preserving raindrops and mats
Glenn.Morton (XDEGRM@ORYX.COM)
Wed, 14 Jan 98 07:20:01 CDT In my response to Bill this morning, I missed an important point in preserving
raindrop impressions in the Coconino. This also applies to the preservation
of footprints. Bill is correct that there needs to be rapid burial (not
instantaneous burial) in order to preserve such delicate features. But the
most important item which is needed is that the raindrop impressions and
tracks must have time to dry and harden. If the sediments containing the
tracks or impressions were not hard, they would likley be washed away when
the next wave comes by. It is precisely this lack of drying and hardening
which makes it so hard for footprints on a beach to be preserved when the next
wave comes in. So contrary to what global flood advocates imply, footprints
and raindrop impressions require drying out prior to the next influx of
sedimentary material. This then means a period of time must pass which is not
possible in the global flood which was supposed to cover the earth to great
depths but now we find was really quite shallow.
I also thought about the vegetable mats that Bill wants to rely on. When the
water is out(so that the animals can leave their tracks) presumably the
vegetable mats are lying on the ground. Why aren't the animals walking on the
mats rather than the sediment below the mats? Why don't we have vegetable mat
impressions in the sediment (with occasional organic matter left behind)
rather than rain drop impressions? Why don't the raindrops fall on the
vegetable mats rather than the sediment? And considering that this is about
halfway through the flood with millions of animals successfuly surviving on
vegetable mats, why did Noah need to build an ark? Why not live on a
vegetable mat where there was "plenty to each"?