CompuServe Thread

#Catastrophic Geo &Rivers

16 messages in this thread
#141823From: Kamron KirkconnellAug 16, 1994 6:55 AM
Rivers for the most part all run in faults and cracks in the earth's crust. This is most apparent in canyons like the Snake River canyon, Grand Canyon and Santa Elena in Big Bend Texas. These canyons in many places have vertical walls that run a consistent width Remove the rubble filling the bottom of the canyon and you can mentally push the canyon back together. The Grand Canyon has huge islands of crust standing within the canyon. The river would not have cut down alternately each side of these stranding them in the canyon. I say the cracks were formed by the catastrophe and the rivers all follow them.
#141862From: Greg LadenAug 16, 1994 12:45 PM
Kamron: You have a great imagination, and that's a good thing! A few comments. It is really true taht rivers for the most part run along faults, although it is true that there are numerous rivers that are partly or largely controlled by fault structuring. In "highly evolved" and often in superimposed terrain, faults are often eventually left out of the picture, even if they were involved early on in controlling the hydrology of a river system. The erosional pattern seen around the Colorado River in the grand canyon is not really very inegmatic, and it is not necessary to posultate a catastrophe to explain the buttes and mesa-like formations of the canyon edge or the free-standing features. This is more typical of erosion in a relatively dry terrain, and in this case, controlled at a different level by the ever-flowing Colorodo (ever-flowing not meaning forever, but just through all seasons) which drains highlands with lots of snow and various amounts of rainfall. Cheers, GTL – Greg Laden, Written 16-Aug-1994 @ 13:18:41 Using: Windows NavCIS PRO 1.25
#141963From: Kamron KirkconnellAug 16, 1994 11:28 PM
The separation of the two sides in vertical wall canyons like snake river and all along the Rio Grande in Texas and New Mexico where in may places the crack runs through flat areas. It is obviously pulled apart. The continuation of the Grand Canyon fault directly into the east pacific rise connects it to a very significant fault. This canyon again was pulled apart.
#142034From: Greg LadenAug 17, 1994 12:02 PM
Oh. – Greg Laden, Written 17-Aug-1994 @ 12:28:24 Using: Windows NavCIS PRO 1.25
#142126From: Bill Webb /CAAug 17, 1994 11:47 PM
Kamron.. >> It is obviously pulled apart. << Obvious to whom? Not me, certainly. Perhaps you can explain why it is obvious to you. There are at least 8 faults running ACROSS the Grand Canyon, that is, NOT parallel to the direction of the river. I am not aware that any run parallel, but I may be out of touch on that one. So which fault are we talking about in the "Grand Canyon fault"? And its continuation into the East Pacific Rise.. do you have cites on this? Bill
#142384From: Kamron KirkconnellAug 19, 1994 6:40 PM
Bill The Grand Canyon _is_ the fault. Most canyons have tremendous fracturing in all directions that caused rapid erosion of side fractures. They also have stepped vertical sections were large hunks calved off the face into the bottom of the crack to be carried away eventually by water. Liquid basalt also entered the cracks from below in places plugging the bottom. The Grand Canyon has a lot of side fractures. If you look though at the side fractures they also have vertical walls even though there is only minor water flow down this tributary. It is tougher to see it in canyons of this type. There are canyons all over the world however with clean exactly matching faces. These are irrefutable evidence that they are split apart from each other and not cut by erosion. When you look for this it becomes obvious.
#141868From: SyndesisAug 16, 1994 1:34 PM
By the way, who do you think killed Kennedy? 🙂
#141887From: Norman ReitzelAug 16, 1994 3:20 PM
John, >> … who do you think killed Kennedy? Oswald, acting alone. He was -such- a nut case even the KGB didn't want him. — Norm
#141913From: Greg LadenAug 16, 1994 5:53 PM
>> By the way, who do you think killed Kennedy? 🙂 << Kennedy? Killed? Is that what they told you? – Greg Laden, Written 16-Aug-1994 @ 18:50:29 Using: Windows NavCIS PRO 1.25
#142042From: SyndesisAug 17, 1994 1:28 PM
Actually, I think Kennedy was simply bumped out of orbit by a passing "wandering star." 🙂 There's also a theory that he was hit by small, fast-moving ice comets: they do a lot of damage, but all that's left is water and dust.
#142051From: Mark WarrianAug 17, 1994 2:17 PM
John, In some really cheesy 'newsletter,' I once saw the allegation that just as certain 'well connected' British writers supposedly put clues in their writing about the real identity of Jack the Ripper, certain well connect American entertainer/arts supposedly put clues through the movie "The Graduate" as to who really killed Kennedy. Don't know myself. … Mark
#142211From: Greg LadenAug 18, 1994 4:26 PM
>> There's also a theory that he was hit by small, fast-moving ice comets: they do a lot of damage, but all that's left is water and dust. << And a sample bag full of dust is known to have mysteriously disappeared from an FBI evidence room but was later seen in the Soviet Embassy in Mexico City…. – Greg Laden, Written 18-Aug-1994 @ 17:16:12 Using: Windows NavCIS PRO 1.25
#141961From: Kamron KirkconnellAug 16, 1994 11:28 PM
Wasn't Oswald……Too many bullets too fast for his old carbine…. No comment on the big cracks in the crust? Or are you linking the missing gunmen with the missing crust?
#141994From: Jay MuzaAug 17, 1994 1:37 AM
I think Kamron Kirkconnell is a geologist with a healthy imagination for producing thought provoking questions for all to debunk. After all, what started the K/T boundary controversy was Walter and Luis Alvarez attempting to measure sed rates by measuring the amounts of "salted" cosmogenous debris in the fish clay found at the K/T boundary. (Which, by the way, was certainly a catastrophic deposit)
#142389From: Kamron KirkconnellAug 19, 1994 6:41 PM
Hey Jay… Thought provocation is better than creating nothing. The problem with my Catastrophic Geology is that you have to go with it a bit before It starts to make sense. I am also not much of a communicator but working on it. There is more to come on this subject. Kamron
#142125From: Bill Webb /CAAug 17, 1994 11:47 PM
Kamron.. >> Remove the rubble filling the bottom of the canyon and you can mentally push the canyon back together. << Imaginative indeed.. However, I am confused by what happens to the bottom of the canyon. Do the sides skid over the bottom, or what? The Colorado River by itself did not cut the Grand Canyon. Many of the tributaries along the river contributed, cutting back from the main canyon, at more or less right angles, isolating the various buttes. Bright Angel Creek, Havasu Canyon, the Little Colorado are substantial tributaries which had significant effect in shaping the Grand Canyon.