the Geologic Column.
The geologic column does not simply refer to the fact
that rocks are found in the Earth in layers, but it mainly refers
to the classification of rocks and fossils based on index fossils
and the theoretical division of these layers into
"ages". These divisions are based on fossils and the
comparison of rocks containing them with rocks found in distant
The first problem is the fact that the geologic column assumes
the three principles of stratigraphy. Two
of which have been shown wrong, and one has never been tested.
Another problem is that all available sources claiming that
fossil are found as shown in the geologic column, assume that
they do. Yet, none of them give any actual evidence that fossils
are found as claimed. The use of these geological ages is so
pervasive that it makes a an independent determination of fossil
distribution and back checking the validity of the geologic
column practically impossible. This gives the appearance that it
has been proven.
Fossils do not always line up in layers. Often only one layer,
of fossils, is found at a given site. This is particularly common
with vertebrates. Some times they are found in multiple
layers, but a statistical study of their distribution shows the
that even index fossils are seldom found layered on top of one
another. It also shows that many fossils are artificially
restricted to a few layers. Different names are given to similar
fossils in different strata. This study can be found in
Woodmorappe's book Studies
in Flood Geology.
The fact is that the geologic column is not found complete any
place on Earth, except in books, and on web sites. While the
geologic column consists of 10 basic layers, all 10 layers are
found in very few places making up less than 1% of Earth's
surface. The theory says it should be 100 miles thick. On average
world wide, the sediment layers are only 1 mile thick. The entire
geologic column was patched together from various locations.
Now there are places claimed to have the entire geological
column. What they mean is that they have found layers that they
can assign to all 10 geologic ages. This list is as found at
Entire Geologic Column in North Dakota"
Ghadames Basin in Libya.
- The Beni Mellal Basin in Morrocco.
Tunisian Basin in Tunisia.
- The Oman Interior Basin in Oman.
Western Desert Basin in Egypt.
- The Adana Basin in Turkey.
- The Iskenderun Basin in Turkey.
- The Moesian Platform in Bulgaria.
- The Carpathian Basin in Poland.
- The Baltic Basin in the USSR.
- The Yeniseiy-Khatanga Basin in the USSR.
- The Farah Basin in Afghanistan.
- The Helmand Basin in Afghanistan.
- The Yazd-Kerman-Tabas Basin in Iran.
- The Manhai-Subei Basin in China.
Jiuxi Basin China.
- The Tung t'in - Yuan Shui Basin China.
- The Tarim Basin China.
- The Szechwan Basin China.
- The Yukon-Porcupine Province Alaska.
Williston Basin in North Dakota.
- The Tampico Embayment Mexico.
- The Bogata Basin Colombia.
- The Bonaparte Basin, Australia.
- The Beaufort Sea Basin/McKenzie River Delta
Of the 25 claimed locations I could only find strata graphic
information on 6 of them. There is little if any mention of
fossils other then micro fossils such a pollen. Often the rocks
seem to have been assigned their geologic age by comparing them
with rocks from other locations. Most of these are 100's of miles
away and there is no direct observation of a physical
connection. In some cases the "ages" are assigned to a
rock layer based on the strata above or below it.
The 6 that I could find information on provided some
Ghadames Basin in Libya.
First of all the only reference to fossils, was a general
reference to micro
fossils so this site seems to have little or no baring on
Contrary to the claim that this site representing the entire
geological column, it is missing the permian period. How can one
claim the entire geological column is present when it is missing
an entire period? The geological column labels seem to have been
assigned based on the correlation
with rocks from all across Libya. This means that there was
sufficient room for subjective analyses, and that the labeling
process assumed the geological column and thus can not be used as
evidence for its validity.
of the Ghadames Basin hints that coincidence rather
long ages brought these layers together as they are. The
cross-section shows some 25 fracture lines. The pattern suggests
that rather than being fault lines they are the result of
compression stress. The Cretaceous, Jurassic, Triassic and
Cretaceous seem to have been forced over the others. This seems
to have occurred after they and the rock beneath them had buckled
down and before both had hardened completely. Such an event could
have occurred during the Flood while the layers where not yet
Tunisian Basin in Tunisia.
While this area is rich in fossils, Other than Pre-Cambrian
only Late Permian through Late Cretaceous seem to be
represented and so it does not really contain the entire
geological column. In at least five of the formations in area
lack biostratigraphically useful fossils" and were at
least to some degree the assigned ages are based on indirect
means such as the "age" assigned the strata above or
below it. So it is circular reasoning to claim this site as
evidence for the geological column in place and in order.
