>From: Bill Payne [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]
>Sent: Thursday, May 02, 2002 7:43 PM
>On Thu, 2 May 2002 06:38:42 -0700 "Glenn Morton"
>We also both know that there is nothing planar about the Okefenokee, yet
>eastern US coals primarily have planar, sharp contacts with the substrate
>and with partings in the coal. And these planar coals may cover
>thousands of square miles.
>Now, Glenn, will you admit that the evidence regarding these coal seams
>in the eastern US points toward an allochthonous origin, even though they
>cover most of the eastern half of the continent?
>As you should know, your answer will carry a lot of baggage if you are
>willing to follow the evidence where it leads. To date, you have avoided
>the implications through the use of some microscopic analogy like the
>Okefenokee. Come on, join the hunt. Fraid of gettin snake-bit?
Bill, what the Pennsylvanian cyclothems lead to is a broad flat plain in
which tiny changes in sea level cause the sea shore to move many miles.
Something like the Rann of Cutch is what had to be there. In such a flat
area, the sedimentation rate is low so a change from shale to peat
deposition will appear to the geologist to have happened quite rapidly
Bill, there is nothing new in what I am saying, most people hold to such a
view for the Pennsylvanian coal seams. You think you can turn it inot a YEC
argument. That dog won't hunt for anyone but you.
for lots of creation/evolution information
personal stories of struggle
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri May 03 2002 - 09:43:36 EDT