Most people imagine that it takes millions of years to form sedimentary rock. That is certainly the impression we are given in our culture today. And because of that impression, many people dismiss the claims of the Bible, which describes Creation in six Earth-rotation days some 6,000 years ago.
However, some Australian scientists have developed a revolutionary new chemical process that transforms loose sediment into rock within days.1,2 The invention does not use strange, synthetic materials, but mimics natural processes. Some may find it hard to believe, but it’s true. Contrary to the general impression, it does not take millions of years to produce sedimentary rock. All it takes are the right conditions.
What is sedimentary rock?
Sedimentary rock, such as sandstone, is composed of grains of material held together with cement. The grains may be fragments of other rock, or minerals such as quartz or calcite.3 The fragments may be minuscule, like mud, or larger like sand, pebbles or even boulders. The rock may be composed of particles of similar size (‘well sorted’) or a mixture of sizes (‘poorly sorted’). Technically the particles are called clasts and the rocks are clastic rocks.
Except for fine-grained rocks like mudstone, clastic rocks are usually porous. The spaces or pores between the grains can store pore fluid such as water, which can move through the rock. Oil, gas and water are stored underground like this.
In natural rocks, many minerals can cement the grains together. Common cements include calcite, quartz, or minerals of iron. Different cements produce rocks with different strengths and different colours. For example, iron minerals produce red rocks.
Sometimes the sediment is well cemented, making a hard, uniform rock, prized for building stone, e.g. Hawkesbury Sandstone around Sydney. Sometimes the cement is uneven and the quality of the rock is variable—hard in places and crumbly in others. Occasionally the cement is confined to small pockets and forms concretions with unusual shapes.
When a rock is poorly cemented, engineers find that building foundations subside and embankments collapse. An obvious way of improving the strength of the foundations would be to increase the amount of cement in the rock. This is how the new rapid-rock invention works.
The new invention is simple to use. All that is needed is to spray two solutions onto the porous sand, soil or rock. The water-based solutions seep into the material, replacing the existing pore fluid. Alternatively, the solutions can be injected into the material. Because the solutions flow easily, like water, the sediment is quickly penetrated. And being entirely non-toxic, the solutions do not pose a health or environmental hazard.
Once inside the pores, the chemicals react to form calcite crystals on the surface of each grain of sediment. The calcite cements the grains together and gives the sediment rock-like strength. The speed of the reaction can be controlled from one to seven days to allow the solution to penetrate into the sediment as far as desired.
Because the cement only covers the grain surface, the spaces between the grains remain open. Thus the porosity of the rock is only slightly reduced and the flow of groundwater is not obstructed. This means that the solutions can be applied a number of times to the same sediment and continue to penetrate the pore spaces, adding extra cement each time. The sediment could be converted into almost-solid rock with the pores mostly filled, but this would take many applications and a few months to achieve. Ordinary water will not soften calcite, so the cement bonds should remain strong indefinitely.2
Lots of applications
The rapid-rock invention has many practical uses, including strengthening weak foundations, stabilizing embankments and strengthening tunnels. One of the first projects was to repair a historic tunnel in Western Australia that was dangerous and closed to the public. After only three applications, the tunnel was strengthened, and the method saved lots of money.
The London Underground has tested the method for stabilizing some of its embankments with the big advantage that the materials can be strengthened in situ. The process could also be used to preserve historic monuments.
‘Don’t tell the creationists’
One unexpected application of this research is that it dramatically demonstrates the fact that rocks do not need millions of years to form. Certainly, for one of the inventors, this application came as a shock.
When CMI-Australia first heard about this invention, we wrote to Dr Ed Kucharski for details. However, we didn’t receive a reply and assumed that he was no longer working on the project or that we had the wrong email address.
Imagine our surprise when we read an article published in the UK about the process, where Dr Kucharski was reported to have said, ‘We had some enquiries which appeared strange. When I looked into them, I realised that they were from a group of creationists trying to disprove Darwin’s theory of evolution. I didn’t call them back.’4 Obviously, that was our inquiry.
CMI seeks to dispel the popular misconceptions that prevent people considering the Creator God of the Bible. One powerful misconception is that rocks take millions of years to form. This claim is not true. The new research vividly demonstrates that, with appropriate conditions, rocks can form very quickly.
The global Flood is the key. Floodwaters flowing over the Earth during that cataclysm dumped the huge deposits of sediment. And the same floodwaters contained the dissolved chemicals that quickly cemented the sediment into rock. Australia’s rapid-rock invention powerfully demonstrates how sedimentary rocks could have easily formed well within the 6,000-year timescale described in the Bible.
References and notes
Kucharski, E., Price, G., Li, H. and Joer, H.A., Laboratory evaluation of CIPS cemented calcareous and silica sands, Proceedings of the 7th Australia New Zealand Conference on Geomechanics, South Australia, pp. 102–107, 1996. Return to text.
Kucharski, E., Price, G., Li, H. and Joer, H., Engineering properties of sands cemented using the calcite in situ precipitation system (CIPS), Exploration and Mining Research News7:12–14, January 1997. Return to text.
