According to my theory, there should have been extensive volcanic activity in the beginning of the flood. We should find evidence for this activity in the form of volcanic ash and gas
Im not sure why that assertion is the case because we should be able to connect a reason with the geological results. For example, we know the reasons for several types of oceanic vents. These being
1. Island Arc deep mantle upwellings (giving us specific ophiolitic and serpentinitic rocks with contact zones of enriched sikica and heavy metal deposists)
2. Mid-Oceanic ridge mechanics where the volcanics are speciic calc-alkaline "lavas' similar to pahoe hoe and aa lavas
3.Hots spots and fumaroles of deep ocean areas where mantle thinning releases sulphitic type lavas with hevy mineral accumulations
5 Acidic (enriched quartz and low Ca Plagioclases) continental volcanic deposist
6. Flood volcanics similar to oceanic mantkle deposits (none of these deposits except those in the Canadian and Australian Shields show chemical partitioning )
7. ANATEKTIC ( remelted continental deposists due to intense tectonic pressures). These are similar to the rocks of the Eastern US Piedmont and Appalachian fronts and the Central pre CambrianMountains of Australia and Russia.
In each case specific minerals that enable us to date these deposits are present. What mineralsoccur in your areas of theory?. In each case of volcanic belts on the planet we know quite well the AGES, THE ENVIRONMENTS, THE MINERALOGY SUITES, and the geological SURROUNDINGS. Im not sure youve provided anything new here but in no case do I see that these volcanic deposits are necessarily precursors to a worldwide flood. In the Perian, for example, we know that the great Deccan volcanics and associated areas occured, but at tha
e same time, we know that is many areas of the planet the entire surfces were bone dry because we have fossils of terrestrial animals in dune deposits, swampy areas, normal dry plain areas where rain had fallen and some sediment infilled for a cyclothemic deposits of many layers of footprints over footprints. In that time we have lots of exampes of anoxic deposits incorporated into coal measures (swamp deposits in terrestrial basins) and vast pyrite deposits associated with ironstones in unique lake waters and palludal deposits
The tidal heating of the mantle radically decreased the solubility of its volatiles (mainly of water but also other typical volcanic gases). Hence vast portions of the mantle became over-saturated, therefore water and other volatiles nucleated to supercritical liquid bubbles.
What minerl deposits do you propose and what evidence is there of them?
Marine and flood sediment: I think that we have agreed that the duration of the flood was too short to generate any marine sediment in the form of Pelagic sediment. We also agreed that riverine flood sediment should be expected. You don't need to convince me about that
No we have not agreed on that point. Youve asserted it and Ive denied that you can go for ANY length of time without depositing some kind of sedimentological record. Itss hard to deny that fact. riverine sediments , seasonal deposits in risng seas, seasonal deposits in receeding seas are all traceable by sedimentology and isotope chemistry. I can take you to sediment deposits going on today where water is rising due to ice melting and the infilling of quite "prograding" basins and inlets can trace their sediment loads to only 50 years of seasonal water rise by rising tides. Its not possible I say and the sedimentological record will bear me out on that. I think you have a really hard row to hoe on being convincing.
AS far as a "gradual" water rise over 150 days, I cannot see how this could ever be described as Gentle. Have you considered a water budget to describe the amount of water being generetaed per day. I submit that tidal forces alone would be enough to throw axial traces off by a significant amount.
Ill call it "tidal sloshing" would be horrendous and would generate its own sediment load from soils, ewrosion and submarine flysch depositing and shelf collapse from continental shelves.
AGain, I cant buy what your satying because youve not shown anyplace on earth where your theory even evidences itself.
I dont think I have to read your book to learn that things are different than I know the evidence to show they really are NOT different.
Instead, lets take a place on the planet that you say fits your theory and then lets compare evidence and you tell me where my science understanding is wrong. I am totally willing to debate it out, if you wish to take the time.
what sedimentation does a rare high tide create?
A good model for a contemporary "occasional high tide" is the Bay of Fundy as seen from areas like the Minas Basin and Cape Split. These areas are generally vast mud deposits that , according to the mechanics of particle movement, can movea bout 50 tons of sediment peracre PER TIDAL CYCLE.(Hjolstrums law of sediment movement).
Cape split is built up from routine tidal rises each year and , if it wouldnt be mined and scoured by people wanting stone, itd be a long peninsula of gravel just from little Minas basin.
Look at mere beachsand deposits during Sandy . The New Jersey and New York beaches were devastated by a regular seasonal Northeaster. I would say that a flood deposit that would encompass several hundred acre feet (times the number of surface acres on the planet) divided by the number of days you are talking about would in my estimation, be an incredible amount of energy laden water.
OH YEH, When did this flood occur? And how do you know?