polonium halos

Gentry deals with all of this in his cosmological theories which go way beyond the scope of discussion of Po halos. There is no evidence of this. This is a false assertion of yours and no other scientist has identified this. It was refuted in message 135 There is no evidence of Rn222 gas staining. The staining is evidence of alpha decay only. The isotopes involved in the staining cannot be differentiated. This evidence if fraudulent. It does not include data. It is refuted in message 134. There is no evidence of secondary processes. There is only evidence of cracks, fissures, and conduits. There is no evidence of any alpha decay from the alpha decay recoi pits, and there is no evidence of staining along these cracks. Many halos have no evidence of cracks, fissures or conduits.Collins produces evidence of staining in fissures, but we have no evidence if that is in granites taken from the same locations. Gentry has granites with halos from Canada, Russia, Ireland, Madagascar, and Europe. Gentry does present the dating information on many of his granites. They are all pre-Cambrian. There is no eviedence that any are Tertiary. That's a wild assertion as all of yours are. I don't even know what this wild claim means.So to summarize, you have presented not one piece of evidence that refutes anything that Gentry has presented. No other scientist has either.

Out of curiosity, does Gentry have full lithologic descriptions and photos of all his samples? And if so, where might these be found?

There are pictures and videos of granite samples on his website. All of the samples and specimen pictures are property of and stored at the Oak Rdge National Labratories in TN.

Hey Rox, Pictures from his book can be found at
Creation's Tiny Mystery: Radiohalo Catalogue, IndexThere is no lithographic description other than "in fluorite" or "in biotitie" etc. that I have seen, nor any that AlphaOmegaKid has produced.I doubt you will find much on the geology. You can also contact Dr Collins at to discuss gentry's geogolgy errors and mistakes.I'll get back to AlphaOmegaKid, I just don't have much time right now.Enjoy.Edited by RAZD, : spling

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

---

• • • Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click) • • •

Thanks, AlphaOmegaKid for (a) proving my point and (b) showing that you can't see the evidence in front of you: Clearly does NOT line up with the outer rings - your diameters there show a gap between your "measured" diameter and the actual ring. This shows that you have fudged - over-scaled - your measurement to force your 210 diameter to fit the 222Rn ring, and you call my photos fraud? Curiously this one doesn't, it shows all the measurements in the outer bands, and voila there is the 222Rn right where it should be. It also shows your 210Po band right inside the gap between the 210Po and 222Rn decay bands - right where it should be.Thanks. Just to confirm this I'll do my own when I get the time. Message 135Your displayed ignorance of radioactive decay is stunning. The decay in question is by alpha particles (2 neutrons and 2 protons) and beta decay (an electron emitted from a neutron turning it into a proton). As a result, the inclusion does not decrease in size with decay, having the same numbers of atoms in it at the end as when it started.The faint evidence of 222Rn is from the few that did not leave the center, but the rest that would make rings as dense as the 238U to 226Ra rings have left. Decay does not happen sequentially with all to one isotope and the all to the next, but continuously.There is no way to have an absence of these outer rings without having an absence of the radioactive isotope OR some mechanism to magically stop radioactive decay from occurring for one isotope in a series, but not in the others. Actually there are halos along such cracks, but this still does not address the issue of the missing "embryo" (nobody else calls them that - only Gentry) 222Rn decay. The only difference is that now you are invoking two different sources of 238U when only one is needed.Enjoy.Edited by RAZD, : No reason given.Edited by RAZD, : qsEdited by RAZD, : 235U changed to 238U