Western Desert Basin in Egypt.
The only geologic "ages" that seem to be
represented here are Jurassic and Cretaceous. Pre-Cambrian can be
included since the basement rock is automatically labeled as
such. The description seems to suggest that this is all that is
actually found at this location. So only 2 out of 10
geologic periods seem to be represented.
Jiuxi Basin China.
Only the Mesozoic and Cenozoic era's seem to be here with no
sign of the Paleozoic except for the Pre-Cambrian being the
generic label the basement rock. In fact it seems to only include
Tertiary and Cretaceous periods. The Tertiary being part of
the Cenozoic and the Cretaceous being part of the Mesozoic. So
only 2 out of 10 geologic periods seem to be represented
here. Further more the nearby Qilian
Shan ( mountain range ) Ordovician strata can be found over
Pliocene strata. ( part of the Tertiary ) So contrary to being an
intact geological column there is a place were "older"
rock is found on top of "younger" rock and thus in the
The Bonaparte Basin,
This one is fairly complete in that all "geologic
period" are present but it in no way qualifies as a
complete column, since there are numerous gaps when the strata
are spread out on the geologic column chart.
There seems to be cases of interbedding that go between
periods. They are at Devonian / Carboniferous and Triassic
/ Jurassic. There may be others as well. There are also cases of
interbedding spanning large portion of periods that should still
be separated by 10's of millions of years. They occur in the
Devonian, Carboniferous, Permian, Triassic, Jurassic,
Cretaceous, and Tertiary.
This means that the evidence suggests that this column formed
allot more rapidly than the geologic column suggests. I can
find no reference to how any of the Rock layers were assigned
their respective ages but at the same time I can find no
reference to fossils, so it is doubtful that they were used. This
means that this site shows nothing about fossil order.
Williston Basin in North Dakota.
Also known as the North Dakota Column, it is claimed to
contain the entire geologic column. As stated earlier the total
theoretical column depth 100 miles, but the depth of the
Williston Basin is only 3.4 miles; this means that much of the
column is missing. Such large amounts of sedimentation are
possible during a year long global Flood, because it was laid
down sideways making it quite possible to lay down such large
amounts of sediment vary quickly, the main factors are available
sediment and the rate current flow.
Now it does have rocks labeled as all 10 ages, but some
interesting data can be found in The
Geological Atlas of the Western Canada Sedimentary Basin. The
Williston Basin is part of the Western
Canada Sedimentary Basin.
I have looked at how they labeled some these strata:
Hay River Embayment(van Hees, 1964) - a depositional area
northwest of the Peace-Athabasca Arch, developed on the Interior
Platform, containing remnants of rocks that have been interpreted as
being equivalent to Lower and Middle Cambrian units of central Alberta.
The rocks have not been dated, and some of the strata may be younger
than here interpreted. The embayment extends westward into the
mountains of northeastern British Columbia.
Atlas Sedimentary Basin - Chapter 8
This indicates that when lacking fossils, they find rocks that
they can interpret as equivalent to the rocks they are dating, so
as to set a geologic age. According BIOSTRATIGRAPHY,
WILLISTON BASIN "biostratigraphy based on pollen and
spores has been used to determine the age of the coal beds."
Other fossils include shells and fish but many layers have few if
any fossils. In general these layers have not been dated by
fossils. Further more there is little reference to radiometric
dates beyond pre-Cambrian. The one set that is mentioned produced
Local lithostratigraphy and sedimentology are generally well
known. However, the paucity of reliable radiometric dates and the
absence of biostratigraphic control has hindered correlation within and
between the assemblages and precluded accurate dating of each
Atlas Sedimentary Basin - Chapter 6
There are several other cases were poor or no
biostratigraphic data is mention, as well as no reference to
radiometric dates. As a result it seems that many of these strata
were assigned geologic ages, based on comparing rocks. Then the
comparisons were interpreted based on the geological column. They
seem to be assuming that because of the geologic column, the gaps
must contain ages for which they have no fossils.
The conclusion that they have a complete geologic column in
this area is base on the assumption of the existence of the
geologic column. This is circular reasoning.
