Figure 4 - uploaded by Kurt Wise
Content may be subject to copyright.
The stromatolite bed. The arrows indicate the location of the stromatolite bed at the base of the Awatubi Member, Kwagunt Formation. Individual stromatolites distinguishable in the lower left corner of the photo are about 2 m high. The dark cliff just visible on the right and the dark band below and to the right of the black arrow are exposures of the basal red sandstone of the Kwagunt Formation.
Source publication
The most extensive stromatolite horizon known in Grand Canyon sediments is found in the base of the Awatubi Member of the Kwa-gunt Formation of the Chuar Group. It is suggested that the greater functionality of growing, compared with fossil, stromatolites indi-cates they were formed by secondary process and not directly created by God. The top-heav...
Contexts in source publication
Context 1
... May 2001 the authors examined the Kwagunt and Sixtymile Formations (see Figures 1 & 2) near Nankoweap Butte (see Figures 2 & 3) in the Grand Canyon. Most significantly for the definition of the preFlood/Flood boundary, an extensive stromatolite bed was examined at the base of the Awatubi Member of the Kwagunt Formation 3 (Figure 4). This stromatolite bed is about 635 m below the base of Sixtymile Formation (Ford & Breed 1973), which Austin & Wise (1994) proposed as the pre-Flood/Flood boundary in the Grand Canyon (see Figure 2). ...
Context 2
... authors walked the strike of the bed for about 1.5 km, around the east limb of the nose of a south-southeast-plunging syncline. At a distance, the prominent bed could be observed on the west limb of the same syncline for a further 1.5 km or so (black arrow in Figure 4). The average distance between the stromatolites along the entire traverse was less than 1 m (see Figure 4), and many were actually in contact with each other. ...
Context 3
... a distance, the prominent bed could be observed on the west limb of the same syncline for a further 1.5 km or so (black arrow in Figure 4). The average distance between the stromatolites along the entire traverse was less than 1 m (see Figure 4), and many were actually in contact with each other. Each of the hundreds of stromatolites observed in the bed was upright (i.e., with pedestal downward and the head upward; see Figure 5). ...
Similar publications
In order to probe com positional characteristics and origins of gases released from Tianchi volcanic springs in the Changbai Mountains, components and various parameters of gases from the Julong and Jinjiang volcanic springs have been analyzed and measured in this paper. Results show that the temperature, contents of He and CO, and ,He/4He ratios o...
Hot springs that are -widely distributed in the SE coastal area of China and there
have been a subject of dispute on their genesis and origin. Since mid 80 's, with the support
of the IAEA Research Contracts, isotope and geochemical techniques have been systematically
applied to the geothermal systems in the region. The techniques have proven to be...
The Zhaxikang Sb–Pb–Zn–Ag deposit, the only super-large deposit identified within the North Himalayan Metallogenic Belt (NHMB), is still debated to date with perspectives of mineralization age and genesis. The previous genetic models mainly include hot-spring, magmatic hydrothermal fluid, coarse-grained hydrothermal Pb–Zn vein overprinted by Sb-ric...
The geochemical characteristics of geothermically heated water can reveal deep geothermal processes, leading to a better understanding of geothermal system genesis and providing guidance for improved development and utilization of such resources. Hydrochemical and hydrogen oxygen isotope analysis of two geothermal field (district) hot springs based...
Citations
... Two fully intact microbialites from this particular site were taken back to the lab for dissection. According to Wise and Snelling (2005), microbialites that widen-upward are best interpreted as in situ if the pedestal (narrow part) is found below the head (wider part). This makes sense since gravity would tend to position the heavier, wider head towards the bottom if in fact the form was transported. ...
... There are problems with this option, most evident of which is the lack of geologic evidence supporting such a catastrophic movement of enormous land masses. Blocks that are hundreds and even thousands of square km in size and perhaps several km thick should leave ample evidence such as crumpling and low-angle thrust faults (Wise and Snelling 2005). Yet all of the formations spanning the lower Cambrian through upper Ordovician are conformable (Hintze et al. 1988;Miller et al. 2003;Miller and Evans 2012), faulting only later in the Jurassic due to compressional forces and in the tertiary due to block-faulting (Powell 1959). ...
... As irony would have it, the most serious objection to a creation week solution is the presence of Precambrian microbialites that lie stratigraphically beneath the Great Unconformity! Wise and Snelling (2005), for example, discuss the presence of in situ Precambrian microbialites within the Kwagunt Formation at Grand Canyon. These authors opted for a post creation-week, pre-Flood interpretation for these microbialites based on evidence that supported natural, secondary processes of growth. ...
