Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Steve Austin and Kurt Wise
Joe Meert
Member (Idle past 5680 days)
Posts: 913
From: Gainesville
Joined: 03-02-2002


Message 1 of 8 (21642)
11-06-2002 12:20 AM


I had the chance to meet these two chaps at their poster in Denver last week (Geological Society of America Meeting). They were talking about billions of dead nautiloids in the Grand Canyon. Several people were listening to Austin (including me). When I asked him the following question, he refused to answer:
"At what point in the Noachian flood did this mass kill occur?"
I asked him again (with several intrigued onlookers) and he said "I am here to talk about my poster". I said that this is exactly what I was asking about and repeated the question. Again he refused to answer and said "Why don't you see if Kurt Wise will answer". Indeed, Kurt not only answered my question but he was quite candid in admitting that creationists do not agree on the fundamental issue of when the flood started, peaked and ended. He said that it is largely a politically charged issue amongst creationists. I also asked him about the Setterfiled c-decay model which puts the entire flood in the Precambrian. He said that the only creationist who believes that is Setterfield and that his ideas are not viewed by 'mainstream creationists' as having any validity. All in all, Kurt Wise was very congenial and straightforward. Austin was useless.
Cheers
Joe Meert

Replies to this message:
 Message 2 by Tranquility Base, posted 11-06-2002 4:49 AM Joe Meert has not replied
 Message 3 by Randy, posted 11-06-2002 7:55 AM Joe Meert has replied

  
Tranquility Base
Inactive Member


Message 2 of 8 (21659)
11-06-2002 4:49 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by Joe Meert
11-06-2002 12:20 AM


Were you wearing your name badge?
On a more scientific level, what sort of interesting titbits were reported this year?
[This message has been edited by Tranquility Base, 11-06-2002]

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Joe Meert, posted 11-06-2002 12:20 AM Joe Meert has not replied

  
Randy
Member (Idle past 6247 days)
Posts: 420
From: Cincinnati OH USA
Joined: 07-19-2002


Message 3 of 8 (21677)
11-06-2002 7:55 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by Joe Meert
11-06-2002 12:20 AM


You can find audio some lectures by Kurt Wise at
http://www.sbts.edu/resources/audio/Speakers.php#Wise
The only one I have listened to is the one on the "Working" geologic model for the flood. He explicitly admits that the model releases enough heat to boil the oceans away several times over.
He also says the the area of the Grand Canyon was a shallow sea before the flood, so no high ground for animals to wait out the flood surges that deposited thousand of feet of sediments. He says that dinosaurs were deposited during huge high tides on the global ocean so I wonder how they left tracks and nests. I also think he makes some doubtfull claims about failures of Mainstream geology to predict things that the runaway subduction model supposedly succeeds in predicting.
According to this page on No Answers in Genesis
Account Suspended
Some of the things he says about Coe et. al. are not true and it seems to me that there has been some comment on creationist claims about that paper elsewhere on this board.
Randy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Joe Meert, posted 11-06-2002 12:20 AM Joe Meert has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 4 by Joe Meert, posted 11-06-2002 10:04 AM Randy has not replied

  
Joe Meert
Member (Idle past 5680 days)
Posts: 913
From: Gainesville
Joined: 03-02-2002


Message 4 of 8 (21700)
11-06-2002 10:04 AM
Reply to: Message 3 by Randy
11-06-2002 7:55 AM


quote:
Originally posted by Randy:
You can find audio some lectures by Kurt Wise at
http://www.sbts.edu/resources/audio/Speakers.php#Wise
The only one I have listened to is the one on the "Working" geologic model for the flood. He explicitly admits that the model releases enough heat to boil the oceans away several times over.
He also says the the area of the Grand Canyon was a shallow sea before the flood, so no high ground for animals to wait out the flood surges that deposited thousand of feet of sediments. He says that dinosaurs were deposited during huge high tides on the global ocean so I wonder how they left tracks and nests. I also think he makes some doubtfull claims about failures of Mainstream geology to predict things that the runaway subduction model supposedly succeeds in predicting.
According to this page on No Answers in Genesis
Account Suspended
Some of the things he says about Coe et. al. are not true and it seems to me that there has been some comment on creationist claims about that paper elsewhere on this board.
Randy

