COMMENTS ON WIND-BLOWN SAND DEPOSITS
The Navajo Sandstone
However, on this issue, many Creationists quote Carl Froede’s article in TJ as their position. In his introductory statement he says that the Navajo was “sorted and deposited in massive sandstone layers during the Middle Flood Division of the Flood Event Timeframe.” This portion is usually attributed to the 150 days that the waters prevailed upon the earth after the rain ceased on the 40th Day to the 190th Day. This creates a problem. Dinosaurs were roaming over the Navajo sandstone right in the middle of this period of the catastrophe. Furthermore, the Morrison Formation, stratigraphically above the Navajo, and therefore deposited after it, is one of the more famous dinosaur bearing layers with many footprints, fossils and coprolites. From the Scriptural account, all the animals were dead after the 40 days of rain, but the Navajo and Morrison formations indicate that the dinosaurs were still alive. The Navajo Sandstone therefore indicates there is something very wrong with the current model of “one Flood did everything”.
The Coconino Sandstone.
The Coconino also has other evidence of its wind-blown origin. It includes the extent and homogeneity of the unit, slump marks that are distinctive of dry-sand avalanching, ripple-mark orientation, rain-drop pits, sharply defined footprints, and reptilian tracks up the steep foreset slopes. If anyone chooses to look carefully at modern dunes, they would find an abundance of climbing translatent beds, with coarsening-up laminae that form only by the migration and accretion of low-amplitude wind ripples in aeolian environments. Such feds are completely absent from marine or lacustrine environments because the wind ripples that create them do not form under water. The fact that wind-ripple and distinctive bedding and laminations occur throughout the Coconino Sandstone tends to refute the marine hypothesis for their origin.
The large and small reptile tracks and invertebrates like scorpions have left footprints and trails. Yet these and the rain-drop pits have been interpreted by those holding to “one Flood did everything” as being evidence of marine formation. The rain-drop pits are suggested as being due to bubbles, for example. The pits which are found are, in fact, distinctive, since McKee points out that they illustrate the cohesion of sand grains with added moisture, and, importantly, a re-orientation of the crater axes with respect to the bedding slopes. By contrast, bubbles emerging under water will tend to be completely symmetrical.
To my mind, at least, the evidence of the high angle for the cross-bedding, the reptile and other tracks, and the raindrop pits all point to a desert dune environment for this formation, not a marine one. It is only when it is absolutely essential to maintain a marine origin because of one’s theoretical position on the issue that the data are force-fitted into that mould.