positive evidence of creationism

TrueCreation:
--Thus if they just had to lay their eggs they could have done it fine, no telling if they would live though beside the point.the colder the temperature the longer it takes for insect eggs to hatch and develop, i know this is true for amphibians as well and may be true for reptiles.------------------
"Overspecialize and you breed in weakness" -"Major" Motoko Kusanagi

"the colder the temperature the longer it takes for insect eggs to hatch and develop, i know this is true for amphibians as well and may be true for reptiles."
--Poor little creatures ------------------

P-38's in the Greenland ice again? Why do Creationists recycle the same old repeatedly refuted argumnets over and over again???Think, people... Is the precipitation rate constant over an area the size of, say, Washington State? Would you expect to find the same rainfall totals in the desert of Eastern Washington as you find in Seattle?So why do you mindlessly extrapolate conditions at the southern edge of Greenland (which is far larger than Washington State) to the high and dry interior plateau on top of the thickest part of the ice sheet?In one area, lots of snow falls every year - just like the Cascade Range in Oregon and Washington. The planes are buried quickly and deeply.In another area, the ice accumulation is measured in millimeters per year. It is a desert, just like the eastern part of Washington - for the same reasons. The mountains along the coast of Greenland trap the moisture before it gets all the way inland. A plane that lands on a glacier in those mountains gets covered quickly. But in the dry interior, it takes hundreds of thousands of years to build up a mile or two of ice.You should feel betrayed and angry at the charlatans who purposely misled you into regurgitating this load of crap. How can you trust people who are so deceitful?

So, is there layering or evidence that snow accummulated quickly over the lost squadron?------------------

[QUOTE][b]"ICR conveniently ignores direct measurements of ice accumulation in favor of indirect methods? Why?"
--The actual depth was 268ft.[/QUOTE][/b]I've decided that that snow probably did bury the planes. Look what it did to their camp. http://www.thelostsquadron.com/camp1.htmlBut it doesn't explain the discordance between that site and the snowfall records for that summit. What we have here is probably an anomaly, not a general rule for the rate of icecap growth. Also the ICR article didn't mention seasonal varves in the ice or the dust from historical volcanic eruptions. I still call that sloppy work. [QUOTE][b]I think I would like to e-mail the project manager and ask a couple questions, what is it you would expect to observe in the glacial formation from (A):An Avalanche and (B):Blowing snow?[/QUOTE][/b]Moot point. But (a) a steep incline (b) curving ice layers near the planes. Note however the emailing the project manager is futile. ICR had nothing to do with the removal of those aircraft, they simply clipped a news article and said, "hey look! icecaps grow 258 ft in 50 years!"If you did want to ask ICR a question (and this is not relevant to the current discussion), maybe you could ask them how they can call what they do science when they make all their conclusions before they do any research? What would happen if they found evidence that the Bible was wrong on a point, and how could they come to terms with that error? Would they be forced to ignore any evidence contrary to their worldview? If so, how much evidence are they ignoring today?"The phenomenon of biological life did not develop by natural processes from inanimate systems but was specially and supernaturally created by the Creator.""The Bible, consisting of the thirty-nine canonical books of the Old Testament and the twenty-seven canonical books of the New Testament, is the divinely-inspired revelation of the Creator to man. Its unique, plenary, verbal inspiration guarantees that these writings, as originally and miraculously given, are infallible and completely authoritative on all matters with which they deal, free from error of any sort, scientific and historical as well as moral and theological."--ICR Tenets of Creationism http://www.icr.org/abouticr/tenets.htm

[QUOTE][b]So, is there layering or evidence that snow accummulated quickly over the lost squadron?[/QUOTE][/b]Probably. Take a geochemist up there and try to identify ash deposits in the ice. But removing those aircraft was an endeavour in digging, not a geophysical expedition.

"Probably. Take a geochemist up there and try to identify ash deposits in the ice. But removing those aircraft was an endeavour in digging, not a geophysical expedition."
--True, but all you need is an abundance of layering, if it is true that they developed in these other ways rather than uniform accumulation, then layers should not be as condensed, as they are sometimes depicted as being annual or seasonal deposits of ice and snow.------------------

[QUOTE][b]as they are sometimes depicted as being annual or seasonal deposits of ice and snow.[/QUOTE][/b]Hmm. You could take pollen counts too.

quote:

---

Originally posted by TrueCreation:
"Probably. Take a geochemist up there and try to identify ash deposits in the ice. But removing those aircraft was an endeavour in digging, not a geophysical expedition."
--True, but all you need is an abundance of layering, if it is true that they developed in these other ways rather than uniform accumulation, then layers should not be as condensed, as they are sometimes depicted as being annual or seasonal deposits of ice and snow.