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

---

• • • Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click) • • •

You are wrong. Period. You are fraudulently wrong.Fact: We know that Henderson, Sparks, Meiers, and Gentry over the course of measuring over a hundred thousand of these halos always measured the inside ring radius(Po210)at approximately .0195mm. This is verified in multiple scientific publications.Fact: We know that Henderson, Sparks, Meiers and Gentry also measured thousands of mature U halos and the Po210 ring was always measured on average at .0195mm.Fact: On a Po218 halo, the inside diameter is the clearest to measure the outside radius.Fact: We know that Henderson, Sparks, Meiers, and Gentry measured all the Uhalos and found Rn222 to have a radius of .0205Fact: No one has ever measured a "Po" halo and found the inside ring to measure .0205mm. This eliminates the possible consideration that Rn222 could be creating the center ring. This is independendant of any discolorattion or fuzziness that the frauds present. The alpha decay enegy of Po210 is not large enough to create a .0205 radius ring in Biotie or fluorite.Fact: No one, but frauds are suggesting that the inside ring on Po halos is Rn222. They are suggesting this based on visual distortion only. No one has presented any data to correspond with the images suggesting that the inside ring is .0205mm in radius. You cannot present any data that suggests that the inside ring is indeed Rn222. You can only arbitrarlily claim that the Rn222 exists because there are color variations inside the measured .0195 radius Po210 ring. Those color variations will be smaller radius than .0195mm and that further elliminates the possibility of them being Rn222.You are fraudulently wrong. And you know it.Here is an example of it.... You've got to be kidding?!?!?! The drawing was scaled so that the inside Po210 ring was exactly .0197mm the documented measurement in fluorite. Therefore, the inside circle is by definition a perfect match. The P218 ring at .0236mm is also a perfect match as anyone can see. The data matches the image. Now the P214 ring is very faint in this image, but we know that the measurements are taken at the largest diameters on the ring. In the photo that would correspond with the 1,2,5,7-8 o'clock sections which are darker and correspond exactly with the measured values.There is no evidence of any ring in between the Po210 ring and the Po218 ring. There is no visible evidence of Rn222. That is a fact. There is no gap in the Po210 ring. There is no gap in the Po218 ring. The only gaps in the Po214 ring are where the ring is faint and not clear. Again, you are wrong This shows you are continuing to deceive and defraud. The rings match very well, but the next photo doesn't at all. Again, you are wrong. This drawing is scaled to the inside ring and it is fraudulently scaled to match the alpha decay energy of Rn222 in fluorite. That means by definition that the Rn222 circle is fraudulently perfect. But notice the Po214 ring according to the same scale. All of the dark areas are outside the circle. That means the ring doesn't match. Then notice the Po218 ring. Again the dark areas are outside the circle. That means the ring doesn't match. Then look at the Po210 circle. There is no ring definable at all in the area. The only ring that matches is the fraudulent Rn222 ring. That's because the scale is fraudulent. Do you understand? Yes, because I constructed that circle there based on the scale. Notice you cannot make a ring out of any dark areas there. The dark areas are much larger that the 1 micron delta between Rn222 and Po210. The Dark areas do not make a ring.There is no evidence of Rn222 creating a halo. Zero. Nada. Zilch. To continue to claim this is beyond reasoning at this point. You are wrong about this, and you know it.The person who first constructed this fraud is Brawley from Evolution's Tiny Violences: The Po-Halo MysteryWakefield then picked up this fraud and copied John Brawley's work to his website. Notice that Collins who hosts this crap does not make the argument that these are Rn222 halos. He accepts that they are Po halos. Then of course you picked this up...tch tchThese are the words of Brawley....

quote:

---

However, on that trip I made a stop at Oak Ridge National Laboratories in Tennessee and talked my way inside, to speak with a Mr. J.K. Dickens, scientist in the electron laboratory, who had worked alongside Dr. Gentry during his stay there. Mr. Dickens pointed out that, while my hypothesis was quite valid from an ideal point of view, there were several "bottlenecks" where an unusually low neutron-capture cross-section would make the transition to Polonium highly unlikely, although not impossible. (Mr. Dickens did give me some encouragement, both by suggesting a way to test for neutron addition/Polonium/Bismuth formation from lead, and by stating, upon seeing my photomicrographs of 'drifts' and 'strings' of halos along cracks and inclusions, "I've never seen anything like that!" I found it significant that one of the people who had been near Dr. Gentry and had seen his work, had "never seen" certain phenomena in the biotite that I had seen and photographed.) Note: Mr. Dickens also told me a story about the procurement by one of the researchers of radiohalo samples from Madagascar--samples previously possessed by the daughter of Madame Curie and obtained from France. A most interesting story indeed, but beyond the scope of this paper.

