Intracratonic Basins
The intracratonic sedimentary basins consist in fills of large areas within continental crustal stable masses. They are characterized by deposits related to continental and shallow marine paleoenvironments, with significant gaps, hiatus between depositional megasequences. They have generally round or oval shapes, and have long histories of relatively slow subsidence. Classic examples of such notable are the basins Williston, Michigan and Illinois, in North America, Paraná Basin, Parnaíba, Solimões, Amazonas, in Brazil, Murzuk and Al Kufra, in Libya, Karoo and Congo in Africa, Surat in Australia, among others.
The origin of these basins has set up a puzzle in geology. The tectonic reconstructions at Plate Tectonics paradigm is very difficult. The Theory of Earth Expansion offers a plausible explanation. In the Paleozoic Era, Earth could have a radius smaller than the current one. There were no extensive processes of oceanic expansion, much less what is so-called subduction of plates. Dominated continental environments such as alluvial, fluvial and deltaic, lakes, deserts, glacial events, and shallow seas, never deep marine oceanic sedimentation, as seen during and after the Mesozoic Era. Formation of Intracratonic basins would promote processes of crustal uplift buckling and bending of the marginal arches and depressions with precursors rifts which later would then be filled by marginal erosion of these arches, with episodic sedimentation of clastic, carbonate, salt, ecc.
Tectonic provinces of South America (Mantovani et al., 2001). AB, Amazon Basin; AC, Amazon Craton; CA, Central Andes; CT, Chilenia Terrane; MP, Mantiqueira Province; NA, Northern Andes; NME, Northeastern Margin of South Atlantic Shield; P, Patagonia; PB, Paraná Basin; PCB, Phanerozoic collisional belts; PNB, Parnaiba Basin; RLPC, Rio de la Plata Craton; SA, Southern Andes; SFC, São Francisco Craton; SP, Southern Province. In green major areas dominate intracratonic basins.
North-south cross section of Muruzq Basin. (Modified after Pallas, 1980). Typical profile of intracratonic basin. Large intracratonic Paleozoic Basin, straddling the Boundaries of Algeria, Niger and Chad. The Basin is filled with sediment ranging in age between Cambrian to Quaternary, with maximum total thickness of more than 3000 meter in the central part.
Intracratonic basins frequently are filled by Paleozoic sediments. At that time Earth probably was much small and there wouldn't deep basins, no subduction, no pangea, just shallow seas and continental sedimentation. Understanding of Earth's evolution is crucial to solve many problems enrooted by geological dogmas including origin of Intracratonic Basins.
that was an impressive lecture...Thanku..
ReplyDeleteYou are welcome. I believe that if we want to better understand the origin of the intracratonic basins we need to change our thinking about the evolution of the Earth.
ReplyDeleteI agree but am confused by the above presentation. I hope to get a handle on it soon. I like the illustration of the Niger-Chad Basin.
DeleteOK.
DeleteSee the description just below the video.
Hm there have been some really informative theories on intracratonic basins, this seems a bit outdated..
ReplyDeleteI might not be updated. Do you have references to new theories about origin of intracratonic basins? If so, could you list them? Thanks.
DeleteDo u mean that there is no deep marine deposits prior to Paleozoic?
ReplyDeleteAs to the mechanism of formation, though still debatable, there are many theories. You can say more about intracratonic basins than this. the relationship between expansion of earth and intracratonic basin formation is flawed
No, I did not say that there was no deep sedimentation prior to Paleozoic Era, but during it. During the Paleozoic Era dominated shallow not deep marine sedimentation. I do not think the statement of the Earth Expanding Theory is fail. It certainly explains a lot, but few give it importance, because they live in a paradigm.
DeleteWhat you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever read. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone who was unfortunate enough to stumble upon this is now dumber for having read it. I award you no points, and may whatever god(s) you believe in have mercy on your soul.
ReplyDeleteVery unhappy your comment. You need to study more, so it will not become ignorant.
DeleteI am also a geologist and I agree with Ronan. That was a waist of 10 minutes. Where the hell did you study geology?
DeleteThe super continents did all join and the rest of the world was covered by oceans.