JM: Yes, he is misrepresenting Coe et al. What is even more interesting is that creationists have paid NO attention to the later works of Coe et al. which offer a more mundane explanation for the EXCURSIONS (not reversals)!! TB, yes I was wearing my name badge and I even introduced myself to Austin and Wise. I don't believe in hiding behind pseudonyms (contrary to what AIG asserts) or 'hiding' from creationists. As for the good science, two papers by Meert were particularly intruiging.
Cheers
Joe Meert

This message is a reply to:
 Message 3 by Randy, posted 11-06-2002 7:55 AM Randy has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 5 by Tranquility Base, posted 11-06-2002 6:58 PM Joe Meert has not replied

  
Tranquility Base
Inactive Member


Message 5 of 8 (21735)
11-06-2002 6:58 PM
Reply to: Message 4 by Joe Meert
11-06-2002 10:04 AM


Joe
I was serious - what were the most exciting results presented? I guess geology may not be as fast moving as genomics but there must have been some good stuff. And what did you report?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 4 by Joe Meert, posted 11-06-2002 10:04 AM Joe Meert has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 6 by edge, posted 11-06-2002 11:59 PM Tranquility Base has not replied

  
edge
Member (Idle past 1706 days)
Posts: 4696
From: Colorado, USA
Joined: 01-09-2002


Message 6 of 8 (21750)
11-06-2002 11:59 PM
Reply to: Message 5 by Tranquility Base
11-06-2002 6:58 PM


quote:
Originally posted by Tranquility Base:
I was serious - what were the most exciting results presented? I guess geology may not be as fast moving as genomics but there must have been some good stuff. And what did you report?
I don't think that you understand, TB. I have the catalog of proceedings. There were over a thousand papers presented a this meeting. One can only see a few dozen of all the papers. There is no way that anyone can say what was the most interesting or ground breaking. I know that you are capable of learning all about geology be reading a few references, but to most of us it really takes a bit more time to sift through the tons of information. Why don't you ask Joe which papers he heard that seemed the most interesting to him.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by Tranquility Base, posted 11-06-2002 6:58 PM Tranquility Base has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 7 by Joe Meert, posted 11-07-2002 4:38 PM edge has not replied

  
Joe Meert
Member (Idle past 5680 days)
Posts: 913
From: Gainesville
Joined: 03-02-2002


Message 7 of 8 (21794)
11-07-2002 4:38 PM
Reply to: Message 6 by edge
11-06-2002 11:59 PM


TB,
I spoke about the evolution of trilobites and what they tell us about proposed Neoproterozoic paleogeographies. I also spoke about the issues related to early Neoproterozoic paleogeographies. I heard a bevy of good talks regarding the Ediacaran fauna, the Cambrian 'explosion' or slow burn and several technical talks on rotational fold belts. I heard some very BAD talks on inertial interchange true polar wander (wacky ideas) and some intriguing posters on mantle plumes in the Neoproterozoic.
Cheers
Joe Meert

This message is a reply to:
 Message 6 by edge, posted 11-06-2002 11:59 PM edge has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 8 by Tranquility Base, posted 11-07-2002 5:43 PM Joe Meert has not replied

  
Tranquility Base
Inactive Member


Message 8 of 8 (21797)
11-07-2002 5:43 PM
Reply to: Message 7 by Joe Meert
11-07-2002 4:38 PM


Thanks.
I think that polar wander stuff might have appeared in the generic science journals/mags a month or two ago? It rings a bell. What was it about again? And what was the Cambrian Explosion news?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 7 by Joe Meert, posted 11-07-2002 4:38 PM Joe Meert has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024