Re: Precambrian geology (1)

Allen Roy (
Fri, 9 Apr 1999 21:59:47 -0700

Sorry for the delay in responding. With Spring break and a family funeral
it has taken time to get back into the frame of mind to take up the
discussion again. :)

> From: Jonathan Clarke <>
> Allen Roy wrote:
> > So, many simply use the conventional termonology with adjustments in
> > meaning, while recognizing that this may not be as accurate as a
> > record devolped by catastophic thinking.
> To me this implies you accept biostratigraphy. I know you do not accept
> numerical ages equate with actual chronological ages. But do you believe
> they are internally consistent? That a Cambrian rock will always give a
> numerical age of 540-510 Ma for example (even though it is in fact only
> years old).

Biostratigraphy is acceptable over a local (a few hundred miles in any
direction) area but not usually accpeted on a global basis.

John Woodmorappe has done alot of literary research which shows that
radiometric ages are not internall nor externally consistent. I refer you
to his publications.

> > I prefer to only deal with formations and their superpositional
> > relationships with other formations.
> If you do reject biostratigraphy then certainly all you are left with is
> lithostratigraphy. Do you believe that inter regional correlation is
> possible? What methods do you use?

I believe that Creationary Catastrophists put most emphasis on
lithostratigraphy. Global correlation may not be possible. Within the
asteroid impact flood model, the stratigraphy will be affected greatly by
relationship to impact sites. While some impacts would make deposition
over large parts of the globe, most would only affect smaller regions.

> Surely you need to think about the specifics. I understand you run
> trips to the Grand Canyon. Doesn't this require you to think about
> in a real world situation? Does it not also require you to test others
> theories against what you see?

At Grand Canyon, there are proposed lines of demarcation for the beginning
of the Flood and post Flood events such as the carving of the Canyon.
However, my point was that just because we might consider the great
unconformity below the Tapeats Sandstone as the initial point of the Flood
here at Grand Canyon, that may not mean that the same holds true for some
other unconformity between supposed Pre-Cambrian and Cambrian eras
somewhere else. Each site would have to be interpreted within it's own
context or setting. In general, it is usually proposed that the line of
demarcation for the initation of the Flood catastrophe is the general lack
of fossils below and fossiliferous strata above.