Mars is a lot smaller than Earth and therefore has cooled quicker so there is no more crustal movement.
Also what science have you used to justify the world has doubled in size? You mention no numbers.
I would like to know what your objective of this video is.
Dear Geologist.
DeleteYou cannot possibly be a geologist.
And I don't even think English is your first language.
Best regards,
An actual geologist with a university degree
Dear anonymous, you are right! English is not my first language. You are wrong...I am geologist, but I think I've learned geology reading rocks, based on natural laws, of course, not dogmas present in books based on uniformitarianism. I recommend you study geology with humility and open mind. Try study publications of Samuel Warren Carey. Our knowledge about planet Earth and its evolution is so smaller as our minds. Thanks.
DeleteDear Geologist,
DeleteTo be a geologist, think of (actual) geologists as a group of friends or a club that has a common interest. Now to get into this nerdy group or club, you must first succeed at a kind of initiation. This initiation is called UNIVERSITY.
Furthermore this initiation awards you a UNIVERSITY DEGREE, the reason this UNIVERSITY DEGREE is not frowned upon by the human society (apart from uneducated conspiracy nutjobs) is because the knowledge gained is not from years of research trail and error and smart minds working together thesis after thesis arguing and discussing possibilities. Your way of self education and critical analysis of the natural world based on your own beliefs... blah blah blah i could go on for hours but how can you possibly claim to be open minded and not ignorant when you only take into consideration the opinions of uneducated people who are only educated by their own beliefs and blinded by seeing what they want to see (ignorance).. I am a student of Geology and in no way shape or form will i ever try and exclude information or shield anyone from knowledge and research I will do in the future. Your claim of someone not telling you something about earth history is absolutely preposterous, what bad could possibly arise from such a conspiracy?
Read a F*%@# buck you idiot.
kind regards,
One of the geologist (to be) not telling truth..
“Geology is the prisoner of several dogmas that have had widespread influence on the development of scientific thought.” — William R. Corliss, 1975
Delete“It is a singular and notable fact that, while most other branches of science have emancipated themselves from the trammels of metaphysical reasoning, the science of geology still remains imprisoned in ‘a priori’ theories.” — Sir Henry H. Howorth, 1895
I hope this is enough for a stupid approach...
If you'd like to discuss Earth Theories with me and Dr. Maxlow and others for a CNPS Special Project, let me know at LKINDR at Yahoo dotcom.
DeleteYou may like to see the website at: www.expansiontectonics.com for a better understanding
ReplyDeleteThank you very much Dr. Maxlow.
ReplyDeleteI am so happy I watched the video at the end. It was definitely an eye-opener. It opened my eyes to the fact the I could not use any of the other information you have given because the source cant be trusted. What you wrote did seem plausible until the video stated your opinion on the extent to which you think the earth has expanded since there was a solid crust and the rate at which this expansion was supposed to have happened. Where do you suppose the material for this growth came from? Are you saying the earth doubled in diameter or volume? If enough material was added to the system from externally to double its size in the last 65my how has the crust formed, instead of being molten or covered with impact craters, and why are we not still being bombarded by this material today? Too many holes in your thought process here, and no data. Wheres the data to back it up. You seem to be relying on your limited senses as your only source for data collection like those crazy flat earth people.
ReplyDeleteThere is certainly much to learn about the Earth and its evolution. On Expanding Earth, I suggest you read the books by Samuel Warren Carey and the publications by Dr. James Maxlow.
DeleteThink ... imagine a child who was just born. It has an initial size and will certainly continue to grow into adulthood. Now, imagine a child who has just been born and remains until the end of his life with the same original size ... This reflection is important to keep in mind. It seems that in nature almost everything expands except the thinking that is in the minds of many geoscientists. Therefore, it is crucial to question the propositions of uniformitarian geology if we want to advance knowledge. Many dogmas of geology that still constitute the current paradigm are not based on laws of nature and, therefore, there are so many inconsistencies.
We should all just go back to our books
ReplyDeleteCorrect! And read the books critically. Never accept everything written there. If the proposals are in accordance with the laws of nature, at least they are possible and the way is plausible, otherwise they are just dogmas.
Delete