/sci/ - Science & Math

>>11791807
Super Duper Mega Redpill on sediments and stratification: https://files.catbox.moe/6vxlly.webm

>>11791807
What's the current theory on this thing?
>>11791892
I aint hittin that

>>11791897
>what is webm and how to embed

>>11791807
Thats pretty cool, can a rockfag explain it?

>>11791897
It's basically saying that differences in currents and velocities of the water can cause different patterns of sedimentation that don't necessarily conform to classic horizontal despostion.

Sandstones are generally associated with moderate energy flow which are subject to turbulence. Certain sizes of grains take different energy levels to transport yet coarser grains are more likely to stay closer to the streambed due to differences in weight, but also subject to micro turbulence from friction of the water flowing over the bed. It's essentially just stuff like cross-bedding at a larger scales.

AFA OP's pic it seems to be a result of faulting, which you can see above the unconformity in the background. It might have also just been some ancient waterfall that eventually got filled up with sediment.

>>11791969
>It's basically saying that differences in currents and velocities of the water can cause different patterns of sedimentation that don't necessarily conform to classic horizontal despostion.
That's a misleading description. In the video it's demonstrated that layers of strata don't need to be millions of years old - that they instead can form very quickly, and that the lower layers can be newer than those above. Hence the traditional understanding both of how rock layers form and how old they are is completely thrown out the window.

>>11791807

>>11791807

>>11791959
The vertical layer is igneous from magma that pushed up through the layers of horizontal layers after they were formed. Looking at features like this is a way of measuring the relative ages of rocks.

>>11791807
What the entire fuck is this? I know what you're saying but, I don't know the implications of what you're saying. Don't make me google shit.

>>11792475
Why is the igneous layer stratified horizontally?

>>11792535
Not OP but the implications of
>>11791807
>>11791892
>>11792454
are huge.

And provides massive support for a cataclysm of extraordinary proportions having occured at some point in Earth's past.

>>11792583
Try re-reading

>>11792594
God you fucking rock fags are stupid...
You didn't even understand the question let alone try answering it....

For fucks sakes, I'd expect something along the lines of "the ingneous intrusion was was sheared vertically resulting in the vertical cracks, or varying horizontal pressures or something...

Jesus fuck... Go level a fucking mountain for your shareholders you fucking drooler.

>>11792587
Oh, well, that ain't nothing new. I got sat out in the hall, in 1988 for arguing that the Grand Canyon happened in a week or two. Of course, science has caught up to me, as it has done so many times.

>>11792583
We like to think that intrusive igneous rocks get deposited as one continuous block of rock but there are indeed many reasons that a rock can end up with a strange seemingly non igneous fabric. In the case of the OP picture I wouldn't suspect shear failure. Under shear failure from compression the failure plane wouldn't propagate as one clean plane through the thickest part of the body, and it couldn't be caused by direct shearing action because the body is much too narrow to apply the forces that would be necessary to break it like that.

I can only guess that the layering in the dike is caused by multiple episodes of magma moving through the fault. That would be easily recognizable as a change in texture of the rocks at the failure plane but that would require closer inspection than is possible from the picture. There's also the possibility that the intrusion isn't an intrusion at all and is actually a hydrothermal vein. Again that would require a close inspection of the rock itself.

And don't let the schizoposting op fool you into thinking there's some grand conspiracy going on about this. It's been well known for decades in sedimentology that Steno's laws are inaccurate. They're still taught in introductory geology classes because they're a simplification convenient enough that a priest from the 1600s can understand them.

>>11791892

>>11791892

>>11791892

>>11791892

Test

>>11791892

>>11793523
>Test
What the fuck did you just fucking do, you little bitch? I'll have you know I graduated top of my class in the shitposting academy and I've been involved in numerous "Ahem, fuck jannies" posts and I've summoned over 9000 succubi. I train gorillas and I'm the top burger flipper in the entire Burger King company. You are nothing to me but just another burger. I will flip you the fuck out with precision the likes of which has never been seen before on this imageboard, mark my fucking words. You think you can get away with writing "Test" on the Internet? Think again, fucker. As we speak I am contacting my secret network of faggots across the chans and your IP is being traced right now so you better prepare for the storm, retard. The storm that wipes out the pathetic little thing you call your life. You're fucking dead, kid. I can be anywhere, anytime, and I can turn you into a tasty burger in over seven hundred ways, and that's just with my feet. Not only am I extensively trained in spaghetti dropping, but I have access to all the anime listed on anidb.net and I will use it to its full extent to wipe your miserable ass off the face of the internet, you little shit. If only you could have known what unholy retribution your clever little "Test" comment was about to bring down upon you, maybe you would have kept your fat greasy fingers off your keyboard. But you didn't, couldn't, and now you're paying the price, you goddamn idiot. I will get Indians to shit all over you and you will drown in their shit. You're fucking dead, kiddo.

