In reading about the sediment deposits, as I understand it, The UM holds that microbe blooms caused these buildups. That makes sense to me with their fast reproduction only limited by nutrients and conditions. In the book it mentioned that the ocean floor is made up of basalt. Are there also these large sediment layers of calcium carbonate, Dolomite and Loess scattered around the ocean floors? It would make sense that these deposits should be both on land and on the sea floor if they were formed in Hypretherm.
Thank you for your question. The answer is yes, there are very large sediments of calcium carbonate and dolomite in the oceans. In fact calcium carbonate deposits are gigantic with no adequate explanation for their origins and are not being formed today. Dolomite is in that same category. Loess is a loosely packed form of sediment and was therefore formed during relatively low pressures during the flood and would make it difficult for formations to occur deeper in the ocean. Because of the theories of loess formations, there has not been as much extensive research done as other sediments. With the paradigm of the UM future researchers may find evidence of loess formations in the ocean.
Let me know if I can further answer any questions!
There are a number of problems with Carter’s answer, but here is one I can correct off the top of my head. Calcium carbonate deposits ARE being formed today. The conditions are usually right in warm, shallow seas, e.g., in the Bahamas. If you want more information (and pictures!) ask Scott Ritter in the BYU Geological Sciences department. He has done a lot of work on carbonate deposition in the Bahamas.
Professor of Geological Sciences
Brigham Young University
Barry we are not sure what you are referencing as incorrectly stated by Carter. His statement and your statement are almost the same. You both agree that Calcium carbonate is being formed today. The question is the environment it is forming in which correlates with the hypretherm environments discussed in chapter 7 & 8 of the Universal Model.
pages 265-266 – hyprethermal environment/process
pages 543-544 – examples of hyprethermal UM experiment creating rocks
Public pictures and info here: https://www.facebook.com/UMScience/posts/401627173517237
Hi UM Team,
Here’s a cut-and-paste quotation from Carter’s post.
“In fact calcium carbonate deposits are gigantic with no adequate explanation for their origins and are not being formed today.”
So he says calcium carbonate deposits are NOT being formed today.
Was he explaining the UM incorrectly?
I apologize for the confusion, allow me to clarify what it was I meant. Yes these carbonates rocks are growing today. If fact all over the world they are growing, and I am aware of that. In my first post on this thread I was answering specifically in response to Floyd’s question, “Are there also these large sediment layers of calcium carbonate, Dolomite and Loess scattered around the ocean floors?”
The UM’s stance is that Carbonates are growing as you say in “conditions are usually right in warm, shallow seas, e.g., in the Bahamas.” But Floyd’s question wasn’t about any carbonate growth. He was asking about “large sediment layers” which if you think about the word ‘large’ I guess it is a bit subjective. I should have been more clear on what I was inferring.
I took it to mean he was asking about the massive pure deposits of carbonate deep within the rock layers, which purity and size are not in any formation process today because of mixtures of other sediments. The UM’s stance is that these hundreds of feet thick deposits were laid out very quickly which prevented different layers of sediment from forming. Also, Dolomite that in general is not forming on the Earth today, came from the hypretherm microbial conditions of the flood.
It has been brought to my attention that I specifically don’t know of any 100’s of feet thick calcite deposits in the oceans, only on the land. I figured since there was dolomite there would also be calcite. Maybe that was a presumptive thing for me to say in my original answer on this thread.
Please forgive my sloppiness, and thank you because I appreciate correction 🙂
Also, the process by which thick layers of limestone can be cleaned up, so to speak, is called “diagenesis”.
Thank you Barry,
I have been wondering about Diagenesis actually. Are there any examples of diagenesis or lithification happening today? Either geologically where we can see it, or experimental where it has been done? I would love to study that if you know of any.
As with any long-term process, nobody has time to wait around and watch it happen, but what they can do is drill down through sediment layers and examine them to see how they change with depth. Assuming the lower layers were deposited first, that makes for a good way to study how sediments change as they get buried deeper and deeper. Here is one such article:
You can find more by Googling “diagenesis borehole study” (without the quotes).
Excellent! thank you
I am unsure of how your are using the term loess deposit. Just to be clear we are talking about the same thing. Wiki defines a loess deposit as “a clastic, predominantly silt-sized sediment that is formed by the accumulation of wind-blown dust.” There are current “loess” type deposits being formed in the ocean today. So that isn’t any thing new that the UM paradigm will discover. Here is relatively recent dust storm off the coast of Africa. https://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/dustanimation_1.gif. I bring this up because after reading some the UM work, I have noticed that the UM routinely says that they are the first to discover something or some new processes when similar studies have already been done. Stop claiming to be the first, do your research first and talk to specialists.
Colin, are you suggesting that the picture gif you present was laying down hundreds of feet of loess from a “dust” storm in a single, pure deposit without contaminates as the UM describes of the many pure loess deposits found around the world? Where is the study that shows where all of these huge loess deposits come from, other than in the UM?
Courtney, thanks for replying. Before we can start a discussion, I think it would be valuable to make sure we are on the same topic.
What do you define as a loess deposit?
How does UM explain loess deposits?
Geologist define a loess deposit as accumulated windblown dust. There are several of these in China and Mongolia that we can use as an example of the current analogues. I thought Carter was implying that floods created loess deposition? If this is the UM model for loess deposits, do you have any evidences of sedimentary features that suggest these loess deposits formed in a high energy water environment?
Define what you mean by “contaminates” and “pure”. This is a very general term and can be used for very different meanings. I don’t know what you mean. Also can you explain which deposits your are referring to.
Lastly I did not intend to infer that a single dust storm creates a “huge” loess deposit. Loess deposition rates are usually relatively slow(mm per year) in accumulation. I was attempting to show that there is current loess type deposits being formed off the coast of Africa in the ocean. But basically I just really like that gif.
Here are several papers on loess deposits that answer your last question.
The nature, origin and accumulation of loess
The onset of extensive loess deposition around the G/M boundary in China and its palaeoclimatic implications
Zhongli Ding. Nat W. Rutter. Tungsheng Liu.
A review of current research on TL dating of loess
Ann G. Wintle
Chronologic evidence for multiple periods of loess deposition during the Late Pleistocene in the Missouri and Mississippi River Valley, United States: Implications for the activity of the Laurentide ice sheet
Steven L. Forman. E. Arthur Bettis III. Timothy J. Kemmis. Barry B. Miller.
Holocene loess sedimentation along the Qilian Shan (China): significance for understanding the processes and timing of loess deposition
Yvonne Küstera, , , Ralf Hetzelb, 1, , Matthias Krbetscheka, Mingxin Taoc
Colin, Colin, if you want to know what the UM says about Loess, read the book! I’m not going to try to carry on a conversation to explain what takes pages in the book to describe. Its all there, very plainly laid out. Please take the time to read it and then we can discuss here what it means if you want. Obviously the UM disagrees with what modern science says about loess formulation or there wouldn’t be pages upon pages in the book about it. I must tell you though, in order to totally understand the processes discussed for loess formulation you will need to start at the beginning of chapter 5 in the UM. Just keep reading until you get there and all will be understandable. There are significant difficulties with modern science’s version of loess formulation which are quoted from the original sources in the book. So, some of that may be familiar to you. Let’s carry on this discussion when you get done if you want.