Tree Standing in Different Sediment Layers

[Dr Fell]

I have got to check out this Kent Hovind character

 

my first posting as a test

[Luminal]

Well, since it's been four and a half years since this thread has been posted to, one would guess the OP has since started and completed high school, or college, or had kids, or won the lottery and become an atheist... who knows.

 

He wouldn't be the only one.

 

I just read this entire thread, sighing inwardly at the OP. Then I noticed the date. Let's think... January of 2004... I was a senior at a fundy Christian High School in the deep South, and a creationist.

 

It's hard to believe sometimes how much can change in four and a half years.

[ydoaPs]

I have got to check out this Kent Hovind character

 

my first posting as a test

 

Maybe you can visit him in jail.

[Daniel The Grey]

There are whole forests like this, even multilayered ones, such as the forests of upright fossils found in yellowstone that do indeed sometimes extand through multiple layers. 

Are there any mechanisms that have led to the formation of geological layers requiring eons of time, and could these mechanisms be distinguished by chemical laboratory analysis procedures and proved that they are in sharp contrast to the rapid deposit genesis mechanisms that require only a short period time and would have a different laboratory chemical analysis patern? In other words, are there two different chemical signatures for the eons layers and for fast-formed layers (excluding the volcanic layers)?

[Area54]

58 minutes ago, Daniel The Grey said:

In other words, are there two different chemical signatures for the eons layers and for fast-formed layers (excluding the volcanic layers)?

I'm not aware of any chemical identifiers, but new techniques are always being developed. However, there are plenty of physical signatures related to mineralogy, clastic size, shape, sorting, angularity, cementation, bedding structures etc. Indeed, on reflection, some of the mineralogical and cementation aspects could be considered as chemical signatures.

58 minutes ago, Daniel The Grey said:

There are whole forests like this, even multilayered ones, such as the forests of upright fossils found in yellowstone

I wasn't aware of these. Do you have a sound reference? Orwill yu just recommend I Google?

 

Edit: Forget the reference. I see the Yellowstone example is simply trees buried in ash and subsequently petrified. That's quite different to the examples envisaged by the OP and requires no more of an explanation than, "they were buried in ash and subsequently petrified".

Edited March 4, 2018 by Area54

[Daniel The Grey]

On 04/03/2018 at 11:17 AM, Area54 said:

However, there are plenty of physical signatures related to mineralogy, clastic size, shape, sorting, angularity, cementation, bedding structures etc. Indeed, on reflection, some of the mineralogical and cementation aspects could be considered as chemical signatures.

Thank you for your kind replay, Area54. I would like, if you could help me, to have some exemples of such physical signatures of geological enons strata that put them in a sharp contrast with rapid deposits strata (of course, excluding vulcanic origins). In other words, which exactly (detailed examples) are those basic features that make a clear distinction between the two types of geological layers (have you any links or articles, etc)? Thank you again for your retroaction.