----------------------------------------------
From: Bill Payne <bpayne@voyageronline.net>
Thu, 15 Jan 1998 08:01:14 GMT Gary Collins wrote:
GC:> I remember reading (in "Creation and Evolution - the
> Facts and Fallacies, by Alan Hayward - sadly, out of print at present
> but I understand soon to be reprinted) about varves. I don't have the
> book to hand anymore, but the author's argument went something like
> this:
BP:
"Some of these deposits are very thick and have hundreds or thousands of
varve couplets. The current world record is held by the Green River
shale deposits in Wyoming, Utah and Colorado, where there are up to
several million successive bands. A typical couplet here consists of a
layer of clean clay particles followed by a layer impregnaated with
organic material, including pollen and spore particles. The thicknesses
vary from year to year, with max thicknesses occurring about every 11
1/2 years, every 50 years, and every 12,000 years. The 11 1/2-year cycle
corresponds to that of the sunspots, and the 12,000-year cycle to the
precession of the equinoxes; both these astronomical cycles affect
rainfall, which in turn affects the amount of clay washed into lakes." p
88, _Creation and Evolution_ by Alan Hayward.
I can only comment about the last sentence regarding clay.
<snip>
I seem to remember that clays in suspension in water carry an electric
charge, which may help them to remain suspended in water longer, since
water molecules have a polar charge. At any rate, clays would indeed
settle very slowly, even in still water. However, (red flag Glenn, this
is YEC stuff) I have heard that clays will coagulate in salt water and
therefore settle quickly under marine conditions. If so, then Hayward
was correct within limits, but he may have overextended his laboratory
data into the real world where it no longer holds true because the
conditions are different. Of course, he would say his interpretation is
still valid because of the spore and pollen particles deposited in the
organic-rich bands each summer.
This sounds reasonable to me:- how would you counter it? Also, why should
there be variations corresponding to the astronomical cycles, as Hayward
points out? (I had forgotten that bit!)
BP: I have observed a vertical fossil tree trunk beneath a coal seam in the
underclay (which contains clay, silt, and fine-grained sand). The tree
trunk is greater than four feet tall and was truncated just below the
coal. I haven't seen the base of the trunk because it is still buried in
the outcrop. My question to Hayward would be, if clay only settles
slowly out of very still water, how many years did the dead tree have to
stand while the clay particles settled around it? I think the presence
of a vertical tree trunk indicates rapid sedimentation of, in this case,
clay.
I have heard of similar things before - though, if I am reading you correctly,
this is not in connection with these varves. Is there alternate layering
in this case, or does the clay form a single layer (presumably above the
silt)? I think the problem that Hayward was suggesting is not so much the
speed of deposition, but rather the forming of so many alternating layers
in such a short space of time, saying also that each layer would need time
to consolidate before the new one formed on top of it.
I had a number of similar problems with Hayward when I read his
_Creation and Evolution, Rethinking the Evidence from Science and the
Bible_, c 1995.
I would like to hear more about these. One thing I have learned as a result
of my interset in this subject is to always try to look upon things from
more than one angle. I haven't seen this later book of Hayward's: I will try
to get hold of a copy. I will also try to recover my copy of "the Facts and
Fallacies," which I lent to someone and has now apparently fallen into a
"black hole." Then maybe I can frame my questions around what Hayward actually
wrote, instead of some vague awareness of the sort of thing that he wrote.
It's just that something in one of Glenn's posts reminded me of this for some
reason, and I would like to know how these arguments are dealt with by flood
geologists. It is a great help to me that you are familiar with his books!
Does my memory serve me correctly: did Hayward say that these varve layers
are sandwiched between layers of other fossil-bearing rock (which acc. to
flood geology, would have been laid down during the flood? I think that is
his reason for saying that, acc. to this model, the varves would have had
to be formed in a very short space of time (i.e. << 1 year)). Is this right,
and if so, how do you account for it?
regards,
/Gary