Out-of-order strata occur at the Lewis Overthrust (Talk.Origins)

Claim CD102.1:


 * At the Lewis Overthrust in Alberta and Montana, Precambrian limestone rests on top of Cretaceous shales, which conventionally are dated much later. The evidence, and common sense, do not support the explanation that the discontinuity is caused by a thrust fault.

Source: Price, George McCready, 1913. The Fundamentals of Geology. Mountain View, CA: Pacific Press Publishing Assoc., pp. 7-8, 86-101.

Whitcomb, John C. Jr. and Henry M. Morris, 1961. The Genesis Flood. Philadelphia, PA: Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Co., pp. 185-195.

CreationWiki response:

It needs to be noted that both of the sources are more than 40 years old, so they are both likely to have some out of date information.

Also, Talk.Origins rebuttal of the claim completely ignores Burdick's CRSQ report. He concluded that the Lewis Overthrust wasn't a real overthrust because of a utter lack of mylonite, breccia, and slickensides.

Burdick "Additional Notes Concerning The Lewis Thrust-Fault" CRSQ Volume 11, Number 1 June, 1974.

Whitcomb and Morris refer to the contact line as a fault line on page 187. The real question is whether or not there is evidence of sufficient motion to justify uniformitarian claims. It turns out that at least in some locations the evidence is lacking.

So what? There are other locations where this is not the case. The Lewis Overthrust could have resulted from one sediment flow settling over another.

What is the basis for the claim about that the image (Fig. 17, pg. 190) is 200 feet above the contact line? Whitcomb and Morris were in personal contact with Lammerts, while Talk Origins is basing their claim on at least third party information.

Talk Origins is misrepresenting Whitcomb and Morris. They clearly refer to the folding but it is in a different location from the area under discussion. The quote is in a footnote and they quote only the portion relevant to the area under discussion. The portion added by Talk Origins is clearly referring to a different location than the part used by Whitcomb and Morris. They did not quote out of context, but simply used the part that was relevant to the location under discussion.