Creation Science Notes...
This page is reserved for brief, easy to read scientific
studies. I will change them as time allows me. Please be patient as I prefer
to exhaustively and meticulously research each note before posting it.
New information comes up almost daily so it's hard to keep up. You can
look through previous notes here
, listed by date and order of appearance. By all means, feel free to send
me a question or request a study on a certain subject and I will attempt
to include it in these notes here.
A study of the Joggins Cliffs
Part III: Interaction of strata and fossils
It is important to note that in more than one
instance, the polystrate plant fossils not only cut through multiple layers
of strata but also layers which are further cross-cut by other fossils.
Click on the image for the unmarked, full resolution photo.
This is site 12 on the map.
In this example you can see the first lycopod starts (or at least becomes
visible, it presumably continues on down through deeper strata in behind
the rock) below the second, but ends above it. The second lycopod
overlaps both the first and third lycopods, the third one being exposed
at least a further 5 meters or more higher than the bottom of the first.
It is very difficult to photograph fossils,
and this is one of the reasons drawings and descriptions are still so important
in a fossil study. The guidelines drawn in, although they may not
look it, trace the strata which are roughly uniform and parrallel.
The breaking up of the cliffs creates the bumps and edges which make it
difficult to follow the strata. The lycopods themselves (in this
photo, not the high-resolution one) have also been highlighted for better
contrast and visibility.
Remembering these are reeds and not logs, how long do you think they
would last before succumbing to rot? A year? maybe two?
One would think that after a year they would at least collapse and no longer
remain vertical. It would appear that these three lycopods were buried
quickly, one after the other. The 5 meters or so of rock would have
been accumulated quickly, certainly a year or less, not tens, hundreds,
thousands or millions of years.
In the same respect, these giant horsetails (again, a reed, and one
that still exists today in a much smaller form) are located at site 2,
just Northeast of the stairway entrance.
The calamites have been highlighted here for easier
identification. Calamite at point A continues on into the rock, the
one at point B goes in behind the rock and comes out again at point C.
Point D is the photo below. Point E goes into the rock and emerges
at point F.
Although only cross-cutting about eight feet worth
of strata, it is important to note that these plants were buried within
a short amount of time of each other, or at the same time in one giant
slurry of mud.
Again, as seems to be the rule in many fossil beds, these were broken,
contorted plants. Not one of them (though there are nine or more
in this one display alone) had roots - only one had a broken root ball
(point D), shown in this photo:
Other interesting artifacts:
There were two layers of compressed, fossil sea bed.
It can be identified by looking for the miriad of small (typically 3-5
mm across) leaves, fish scales and sea shells. The coal seams do
not have this. You will also find chunks of the strata on the beach,
such as this one.
The seams vary in thickness around the 16" mark.
They are located at points 9 on the
map. I think it very important to note that although I looked
intently, I did not find one fossil cutting vertically through either of
these layers, nor had anyone else that I could find. (Mind you, the
people I asked hadn't seen the inverted trees either)
Also noteworthy to visitors are two drainage tunnels
which are remnants of the previous coal mining operations. These
drainage tunnels are located at point 11 and around point 13.
Some other interesting finds were several fossil
trackways such as this one from a horseshoe crab:
Again, one has to ask: How could these be formed? Proposals
that I have heard of the water gently washing in and covering up the tracks,
thus protecting them, are just too impossible to me. Two waves would
certainly be enough to wash away any track. If it were harder clay
it may need some more working, but reality is these tracks had to have
been formed (once again) rapidly! One strata in particular, near
point 3, had miriads of these fossil trackways. Some of these rocks
had fallen to the beach and when split open were full of trackways on nearly
every layer. The most likely explanation is once again, a rapid formation.
A mud which chemically hardens (not unlike concrete) would be the best
candidate for preserving fossil tracks. But it would have to harden
quickly or else the tracks would be lost to erosion.
There have been several animals found in the base
of the hollow lycopods, which were then buried inside as the plant infilled.
The plant and the encased animals later became petrified.
It had been suggested that these plants grew, and
were buried in situ. As the plant died, the top broke off, leaving
of course the hollow trunk. Animals had then fallen into the trunk,
to eat others which fell in or to be eaten themselves. Eventually
the trapped animals or remains were buried inside the trunk, all of which
later became petrified. Up to seventeen skeletons had been found
in one trunk!2
Initially I felt this was a good hypothesis, and
even a possible evidence in favour of the long ages proposed by the uniformitarianists.
However, there are some problems with this hypothesis:
These plants were soft, hollow reeds. They
would not have stood up to any kind of burial as they would have collapsed
or caved in. More likely the plants were infilled either before or
during the time they were buried. Plus, the evidence I have already
presented flatly refutes the idea of in-situ growth.
For reasons like these there have been a few other
theories floating around which suggest perhaps the hollow trunks were laying
flat on the ground and were then somehow buried vertically trapping the
animals which had made the trunks their home. There are other proposals
that the animals came up through hollow, rotted roots or holes in the stumps.
To the best of my knowledge, the only animals found
were always at the bottom of the trunks. I am not aware if any have
ever been found in an inverted trunk.
The story in the roots:
The roots (as well as the lack thereof) tell a very
specific story. As I have already mentioned, very few of the plants
actually had root systems. Of those, many were broken roots and/or
roots with the rootlets stripped off of them.
Stigmaria (the roots of Sigilaria) are easily recognizable
by the pocks left behind from the rootlets.
