/
Grand Canyon Grand Canyon

Grand Canyon - PowerPoint Presentation

min-jolicoeur
min-jolicoeur . @min-jolicoeur
Follow
430 views
Uploaded On 2017-11-01

Grand Canyon - PPT Presentation

Cambrian Tapeats Sandstone How was it deposited Research by Arthur Chadwick PhD Collaborators from Geoscience Research Institute and Loma Linda University Research approach A good theory in science is one that successfully predicts the outcome of untried experiments ID: 601581

model tapeats sandstone shallow tapeats model shallow sandstone deposited research breccia standard cliff deposition canyon water grand cambrian rapid

Share:

Link:

Embed:

Download Presentation from below link

Download Presentation The PPT/PDF document "Grand Canyon" is the property of its rightful owner. Permission is granted to download and print the materials on this web site for personal, non-commercial use only, and to display it on your personal computer provided you do not modify the materials and that you retain all copyright notices contained in the materials. By downloading content from our website, you accept the terms of this agreement.


Presentation Transcript

Slide1

Grand CanyonCambrian Tapeats Sandstone:How was it deposited?

Research by Arthur Chadwick, PhD

Collaborators from Geoscience Research Institute and Loma Linda UniversitySlide2

Research approach:A good theory in science is one that successfully predicts the outcome of untried experimentsBible can be used to give direction to research efforts in a manner that will yield better results than the standard modelScientists following the Standard Model (millions of years

of evolutionary time) have suggested a layer of sandstone in Grand Canyon – the

Tapeats

Sandstone - was deposited

in shallow water over millions of years

Biblical model suggests

Tapeats

may have been deposited in deep water rather quicklySlide3

Events at the Grand Canyon 1. Deposit the Tapeats Sandstone

Slow, or rapid?

2. Deposit

the

rest of the sediments

3. Cut

the Canyon

Standard model – many millions of years

Biblical model – could have been rapidSlide4

Cambrian Sediments in Grand Canyon Uppermost Cambrian - Muav Limestone

Below this - Bright Angel Shale

Below this -

Tapeats

Sandstone

= lowest

Cambrian sediment in the

Grand Canyon

region

Coarse-grained quartzose sand

100

meters thick

Described as

Middle CambrianSlide5

Standard model explanation of the Tapeats: Shallow

transgressing sea

Getting deeper and moving shoreward; suggested multiple cycles of deeper, then shallower

Based upon “shallow water”

sedimentary structures

Based

in large part on comparisons with modern environmentsSlide6

Locations of our observations

10 miSlide7

The surface the Tapeats Sandstone was deposited upon was mostly flat, but one very large cliff was presentSlide8

Below the cliff (background) the Tapeats was deposited with or upon a thick layer of angular rocks (breccia)Slide9
Slide10

PrecambrianBreccia

Cliff

Relationship between Precambrian cliff and breccia prior to

Tapeats

depositionSlide11
Slide12
Slide13
Slide14
Slide15
Slide16

If it had taken millions of years for the advancing sea to deposit the Tapeats, the sea waves would have destroyed the breccia and the cliff as well Slide17

The water had to be deep enough to cover the entire breccia slope all during the deposition of Cambrian sediments – to protect the breccia and the cliff from destruction Slide18

Comparison of the models: 1. Standard model – slow, shallow marine

deposition

in

advancing sea

2. Revised model – rapid deposition in deep waterSlide19

Standard modelSlide20
Slide21
Slide22
Slide23

Revised modelSlide24
Slide25
Slide26
Slide27
Slide28
Slide29

Conclusions :Tapeats was not deposited in a shallow setting.Deposition was in deep water, and was rapid. Sedimentary structures used to define

Tapeats

as shallow marine need to be reevaluated in the light of these findings.Slide30

Conclusions :Research motivated by a biblical worldview resulted in notice of features not recognized by other geologistsCareful geological research confirmed the revised interpretation