---

The nick-name for the P-38 excavated is "Glacier Girl", and as well
as SINKING over 50 years the ice streams have moved the
craft some 1.5 miles from the original crash site.Far from being covered (read the info on the web-sites you site) they
have been thrust under the ice stream over 50 years.

TC asks:

quote:

---

So, is there layering or evidence that snow accummulated quickly over the lost squadron?

---

and...

quote:

---

all you need is an abundance of layering, if it is true that they developed in these other ways rather than uniform accumulation, then layers should not be as condensed, as they are sometimes depicted as being annual or seasonal deposits of ice and snow.

---

It should be obvious that there is evidence that snow accumulated quickly over the planes. Otherwise, they would not be buried under 268 feet of ice, would they?As I mentioned before, the planes were found in south-eastern Greenland where precipitation is highest. The ice cores used for long-term climate studies (and which are impossible to reconclie with YECreationism) are taken high on the ice sheet in the center of Greenland which is nearly as dry as the Sahara...It's possible the ice built up as part of the dynamic processes of the moving glacier. Melting ice from one part of the glacier might flow out onto the surface and refreeze over the planes.Evidence of layering? You might be referring to annual variations in oxygen isotope ratios, volcanic dust, CO2, and many other variables measured in ice cores. These layers would be easy to pick out in the 50 or so layers above the planes if snowfall were responsible for their burial. We might expect to see something like this: Figure 12 — Average yearly temperature change between 60-90oN from AD 1875-1977 (Self et al., 1981). Arrows represent volcanic events observed in the 20D ice core (Mayewski et al., 1990) from southern Greenland. Taken from Lyons et al. (1990).or this: Figure 14 — Comparison of GISP2 and Siple Dome ice core records with potential climate forcing factors. The GISP2 and Siple Dome Na and excess (xs) SO42- records (in ppb) were resampled to 5-year intervals (the lowest common resolution in both records is ~3 years). Two time periods discussed in the text are highlighted: 1680-1730 AD (period of coeval Na increase in Siple Dome and GISP2 records) and 1399-1427 AD (onset of LIA conditions). Two prominent volcanic events at 1815 AD (Tambora) and 1259 AD (possibly El Chichon) were used to confirm the Siple Dome annual layer counting and to correlate with the GISP2 record. The obvious xsSO42- increase during the last century in the GISP2 record, attributed to anthropogenic emissions (Mayewski et al., 1986), is notably absent from the Siple Dome and other Antarctic xsSO42- records . Did you notice the historical volcanic events used to confirm the annual layer counting? That means they have counted the annual layers and found a layer of volcanic dust and SO4 at exactly the right number of layers to correspond to known volcanic eruptions (which spread dust and sulfate aerosols worldwide).Here's another one: Figure 16 — Atmospheric compositional variations throughout the last 200 years as deduced from analyses of trapped gases in Antarctic ice. The records show the rapid accumulation of three trace gas species in the atmosphere, largely the result of increased emissions of these gases, which relate to increased world population (McEvedy and Jones, 1978). Also included are records of direct measurements, which started in 1957 (Keeling et al., 1976). Data taken from Etheridge et al. (1992, 1996) for CO2 and CH4, and Machida et al. (1995) for N2O.
and another: Figure 17 — Time series of the non-seasalt sulfate (SO42-, red line) and nitrate (NO3-, blue line) concentrations at ice core site 20D, southern Greenland. To remove seasonal signals, data have been smoothed to 1 year from the original ~5.8 samples per year. Examples of volcanic events recorded in nss sulfate spikes are: (1) Laki (1783); (2) Tambora (1815); (3) Katmai (1912). Modified from Mayewski et al. (1990).Notice the "seasonal signals" they had to remove to see the long-term trend. That means the record is so detailed, that seasonal variations are apparent. Anyone who doubts these scientists' ability to distinguish annual layers in ice cores is seriously deluded or ignorant of the facts. Perhaps these images will help dispel some of that ignorance. trying to fix pic size...will try again later as it is late here - The Queen
[This message has been edited by AdminAsgara, 11-25-2003][This message has been edited by AdminAsgara, 11-25-2003][This message has been edited by AdminAsgara, 11-25-2003]

I believe I have a theory that proves God created the world. At least it in one reasonable, logical answer to the ongoing creation/evolution debate. I have posted it under "Great Debate", but I am not sure if they will accept it or not. If you would like me to e-mail you a complete copy, I will do so. Here's a hint to my theory. "Time" is the key.Len Lisenbee

Welcome Len,The Great Debate forum is currently for moderated and judged debate between two participants on one defined topic. You are more than welcome to post to a different forum/thread. May I suggest Faith and Belief?------------------
AdminAsgara
Queen of the Universe

Going to close this topic.Oh, all powerful queen (and greater master of the HTML spirit) -I don't know how to do it, but if you do, you're welcome to re-open the topic, and reduce down the size of that map, found just up string.Adminnemooseus