The stigmaria grow like this fossil here, with the
rootlets radiating out. However, the roots I found were almost always
stripped of the rootlets, indicating a violent uprooting. There is
the possibility that the rootlets rot off before the roots but I would
not know about this. I suspect this is not the case and will go with
the more likely explanation, that of a violent uprooting.
One of the few stigmaria I found with rootlets still attached was this
one in the MacCarron riverbed:
One interpretation (consistant with the other evidences
and the hypothesis of violent uprooting) is that the rootlets held a clump
of topsoil together with the root, was violently uprooted and transported
elsewhere where it was buried and petrified. The discoloration of
the rock immediately surrounding the root is the topsoil that was transported
with the rootlets.
Once again, the roots I did find were broken fragments,
often stripped of their rootlets which were found in other rocks like some
mowed grass.
Conclusions:
There are still many who claim that these polystrate
fossils were formed from plants which were growing in situ, and slowly
buried, forming these fossil "forests". However, this is flatly refuted
by the evidence. Broken lycopod trunks and chunks, buried at
different, cross-secting levels; broken and missing roots; stripped rootlets;
inverted lycopods; and vertical (polystrate) lycopods suggest rapid, violent
burial by flash flood.
The cross-secting of many strata for many different
levels also seems to indicate that at the very least large chunks of the
geological strata were laid down virtually simultaneously.
With the exception of two compressed sea bed strata,
I see no reason (other than the sheer scale required of such a flood) not
to believe that the whole 2000 or so feet wasn't laid down together.
I have heard some suggest that this formation was made by a series of flash
floods over many years. This is certainly a fair suggestion, but
we are talking about a remarkable series of events: Enormous flash floods,
laying down thirty feet or more of strata, one right after the other for
years and years on end (save for two short breaks, each recorded by the
two sea-bed strata which would indicate it was underwater during those
times).
This also still does not answer the Creationist's
claim that geological strata do not take even tens, let alone thousands
or millions of years to lay down enormous depths of strata. Thirty
feet or more can be laid down very rapidly - rapid enough to bury and preserve
an entire giant lycopod. If that thirty feet was obviously laid down
rapidly, what reason is there for me to believe that strata this thick
(or thicker) elsewhere in the world represents thousands or millions of
years?
It is at least as likely that a world-wide flood
as recorded in Genesis made this whole formation in a relatively short
amount of time, each strata being laid down by enormous tides travelling
by the site twice daily. In fact, the two sea bed strata fit the
explanation of a global flood better than the hypothesis of many flash
floods. The volcanic ash deposits interspersed among the strata would
also fit the global catastrophe model as undoubtedly there would have been
tremendous volcanic activity going on during this time.
Joggins is a world-class fossil site, utterly unique.
It is truly fascinating and mysterious, raising questions in the mind of
the inquisitive.
Remaining questions:
-
Why were the lycopods and calamites buried vertically? We
have a model for trees to be buried vertically, as we see happening in
Spirit Lake, Mt. St. Helens, Washington, right now. But Joggins is
a very unique site - why did giant, hollow reeds get buried vertically
and infilled without collapsing? Why is it that the two petrified
wood tree trunks I did find were horizontal?
-
Why do we find animals encased in the bottom of these hollow trunks?
Have there ever been any found in the inverted trunks?
-
I didn't personally find any, but I have heard reports of slabs of rock
with "fossilized mud" which had dried in the sun enough to crack and flake.
If this fossil site was caused by a flood, why would we find dried, cracked
mud hardened into rock? How long would it take for mud to dry, crack
and flake? Is there another explanation for these formations?
ADDENDUM: January, 2003
It has been drawn to my attention that cracks in mud can form underwater.
"Mud cracks (shrinkage cracks) can also originate subaqueously as
a result of synaeresis (Jüngst 1934). A rapidly flocculated clay layer
develops shrinkage cracks due to compaction (White 1961). Similarly, an
increase in salinity can also generate shrinkage cracks in the mud layers
(Burst 1965). This process can be important in coastal lagoons and inland
sebkhas where salinity of water increases markedly during certain periods.
Kuehen (1963, 1965) and Dangeard et al. (1964) also produced underwater
shrinkage cracks in the laboratory.
"Such subaqueous shrinkage cracks differ from subaerial desiccation
cracks in that they are not so well-developed, the cracks are rather narrow,
and they do not possess well-developed V-shapes in transverse sections.
In general, subaqueous shrinkage cracks are less regular in form and often
incomplete. Sometimes, cracks are developed as open, straight to curved
cracks occurring singly or in sets, having a preferred orientation. The
cracks are 2-8 cm in length and known as linear-shrinkage cracks. According
to Picard and High (1973) linear shrinkage cracks develop when relatively
thick water-saturated thixotropic muds dehydrate usually under standing
water. "
(Depositional Sedimentary Environments. Second Edition. Springer-Verlag,
New York. 1980 p.60).
Once again, what appeared at first to be evidence of long periods of
time adds at least as well into the hypothesis of a massive flood. |
-
I have also come across a claim of a creek bed eroded into strata and preserved
by infilling. Lack of strata erosion has always been cited Creationists
to claim that strata do not take long periods of time to form. If
this is in fact an eroded stream or creek bed, this is the first of its
kind
in the world that I personally have ever heard of. If true, why is
it here? This entire site loudly proclaims rapid formation, burial
and upheaval. This seems the most backward place to find such a unique
feature. Is this strata vertically cross-sected by any fossils?
Go back to:
Part I: A study of the cliffs of Joggins, Nova
Scotia
Part II: The fossil "trees"
Pages and photos Copyright © 2002, Ian A. Juby
|