Bioturbation

From: Bill Payne (bpayne15@juno.com)
Date: Sat May 24 2003 - 23:17:05 EDT

  • Next message: PASAlist@aol.com: "Re: The Tower of Babel - Less Confusing"

    On Sat, 22 Mar 2003 15:50:55 -0500 "bivalve"
    <bivalve@mail.davidson.alumlink.com> writes:

    > Most bivalves
    > normally live buried, so ordinary conditions are often adequate to
    > bury them beyong the reach of normal bioturbation.

    > Finally, the evidence of myriad separate events of rapid burial,
    > interspersed with abundant evidence of slow deposition or even
    > erosion, in no way supports a young earth.

    Hi David,

    Sorry I'm a little slow to respond, but as you can see I have continued
    to ponder what you said. In your post you made the point (snipped) that
    articulated bivalves (e.g. clams) live buried so when they die they may
    not become disarticulated. I had said that articulated bivalves were
    evidence of rapid burial, not thinking that they live in the sediment.

    Which raises another question that hadn't occurred to me earlier. If
    bivalves and other bottom dwellers constantly bioturbate the bottom of
    marine and fresh-water bodies, then why do we see layered strata
    throughout the geologic column? I once read (wish I had the reference
    but I don't) that a storm in the Gulf had blanketed the bottom with a
    layer of sand. Two days later the sand layer had been completely
    obliterated by bioturbation.

    Are you saying that layered sediment, as seen throughout the geologic
    record, is evidence of rapid burial - burial that was too rapid for
    bioturbation to occur?

    Bill

    ________________________________________________________________
    The best thing to hit the internet in years - Juno SpeedBand!
    Surf the web up to FIVE TIMES FASTER!
    Only $14.95/ month - visit www.juno.com to sign up today!



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat May 24 2003 - 23:25:37 EDT