The Proceedings of the Eighth International Conference on Creationism (2018)

sandstones must have had a very nearby mica source during its deposition, or perhaps they are not eolian and rather subaqueous in origin. We have not extensively sampled all of the formations in this paper, with the exception of the Coconino, but, with that formation in particular, there are no nearby beaches, mica-bearing outcrops or known fluvial deposits stratigraphically within the formation. We expect that some of the other formations we have mentioned in this report may exhibit the same textural characteristics and stratigraphic relationships. There are many other criteria besides mica to consider when determining an environment of deposition for cross-bedded sandstones. One of these, angular K-feldspar, is addressed by Whitmore and Strom (2018). We do not think it is a coincidence that many of our samples had both angular feldspars and mica grains. Although these are only two criteria, they raise serious questions that need to be answered by the conventional model, or else re-explained in light of a different model for the deposition of these sandstones, namely with subaqueous processes as the primary mode of transport. As further research emerges on these sandstones, we expect that it will continue to call into question the eolian model of their deposition, and to further align with Flood geology. Whitmore and Garner (2018) and Whitmore et al. (2014, 2015) provide many more indicators that the Coconino is a subaqueous deposit including dolomite (ooids, cement, clasts, rhombs, beds), parabolic recumbent folds, texture, petrology and sedimentology. These and other features are likely present in many other cross-bedded sandstones, which if identified, could lead to a reinterpretation of their depositional environments as well. FURTHER WORK We encourage further petrographic work on many of the sandstones we have examined in this study, especially those other than the Coconino Sandstone. We were shocked to find out how very little petrographic work has been completed and/or published on many of these formations. Further documentation of micas in cross-bedded sandstones, along with investigations of other criteria (K-feldspar rounding, soft-sediment deformation, petrology, sedimentology, etc.), will likely bolster our conclusion that these sandstones were deposited in a subaqueous environment, such as provided by the Genesis Flood. We also encourage further experimentation on the conditions under which mica disintegrates, such as those performed by Anderson et al. (2017), in order to determine what exactly is the mechanism that preserves mica for long transport distances underwater. CONCLUSION Mica is commonly found as an accessory mineral in cross-bedded sandstones that are currently understood to be either entirely or partially eolian in origin, and the mica found is detrital, rather than diagenetic. Laboratory and field observations have shown mica can only survive very short periods (or distances) of transport by eolian processes, but can persist for very long durations and distances by subaqueous transport. For these reasons, we suggest that the presence of mica in cross-bedded sandstones is an important criterion when determining the depositional environment. While this has already been suggested by many authors (Hallam 1981, p. 20; Mader 1983, p. 589, 590; Moorhouse 1959, p. 343; Tucker 1981, p. 45), it has been previously neglected, often in favor of cursory observation and hasty interpretation without detailed petrographic analysis. We believe this is the case because, as far as we know, this is the first time widespread mica has been reported from any of these formations. Although more research is necessary to extend our conclusions to similar deposits around the world, ubiquitous mica in cross-bedded sandstones is something that Flood critics will need to reckon with if they want to continue to use these sandstones as evidence against the Flood. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Most of the samples used in this work were collected as part of the FAST project to study the Coconino Sandstone during the years between 2007 and 2011 which was partially funded by ICR. Other parts of this project were funded by Calgary Rock and Materials Services Inc. and private sources. Cedarville University provided logistical support. The authors thank the many people who have provided help, support and funding over the years. Special thanks also go to Paul Garner who helped collect many of the studied samples and has been an integral part of the entire Coconino Sandstone project. REFERENCES Agatston, R.S. 1952. Tensleep Formation of the Big Horn Basin. In Wyoming Geological Association Guide Book, Seventh Annual Field Conference, Southern Big Horn Basin, Wyoming , pp. 44-48. Anderson, C.J., A. Struble, and J.H. Whitmore. 2017. Abrasion resistance of muscovite in aeolian and subaqueous transport experiments. Aeolian Research 24: 33-37. Anderson, C.J., M.S. Cheney, A. Struble, and J.H. Whitmore. 2013. Muscovite survival in simulated (turbulent) eolian and subaqueous conditions. Journal of Creation Theology and Science Series C: Earth Sciences 3: 1-3. Arthurton, R.S., I.C. Burgess, and D.W. Holliday. 1978. Permian and Triassic. In The Geology of the Lake District , ed. F. Moseley, pp. 189- 206. Yorkshire Geological Society, Occasional Publication No. 3. Baars, D.L. 1961. Permian blanket sandstones of Colorado Plateau. In Geometry of Sandstone Bodies , eds. J.A. Peterson, and J.C. Osmond, pp. 179-207. Tulsa, Oklahoma: American Association of Petroleum Geologists. Baars, D.L. 1961. Permian blanket sandstones of the Colorado Plateau. In Geometry of Sandstone Bodies , eds. J.A. Peterson and J.C. Osmond, pp. 179-207. Tulsa, Oklahoma: American Association of Petroleum Geologists. Baars, D.L. 1974. Permian rocks of north-central New Mexico. In Silver Anniversary Guidebook: Ghost Ranch, central-northern New Mexico , ed. C.T. Siemers, pp. 167-169. New Mexico Geological Society, Twenty-Fifth Field Conference. Baars, D.L. 1979. The Permian System. In Permianland , ed. D.L. Baars, pp. 1-6. Guidebook of the Four Corners Geological Society, Ninth field conference. Baars, D.L. 2010. Geology of Canyonlands National Park, Utah. In Geology of Utah’s Parks and Monuments , 3 rd edition, ed. D.A. Sprinkel, T.C. Chidsey, Jr., and P.B. Anderson, pp. 61-83. Utah Geological Association and Bryce Canyon Natural History Association. Utah Geological Association Publication 28. Baars, D.L., and W.R. Seager. 1970. Stratigraphic control of petroleum in White Rim Sandstone (Permian) in and near Canyonlands National Park, Utah. AAPG Bulletin 54:709-718. Baltz, R.M. 1982. Geology of the Arica Mountains . San Diego State University, California [Thesis]. Biek, R.F., G.C. Willis, M.D. Hylland, and H.H. Doelling. 2010. Geology of Zion National Park, Utah. In Geology of Utah’s Parks andMonuments , 3 rd edition, ed. D.A. Sprinkel, T.C. Chidsey, Jr., and P.B. Anderson, pp. 109-143. Utah Geological Association and Bryce Canyon Natural History Association. Utah Geological Association Publication 28. Borsch et al. ◀ Micas in ancient sandstones ▶ 2018 ICC 319