... There is general consensus that the beginning of the Flood is recorded in Precambrian strata (for example , Robinson 1998b;Wingerden 2003;Wise and Snelling 2005;Tyler 2006), but that is where consensus ends. As early as 1982 Morton gave several reasons to consider all Phanerozoic strata post-Flood, and a few subsequent Flood geologists eventually expressed agreement (for example , Robinson 1998b;Tyler 2006). ...
... However, neither author addressed the other indicators of long passages of time that Tyler (1996) noted: bentonite beds, Micraster speciation, and cyclical formation of multiple surfaces. Robinson (1996Robinson ( , 1998a Wise and Snelling (2005) noted that in situ stromatolites (sedimentary deposits formed by slow-growing beds of cyanobacteria) are abundant in the sediments of the Proterozoic Chuar Group in the Grand Canyon. Stromatolites form in low-energy, shallow marine environments, and the sedimentology of the Chuar Group sediments containing them is consistent with this. ...
... Stromatolites form in low-energy, shallow marine environments, and the sedimentology of the Chuar Group sediments containing them is consistent with this. Those sediments therefore cannot have been deposited during the Flood year, as Wise and Snelling (2005) note. Wise (2003) also noted that the Crystal Spring and Beck Spring Formations in Death Valley, both Proterozoic, contain stromatolites. ...
Senter, P. 2011. The defeat of Flood geology by Flood geology: the ironic demonstration that there is no trace of the Genesis Flood in the geologic record. Reports of the National Center for Science Education 30(3):1.1-1.14.
... This theory coincides with the majority belief that the Noachian Deluge and its attendant events caused "most of the geological formations of the earth" (Gish, 2006, p. 49). The debate concerning the pre-Flood/Flood boundary follows this premise with researchers placing this horizon in strata at the beginning of Phanerozoic or Proterozoic eras-before the Cenozoic, Mesozoic, and Paleozoic (Austin, 1994;Hoesch, 2007;Austin and Wise, 1994;Wise and Snelling, 2005;Oard and Froede, 2008). Many regard the period, between the Fall and the Flood, as having a minimal impact on the extirpation and fossilization of terrestrial animal kinds and its impact on geological strata (Reed et al., 1996;Froede, 1995;Walker, 1994;Reed et al., 2006). ...
Archaeologist describes that the Linnaean classification system, familiar to modern biology, follows the earliest recorded taxonomic system, Historia Animalium, authored by Aristotle around 343 B.C. Earlier than Aristotle, a Biblical classification system of terrestrial and marine animals, stated by God, was recorded (or compiled) by Moses around 1440 B.C., according to traditionalist scholars, and between 1000-500 B.C., as proposed by liberal scholars following the Documentary Hypothesis. An evaluation was completed of the usage of the Hebrew terms for each taxonomic group and a comparison is rendered between Biblical classification systems and Linnaean taxonomies. The analysis suggests both similarities and notable differences between the major taxonomic groups from the Torah or Bible and those ascribed by Linnaean classifications.
In addition, an evaluation was completed of the usage of the Hebrew terms for each division during the creation week, after the Fall, during the Flood, and later in Biblical history. The analysis exhibits that dinosaurs declined significantly, after the Fall and before the Noachian Deluge. Conversely, after the Fall, mammals increased markedly. This conclusion runs contrary to most creationist theories which suggest that most dinosaurs died during or after the Flood. These Biblical trends follow the conclusions of paleontological research in that dinosaurs perished before the floruit of mammalian fauna.
Stromatolite are layered sedimentary rocks in the form of ridges and columns that are formed by the spread of one layer over another layer of cyanobacteria, which is a photosynthetic single-celled microbe. Some of the fossilized stromatolites are 3.7 billion years old, which contains evidence of life on Earth. These structures are usually created in coastal and near-coastal environments. Stromatolites were abundant on Earth during the Precambrian period and are the best organisms of this period. If the Lower Paleozoic is generally considered to be the period of trilobite expansion, the Proterozoic should be considered the period related to stromatolites. Formations containing these structures (stromatolites) are mostly Upper Cambrian to Early Cambrian, including the stromatolites of the Bindor Formation (Late Precambrian) and the Soltanieh Formation (Late Precambrian to Early Cambrian), especially the Upper Dolomite. The maximum development of stromatolites is in Proterozoic and this development is reduced in the late Precambrian. One of the ideas about the growth and development of stromatolites in the Proterozoic is the lack of digging and underground animals and gastropods to make sediments disappear. Because these animals prevent the growth of floor coverings by stirring up sediments and thus the growth of stromatolites. These structures (stromatolites), their variety and number decreased during the Paleozoic and are rare in today's advanced sea. This paper tries to study the stromatolite fossils of the Baroot formation.