Calcite (CaCO3) crystals have a distinctive prismatic shape and can be scratched with a knife. Quartz (SiO2) is harder than a knife. Coral and shells are made of calcite, as are most of the stalactites and stalagmites in caves. Usually calcite is colourless or white, but it can also be yellow, pink, brown or green. Return to text.
Thompson, P., Scientists’ spray has proven rock steady, Construction News6737:36, 11 October 2001. Return to text.
Kucharski, E., Price, G., Li, H. and Joer, H.A., Laboratory evaluation of CIPS cemented calcareous and
silica sands, Proceedings of the 7th Australia New Zealand Conference on Geomechanics, South Australia,
pp. 102–107, 1996.
Kucharski, E., Price, G., Li, H. and Joer, H., Engineering properties of sands cemented using the calcite
in situ precipitation system (CIPS), Exploration and Mining Research News7:12–14,
Calcite (CaCO3) crystals have a distinctive prismatic shape and can be scratched with a knife.
Quartz (SiO2) is harder than a knife. Coral and shells are made of calcite, as are most of the stalactites and
stalagmites in caves. Usually calcite is colourless or white, but it can also be yellow, pink, brown or green.
Thompson, P., Scientists’ spray has proven rock steady, Construction News6737:36,
11 October 2001.
I wonder if Uluru (Ayes Rock) was formed quickly that way. It would shock the world if it was proven that it was.
Tas Walker responds
Indeed it was. Search for articles on it on this site.
FJ L., South Africa, 7 August 2013
What about Dr Robert Gentry's discovery of polonium halos in rock showing split second formation of the rock
Tas Walker responds
Those halos were in granite but this is sandstone. Search for polonium halos on this site to find articles.
mike H., United States, 7 August 2013
This article may contain a clue about the construction of the Egyptian pyramids.
ken B., Australia, 7 August 2013
Hi Tas, I had an flash of inspiration today, which I think is relevant to the good Doctor in your article. What is the opposite of ID (Intelligent Design)? Answer: DI (Deliberate Ignorance)
george M., United States, 7 August 2013
Is it possible that some of the ancient building sites throughout the world may have used similar techniques. This would explain such percise grout joints in building blocks that you could not fit a knife balde into. It would also make it more feasable to move large amounts of weight considering the size of some of those stones. If some type of form was used it would be able to produce exact replicas of stones over and over again reducing human error. So is it possible buildings like the great pyrimaids are actually poured concrete?
Tas Walker responds
Possibly some. Would have to look at specific examples in detail. Pyramids? Probably not. Search for "Great Pyramid" to see articles on this sort of topic.
Christopher R., United States, 7 August 2013
Fascinating. I had often wondered about what the flood would have done to the rocks and soil during the flood. Now I understand that some of it would, with the right condition, solidify again.
Thank you for this interesting article.
Thomas H., United States, 7 August 2013
Jeremy W., Canada, 7 August 2013
Its amazing how many times I have been told to 'educate myself' or that I was ignorant of the 'facts', but like Dr Ed Kucharski when I asked to be educated, they didn't want to teach me because I would learn the lies being told.
Joeseph S., Canada, 7 August 2013
Could this be how they made the pyramids or other structures with large rocks that seem to defy our efforts to explain how?
Tas Walker responds
Probably not the pyramids. Search "great pyramid" on this site to find helpful articles.
Paul O., United States, 8 August 2013
So doing a small amount of material in a lab takes months, and you think that doing this to trillions of tons of material all over Earth would also take...what, months?
Tas Walker responds
Indeed. It all depends on the magnitude of the processes involved. Remember that the Flood described in the Bible was global in its scale. You should know that small scale laboratory testing is the way almost all scientific research is done. The principles uncovered on the small scale are then applied on all scales.
Becky S., United States, 8 August 2013
Thank you for sharing this information! I've been doing a series of experiments over the last few years, trying to fossilize dead pet store fish, chicken drumsticks, etc., in loose sediments. I'm very interested in learning more about this rapid rock formation! What chemicals are used in this process, and are they chemicals that would have been sloshing around during Noah's Flood?
Tas Walker responds
The main minerals that cement sediment into rock are silica and limestone. Iron minerals also act as a cement. These would have all been plentiful in the waters of the Flood. Portland cement is a product that is based on limestone.
Chris G., Australia, 8 August 2013
I notice a few people have mentioned the pyramids. It would be interesting to compare the timetable of when the pyramids were built with the time that the Israelites were in captivity in Egypt, prior to the exodus. Were they the 'slave force' that built Pharoah's great cities and pyramids?
Tas Walker responds
This article Timing is Everything provides a scheme that would allow you to explore that question. Be aware that there are some differences of opinion on how the chronology of Egypt should be revised.
Robert B., Australia, 9 August 2013
Thanks for the article Tas
The advertising on the relevant 2010 CSIRO blurb about CIPS
"Revolutionary New Ground Improvement Technology Turn Sand into Rock the Same Way Nature Does— But a Million Times Faster".
might be rephrased as
'not so revolutionary technology mimics God's design to create sandstone from sand in a matter of days '