>>11791892

Is this some crypto creationism bullshit?
This shit has been known for a long time.

>>11793082
>>11793319
>>11793514
>>11793524
Is this the origin story of rockfags?
Too many sandcastles as kids?

>>11793540
See: https://files.catbox.moe/6vxlly.webm

>>11791892

>>11791892

>>11791892

>>11791892

>>11791892

>>11793081
based
>>11792454
cringe

>>11791892

>>11791892

>>11792454
Where is this? Source

>>11794038
Nova Scotia.

>>11791892

>>11791807
Proof of God.

>>11794038
Nova Prospekt.

>>11794108
No, all it's proof of is the standard understanding of geologic strata is incorrect (layers aren't separated by millions of years), and they were laid down in a different manner and through different mechanics than popularly believed.

>>11793081
>I can only guess that the layering in the dike is caused by multiple episodes of magma moving through the fault.
Makes sense - the fault slips every few thousand (million?) years allowing the igneous intrusion up to solidify periodically.

Nerds

>>11794647
Your mom is fat.

>>11791959
Geologist here, this is a dike. They're certainly not uncommon and are formed when igneous rock pushes up through weak cracks in sedimentary layers. The dishonesty of the OP is taking a picture and claiming the rocks are all sedimentary. Just because rocks have the same coloration don't mean they're remotely related to one another. OP knows this and hopes you don't ever try to find the location where the image was taken to realize for yourself that the dike is made of igneous rock.

>>11792454
Poly-strata trees have been known for centuries and may confuse someone only if you happened to live before 1920. The person posting this image is both telling the truth and at the same time hoping you don't realize the lie they slip in while doing it. Just because SOME strata take millions of years to build up doesn't mean ALL strata take millions of years to build up. A single event, such as a large volcanic eruption, a meteor impact, or a landslide can deposit large amounts of sediment in a single area at a time. A tree becoming embedded in such an event can become petrified standing upright. This does not mean it penetrates 'Millions of years of sediment deposits' as they claim.

There is not a single instance of a polystrate tree ever being found which fits their narrative so they lie about it, post images like what you see on imageboards, and hope you're not educated enough or never bother to research it in order to expose their lie.

You can start your education here if you wish.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polystrate_fossil

>>11794955
You missed the point completely. The trees obviously don't go through millions of years of strata. Because strata /aren't/ layed down over millions of years. The layers are formed very quickly (hours/days/weeks) through particle segregation mechanics. It's that simple. Stata has simply been assumed and believed to be the result of millions of years, which isn't correct.

>>11794955
You missed the point completely. The trees obviously don't go through millions of years of strata. Because strata /aren't/ layed down over millions of years. The layers are formed very quickly (hours/days/weeks) through particle segregation mechanics. It's that simple. Strata has simply been assumed and believed to be the result of millions of years, which isn't correct.

>>11797245
This is equally garbage. Now you’re saying that because SOME sediment deposits accumulate quickly ALL sediment deposits accumulate quickly.

We have Varve deposits which alone prove you wrong. No need to even invoke anything else.
https://eos.tufts.edu/varves/Geology/deglaciation.asp

>>11797245
Bro what if the tree just like grow up alongside the strata that is a cliff and then soil or dust accumulated just made it appear it crosses over.
What if that strata you talk about is something like sand or volcanic ash that also buried the tree while preserving it.
What if it isn't a tree but a root that actually penetrates strata.
What if it isn't vegetable matter at all but some weird lava plume that I'm not even sure it's possible.
These are random guesses my tired mind that has close to zero knowledge in geology can made in less than five minutes.

>>11792598
Nice reddit spacing, dullard.

>>11794955
thank you Randy Marsh

>>11791892
>https://files.catbox.moe/6vxlly.webm

Very good post, thank you anon. Got any more?

>>11791897
>>11791959
A glitch in the matrix. You weren't supposed to see it.

>>11794199
Atheists are so cringe. It's always "millions of years"

>>11794955
question for you then. Is there any geological formation in the world that you believe to have cataclysmic origin? if so, what and why?

>>11801134
Not him but there's plenty of shit. Impact craters are obvious. Then you have things like the deccan traps or lake Missoula and the megafloods that scoured the pacific northwest. I'd say all of those a various degrees of cataclysm without having to invoke space lightning and atlantis.

>>11801118
Are you seriously one of those creationists that believes the earth is only 4000 years old? Most religious people accept the earth is way older than that. Geological records prove it. Also, stop using "cringed" like a fucking 12 year old.