If that is not enough there is a place were a rock layer
labeled Devonian can be found between rock layers labeled
Carboniferous. Devonian is alleged to be older than
Carboniferous, this would suggest that they are really the same
Curiously while the theoretical column thickness is 100 miles,
the maximum thickness of sediment found any place is only 16
miles. That means that at any given location at least 84% of the
geologic column is missing.
Out of place layers.
It is known that the layers of the geologic
column are some times found out of place, that is " older
" layers on top of " younger " ones. They are
referred to as over thrusts. An over thrust would be one layer of
rock being pushed over another. Here are some examples:
||Out of place layers
||North / West China
||Ordovician over Pliocene
505 million - 5.1 million
|Ordovician strata is over Pliocene gravel with a valley
filled with Pleistocene gravel
||Precambrian over Cretaceous
644 million - 144 million
|350 miles and 15-30 miles wide and goes from Glacier National
Park to Alberta, Canada. However there is a fault line.
||Near El Paso, Texas, at West Crazy Cat Canyon
||Ordovician over Cretaceous
450 million - 130 million
|No physical evidence of an overthrust.
|The Glarus Overthrust
||Near Schwanden, Switzerland
|| Permian - Jurassic - Eocene
supposed to be
Eocene - Jurassic - Permian
|21 miles long. An overthrust is assumed because the fossils
are out of place
||Southern Arizona, USA
||Permian over Cretaceous
286 million - 144 million
|Contact is like gear meshing. Sliding would ground off lower
||Cretaceous over Eocene
200 million - 60 million
|Older rock allegedly pushed all the way from africa
||Paleozoic - Jurassic - Tertiary - Paleozoic supposed to
be Tertiary - Jurassic -Paleozoic
||Fossils in the wrong order
||Eocene - Triassic - Jurassic - Cretaceous; supposed to be
Triassic - Jurassic - Cretaceous - Eocene
||Alleged to have been trusted 60 miles
Shan is interesting since the upper stratum is over gravel.
At first glance this would seem like a perfect example of an
overthrust but the implication is that all of the underling
Pliocene material and Pleistocene material are gravel. An
overthrust would grind the rock at the contact point not two hole
rock layers pushing one aside and going over the other. If the
Pliocene material and Pleistocene material were gravel to start
with both would have tended to be pushed a side. The top lay is
partly broken up but that does prove it is an over thrust. They
seem to have been laid down together, with gavel under solid
In some places the Lewis Overthrust has a well defined line
between the Precambrian and Cretaceous. These places lack the
deformation and rubble that would result from an overthrust. Some
places do have such deformation and there is a fault line which
shows there is tectonic activity. It could be an over thrust, but it
could still have formed were it is, the fault would result from
subsequent tectonic activity.
Out of Place Fossils
Fossils are often found out of place according to geologic
column. Some of those relating to humans are discussed under
Out of Place Artifacts. A list
of over 200 some out
fossils has been compiled by John Woodmorappe.
Out of place fossils are ether ignored as
anecdotal if not published by a "proper"
(evolutionist) scientific journal, or explained a way by one of
two methods if they are. These methods are:
||Fossil eroded from older rock
||Fossil is washed down in to older strata
Reworking is used more often since preference is given to
" younger " fossils in dating layers.
Mississippi and Cambrian limestone near the bottom Grand Canyon
shows they formed at the same time, erasing at least 155
million years from the geologic record.
fossils like the Coelacanth and Nautilus have not left
any fossils for 100's of million years according uniformitarian
geologists. These and other living fossils were all thought to be
extinct based on fossils. They have all been found alive. This
shows that a lack of fossils does not mean that an animal was not
living when a given layer was laid down. This places the entire
stratigraphic order and time sequence in question. Further more
the fact that these animals are unchanged after the alleged
million years strongly suggests that the time did not happen.
As near as I can tell the Geologic Column only is a mental
abstraction. There are sufficient assumptions made in classifying
fossils and rocks as to justify questioning its legitimacy. There
are also sufficient anomalies to show that the time scale is
wrong and that the fossil order depicted in the Geologic Column
is at best a local phenomenon. Basically the Geologic Column is
found only in books and web sites and does not really exist.
What is needed is a statistical study of fossil locations that
does not involve the geologic column classification system, but
is based only on the actual three dimensional location of fossils,
latitude, longitude, and depth relative to sea level. Surface
altitude above sea level should be included as well, this would
give a true picture of both local and global fossil distribution,
not one based on a theoretical classification system.