CompuServe Messages

#Fold mountains

    19-Mar-95 02:51:36
Sb: #174161-#Fold mountains
Fm: Don Kenney 72630,3560
To: Ed Fisher/PA 72324,264
>>>Until, of course, there is deposition on top of the stubs, as there is already in GA and AL where the southern range disappears under the Mesozoic. Should that area ever be uplifted and subsequently eroded, newly re-exposed faults and folds will once again provide relief.<<< I'd think that if erosion proceeds to the point of actually flattening out the countryside and the area is then uplifted again, new drainage patterns will develop away from the center of the uplift. There may certainly be traces of the former drainage pattern. What makes me sceptical of the Appalachians as a reuplifted range is that the major drainage patterns either follow the folds or, in the case of rivers like the New and Susquehanna seem to predate the folding entirely. The drainage is what you'd expect to see in a folded mountain range, not a folded range that has eroded, then re-emerged. There is also the question of why No Middle or Lower Mesozoic sediments occur around the ranges. There are, not suprisingly, some sedimentary layers in the Triassic Jurrasic Rift Valley deposits along the East Coast, but no particular evidence (that I'm aware of) that the sediments originated in the Appalachians. I really can't see any hard evidence that the Applachians are older than the Early Cretaceous. The whole thing looks kind of like bending the facts — moderate erosion — maybe 100,000,000 years worth to fit modern theory that requires the mountains to be three times that old. Don't know why this bothers me. I don't really much care how old the Appalachians are. Of course I don't know enough about geology (other than what sediments are found where) to even qualify as an informed amateur so what do I know?