Lloyd Blog

[Lloyd]

Proof of Continental Drift
I just remembered that one of the proofs of continental drift is that the edges of the continental plates where they separated from each other have identical strata and fossils. This disproves the theory that EDM removed material that left behind the Atlantic basin etc.

Assuming the data about the continental edges is correct, it means that the strata and fossils in those locations already existed before the continents separated. I had recently supposed that the earlier supercontinent consisted of mostly soft clay, but that seems to be false. It must have consisted of rock strata containing fossils.

Therefore, there must have been an earlier flood that deposited those strata and fossils.

Then the question is, how many strata with fossils were deposited after the impact that caused the continents to separate?

I'll ask Gordon.

[webolife]

Thanks again.
A rapid continental drift scenario is a total paradigm shift from the standard model, so the simple answer may be perplexing if the paradigm shift isn't envisioned. Here is my model in brief:

Think tsunami, the primary mechanism of the flood event in my model. A tsunami wave washes in carrying and burying all sorts of organisms, then ebbs out, some of the currents forming rivulets through the recently deposited "strata". Or additional wave[s] come in over or after the first, making additional strata. This is happening over a period of minutes (as in contempory catastrophic tsunami events we've witnessed) or hours, over several days, weeks and months, as opposed to years or millenia or epochs of time.

The cause of the tsunamis is associated with the earth shattering impacts of multiple asteroid/planetoid/EDM-causing astronomical events that initiated the cataclysm; some of which I would locate in the Gulf of Mexico, at the time near the center of the supercontinent. The splitting continent allows the inrush of the oceans into its interior, and those mega tsunami force waves churn up, transport and bury loads of surface material, including lifeforms some of which get deposited bsck into the sea, some under over burden on the continent. The flood happens in waves, not as a sudden total burial, but no part of the supercontinet is untouched. The supercontinent has no mountain ranges as we know of them today, as these will form as a result of the leading edges of the spreading continents encountering resistance from the opposing oceanic crust, ie. the topography of Pangaea was relatively flat. In addition, the atmosphere of the earth was a greenhouse compared to today, leading to the pervasive fossil evidence below the Pleistocence strata of an original worldwide subtropical climate. Which brings us to when was the fossil record initiated, how long did it take to accumulate, and where does this fit into the scenario of continental drift?

There is no evidence of sedimentary fossilization prior to or apart from the mechanism and time line of continental drift. The question becomes, how long did it take? My model calls for a rapid continental drift episode that took primarily a single year, followed by minor adjustments over another couple of centuries, ending in the few thousands of years ago, concurrent with the last stages of continental glaciation commonly called the "Ice Age". The original supercontinent may in fact have consisted of large bodies of uncemented crustal materials remaining from the original formation of the continental masses from an oceanic birth. "May" because it must be explained how so many formations of sedimentary rocks consist literally of cement (ie limestones, sandstones, siltstones, conglomerates, etc.) that are identifiable worldwide by their compositions and relative superpositions.
If these were only local occurrances one might imagine rocks in one area being eroded to form sediments in another, as we see today. Contrary to this, however the worldwide occurrence of most of the major (especially fossil-bearing) strata suggests that materials were more readily transportable than is allowed by the standard model. The SM alternatively has no explanation other than that millions of years of erosion were followed by millions of years of deposition, repeatedly, with no evidence of these major episodes. "No evidence?" No, the resulting relatively flat strata that we see today lying largely conformably one atop another (with plenty of exceptions of course) are the remnants of these supposed "hiatal" epochs of time that must have occurred "invisibly" between the strata we observe. There is simply no evidence for the long periods of time proposed by the Huttonian and Lyellian paradigms, just loads and loads of sediment, now compacted and cemented.

In the last stages of the major drifting event, the mountain building stages, the sediments undergo tremendous compression and uplift, including metamorphism, as abovementioned, resulting in these fossiliferous sediments coming into their present positions, atop the highest mountains in the world as well as on and off continental shelves.

Finally, major volcanics which were intiated at the outset of the cataclysm, perhaps by the astronomical impact events, and continued intermittently with the sedimentary/depositional events, continue to be "icing" on the layer cake of the sedimentary events... evidenced worldwide by the relative "young-ness" of volcanics with respect to the other orogenies I've described.

There you have it in a nut shell

[webolife]

I agree with most of your young Earth evidences there Lloyd. The necessity of rapid fossilization cannot be overstated. The evidence for long time periods of deposition are by definition "hiatal" epochs that exist "invisibly" between the strata we see, as I mentioned elsewhere. There are loads of sediment, which either got there quickly, or slowly, and either way, here they are sitting conformably atop each other. The "slow" method has some 'splainin' to do. Guy Berthault's sedimentology flume experiments show that these actually likely occurred at the same time rather than one after another, and can be used to demonstrate that fossils found in higher beds may actually have been emplaced before some in lower beds