Re: Pitman's Miller Time


"Ernest Major" <{$to$}@meden.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:CU1nt8zkTZhGFwaB@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
| In message <A4VnmwSgC9gGFwxu@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Ernest Major
| <{$to$}@meden.demon.co.uk> writes
| >In message <1183041783.456997.320410@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
| >Seanpit <seanpitnospam@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes
| >>On Jun 28, 6:12 am, "Lizzardwoman" <lizzardwomanRM...@xxxxxxxxx>
| >>wrote:
| >>
| >>> If you would just research chalk formations (in all their
biogeochemical
| >>> complexity - focus on fluxes of specific elements, doubling times of
| >>> relevant organisms, etc. and not the cursory stuff you previously
wrote in
| >>> reply) or the Green River Fm, you would have to discard YECism without
| >>> resort to radchem techniques which I guess you distrust per se because
they
| >>> yield results counter to Bronze Age thinking.
| >>
| >>I have looked into the formation of chalk formations. It is one of
| >>the features that helped convince Walter Veith (Professor and chair of
| >>the Department of Zoology at the University of Western Cape and former
| >>ardent evolutionist) that the geologic record was a catastrophic
| >>record. He noted that after catastrophic conditions or large
| >>environmental disturbances, algie can grow very very rapidly creating
| >>massive algal blooms. The formation of the chalk layers in the
| >>geologic column follow a massive world-wide catastrophic event that
| >>provided great quantities of neutrients to the warm waters of the
| >>shallow oceans and seas. The resulting algal blooms could easily have
| >>produced very thick chalk layers in very short order. No need for
| >>millions of years which are only necessary given the blinders of
| >>outmoded uniformitarian thinking.
| >
| >How thick do you think that the chalk beds of southern and eastern
| >England and the southern North Sea basin are?
|
| As Dr. Pitman doesn't seem to be addressing this point ...

Based on his web site, I was not going to crunch any data because he would
simply reject any/all of my figures. I even toyed with providing a worst
case scenario (some of these things are likely close to reality, though) :

- least thickness that likely does not include redeposited material
- quickest doubling time even measured for the organisms (excluding
chemostat work)
- deepest possible photic zone (no self-shading in bloom conditions, indeed
assume sufficient light levels the entire depth of the water column)
- Highest measured oceanic {Ca}
- 0% dissolution in the water column
- 0% predation in the water column
- 0% horizontal transport out of the bloom vicinity
- highest measured settling rate assuming quiescent condition (worst case
since the environemnt was certainly not quiescent)
- 100% incorporation into seds from the water column (i.e., no post
depositional dissolution/diagensis and no ingestion by benthic animals)

But I realized that whatever I selected for these figures, Sean would attack
because he has to preserve the few thousand year old life scenario.

I'm guessing his final refuge would likely be the flux of Ca to the bloom
area where he would have to propose something so whacking high as to not be
close to anything ever measured.

| Figures for the total thickness of the Chalk in England include 500m in
| the Isle of Wight, 300m at Portsdown, 440m in north Norfolk and 415m on
| the Yorkshire coast (rounded from figures in Anderton et al, A Dynamic
| Stratigraphy of the British Isles). (Over in Ulster it's only 50m, but
| it approaches 900m in the English North Sea.)
|
| Elsewhere I find quoted thicknesses of over 2500m for parts of the
| Netherlands North Sea, for a band across northern Denmark (and I think
| for the Munster Basin in Germany as well), but these figures include
| redeposited chalk from adjacent shallower areas.
|
| >
| >Where do you think your hypothetical algal blooms got all that Calcium
| >Carbonate from? (When we talk of the Chalk Sea we don't mean that the
| >sea was composed of chalk, rather than water.)
|
| So lets take 1000m as an estimate of the amount of thickness of Chalk to
| be explained.
|
| Calcium Carbonate is about 0.1% by mass of sea water. Chalk is about 2.5
| times as dense as water. (Less dense than much other Calcium Carbonate.)
| So to produce 1000m of chalk we need to extract the Calcium Carbonate
| from a column of water 2.5 million meters deep, that's 2500 kilometers
| (Noah's flood was a minnow by comparison), or produce the Chalk
| sufficiently slowly that the Calcium Carbonate in the photic zone (40m)
| can be replenished.
|
| Looking at it from the other direction, extracting all the Calcium
| Carbonate of the photic zone produces 16mm of Chalk. Even if you were to
| grant -ignoring the question of where the replacement Calcium Carbonate
| comes from - one 100% efficient bloom every month, this would take 5,000
| years to produce the Chalk. (Geological dating of the Chalk spans 35
| million years, but the greater bulk was deposited during the Upper
| Chalk, which covers of the order of 10 million years.)
| >
| >How to you explain the change in the bottom fauna over the
| >stratigraphic column? (I'll assume that you'll explain away the change
| >to the open water fauna as ecological zonation in the water column.)

I still don't understand this question of Sean's.

I would like him to address the Green River Fm at some point.

sharon

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Pitmans Miller Time
    ... >England and the southern North Sea basin are? ... redeposited chalk from adjacent shallower areas. ... Calcium Carbonate is about 0.1% by mass of sea water. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Pitmans Miller Time
    ... England and the southern North Sea basin are? ... redeposited chalk from adjacent shallower areas. ... times as dense as water. ... (Less dense than much other Calcium Carbonate.) ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Pitmans Miller Time
    ... England and the southern North Sea basin are? ... redeposited chalk from adjacent shallower areas. ... times as dense as water. ... (Less dense than much other Calcium Carbonate.) ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Pitmans Miller Time
    ... produced very thick chalk layers in very short order. ... How thick do you think that the chalk beds of southern and eastern England and the southern North Sea basin are? ... Calcium Carbonate is about 0.1% by mass of sea water. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Homebrew Digest #5492 (February 01, 2009)
    ... TODAY'S HOME BREW DIGEST BROUGHT TO YOU BY: ... How much increase in alkalinity as CaCO3 should 1ppm CaCO3 cause? ... A few weeks back I decided to write another brewing water calculation ... showing an imbalance when chalk was used. ...
    (rec.crafts.brewing)