This is a continuation from another thread in which Peter Wilders has attempted to justify Guy Berthault’s attempt to demonstrate a problem as he sees it with a basic principle of geology. Peter posted a challenge to me prior to the thread being closed and I will answer him here. I don’t believe that this is the reason the other thread was closed, so I hope that this thread isn’t closed as well.
As a Catholic, it is difficult for me to ignore the deliberate ridicule sarcasm and even hostility of some participants posting on this thread. They should know that such tactics are considered by the Church at least as a grave sin against charity and, at the worst one of calumny. **
Before I even get into answering his claims, I want to point out that this is perfectly predictable by Peter. He does this in every single thread that I have seen him participate in. I don’t know if he does it because he is insecure with the debate or if he wants to cast a particular light on those whom he is debating. But, since he has declared both the current pope and the previous pope to be in “grave error” as he defines heresy, I don’t feel one bit embarrassed by his accusations.
Quote: **Just use that sideways definition of above and below and it all makes sense! **
I agree. In its simplest terms the lateral formation of beds or strata inevitably produces a lateral chronology; not vertical as required by the principle of superposition.
Straight from the source, folks. Do I need to say more? Geologists understand above and below to be a vertical relationship. His entire principle buster is therefore busted itself.
Quote: A particle below another one means that if you draw a horizontal line, any particle below the line is below any particle above the line. They can be miles apart.
The reason for saying they can be miles apart is to demonstrate that at any part of the bed or strata, the same phenomenon occurs. Depositing particles, in real life, are of course, only centimetres apart. In the diagram because of the current they succeed each other by a few seconds; indicated by the terms T1, T2, and T3 (T = time). The sorting of the sediments according to size is just as rapid. A bed will prograde as a function of the current velocity.
But the mechanics become more complex when multiple changes in current occur, because each change triggers off a new prograding bed on top of the bed already forming. The result, as shown in the video, is simultaneous vertical and lateral bed formation; vertical in the sense of beds forming on top of each other. Such formations are contrary to the principle of superposition which requires one bed to form completely before the next one starts to form on top of it. See the URL below.
Peter is arguing against something he doesn’t understand. No geologist expects a bed must be formed over the entire surface of the earth. Period. That is required, however, for Peter’s claim to be true. And he knows it. And he knows that those of you reading this who aren’t geologist probably don’t know that and therefore he can convince you that it is true. Then, once he shoots it down, he can claim to have invalidated an important geologic principle and therefore, evolution. Don’t buy it folks.
Geologists understand the concept of prograding beds. We have understood it for a very long time. We can see it in the field when we study sedimentary outcrops or in well cores or in seismic sections.
To my comment:
[quote]]…it should be noted that Berthault’s study of rock formation takes into account the paleohydraulic conditions of strata development.
Quote: **What rock formation? How many rocks has this guy actually studied? He did a flume study, not an investigation of rocks.**
The answer to his question is given in Berthault’s website www.sedimentology.fr where recent paleohydraulic studies are mentioned, i.e.
**Several formations of Cambrian Ordovician sandstones of the St.-Petersburg area.
The Upper Jurassic division of Mesozoic rocks making up the main range of the Crimean Mountains.**
Which of those formations did Berthault visit, Peter? In the past, you told me that he didn’t personally inspect those outcrops. Are you changing your story now?
(continued on next post)