous rock however that cannot possibly have happened. That was the whole point of the thread. It requires these strata to be exposed to the surface, to air - but according to the flood model it wasn't.
Events after the flood cannot account for the many layers of nice strata above it, it is very clearly not the result of landslides but sedimentary and igneous strata just like elsewhere. Or do you claim that geologists cannot distinguish landslide rubble from limestone?

And these aren't rare "exceptions". There are tons of instances of this all over the geologic column.

Do you even consider the possibility that your flood model might be incorrect?

Sorry you see this as a desperate ad-hoc rationalization., but it's straight up Geology 101 my man. Remember the exposure to air was facilitated by the neck and fissure openings...after the flood strata was laid down. This is necessary because the igneous intrusion penetrates (happened after) the flood strata.

I've of course questioned the flood hypothesis, but have been unable to falsify it to date.

Let me ask you this: how did the columnar basalt in the above photo stay in place while it cooled. It had to be contained by something. My contention is the once overlying and side-filling sediments have been eroded away.

Here's other similar occurances:

Note that all the exposures occur on very steep hillsides or cliffs, where landslides and heavy erosional forces are prevalent.

 

[jwu]

Let me ask you this: how did the columnar basalt in the above photo stay in place while it cooled. It had to be contained by something. My contention is the once overlying and side-filling sediments have been eroded away.

That's a neck.

Sorry you see this as a desperate ad-hoc rationalization., but it's straight up Geology 101 my man. Remember the exposure to air was facilitated by the neck and fissure openings...after the flood strata was laid down. This is necessary because the igneous intrusion penetrates (happened after) the flood strata.

Necks are bad examples because they do not require exposure to air on a large surface, but there are plenty of plains:

These are very clearly not intrusion necks but large plains that got flooded by lava and which cooled while exposed to the surface. Intrusions don't form such nice flat layers.
The last image seems to be the result of a cooling downhill lava flow - it doesn't bear any resemblance to the curved columns of neck basalt as visible in your first picture.

Note that all the exposures occur on very steep hillsides or cliffs, where landslides and heavy erosional forces are prevalent.

Umm...because only there we can see it without excavating it on our own.

And again, do you seriously assert that geologist cannot distinguish landslide rubble from sedimentary strata?

And where is the mountain whose landslide covered this:
http://volcanoes.usgs.gov/yvo/images/20 ... _large.jpg

Where did all that rock above the basalt come from in merely 4000 years:
http://www.cas.sc.edu/geog/gsgdocs/imag ... inting.jpg

Note that all the exposures occur on very steep hillsides or cliffs, where landslides and heavy erosional forces are prevalent.

And all that erosion happened in merely 4000 years?

And how about the welded tuffs anyway?