---

The part in yellow there is a clear indicator of the fraud that Brawley presents. If you know anything about Oak Ridge National Labratories, then you know that this is an extremenly secure facility. This is a DoE facility which has many areas that are the highest level "Q" clearance. The area that Gentry was in may not be a "Q" level area, but with the level of equipment that Gentry was using I suspect that it was one of the highest level clearance areas.No one is just going to show up and "Talk their way inside". This whole article is a farce, a sham, and a scam. And you are promoting it.Even with Brawley's deceit who never once measures a halo, he does admit....

quote:

---

Visual judgement, however, can be wrong.

---

He is right about that part. His judgement if there ever was one was wrong. Yours is too. If this is the company you want to keep and promote, then go ahead. But I will continue to expose these internet frauds.If you cannot provide measurements of these halos from legitimate scientific sources, I will continue to call it a fraud and deceit. Making a claim on a fuzzy visual image is not evidence of anything. The image must have legitimate data attached to it. If I get admonished for this then so be it. But a spade needs to be called a spade.And finally, the fraudulent Rn222 gas halo theory cannot even start to account for Po214 halos or Po210 halos which present just as a significant problem to the uniformitarians.Edited by AlphaOmegakid, : took out the lying part

You will stop using the words "liar" or "lying" as of now.You may suggest that someone is wrong about something however. But you'll have to be careful that you have that right.

Hey, AoK, I like the work you are putting into this. Can you explain why the outer ring is so obviosuly not matched by your autocad circle? The autocad circle is some considerable distance outside it (e.g. upper right of the 'e' in Fluorite.) What causes this?

I must say that it is very brave of Gentry to suggest cosmological theories when his grasp of relativity is so poor.Go on, start on a thread on this. You know you want to

AOK:

quote:

---

The part in yellow there is a clear indicator of the fraud that Brawley presents. If you know anything about Oak Ridge National Labratories, then you know that this is an extremenly secure facility. This is a DoE facility which has many areas that are the highest level "Q" clearance. The area that Gentry was in may not be a "Q" level area, but with the level of equipment that Gentry was using I suspect that it was one of the highest level clearance areas.

---

WOW! Maybe while Brawley was there he just looked up Justin Kirk Dickens, which you can currently do on the ORNL website, and called him and arranged a meeting. Isn't this a more reasonable supposition that to go around calling people liars. Maybe you can call Mr Dickens yourself to see if the meeting happened.

Are you sure? Because it certainly appears from your own annotated images that RAZD is correct.

I already did my homework on this. J.K. Dickens has been retired for some years. He still is involved with the ORNL. That may be why Brawley chose his name.However I called ORNL and did talk to Dr. Uribarri who is at the same listed phone number. This area is the Radioactive Ion Beam Labratory and Dr. Uribarri assured me that no one would be able to or be allowed to just "talk their way into this facility" without substantial preparation and security work. That is today or in 1992 when he says security was even tighter.You've got to admit, the whole article is fishy. Who, with half a brain, would inspect these halos and not measure them? He could verify or refute his own theory in a matter of minutes. It's a joke.

see Message 141It does match.

I guess a physicist like you measures the diamter of his vehichle tires by the inside diameter of the tread? Or do you measure them somewhere in between the outside diameter and the bottom of the tread? Most people measure them by the outside (maximum diameter).Halos are the same way. It is the outside/maximum diameter that reflects the alpha decay energy. Not any other discoloration towards the inside.Please also realize that these pictures are blown up way beyond the field of view on a microscope.If you are so wise about this, then why don't you do a little investgative work and diametrically prove Gentry, Spark, Meiers, and Henderson wrong on their measurements. Then get your paper published and all the evos will love you forever.Edited by AlphaOmegakid, : No reason given.

No, it obviously doesn't. The autocad circle is some considerable distance outside the P214 ring (e.g. upper right of the 'e' in Fluorite - actually from above the 'o' in Fluroite clockwise to 2 o'clock position)Why? Why? Surely you would mark to the maximum of the ring? Why would variation in the alpha penetration only ever fall short of the theoretical distance? Wouldn't an extended source create a natural spread in the ring diameter, with the central maximum corresponding to the theoretical prediction?Even if the measurement is taken to the maximum extent of the ring, the image shows that the autocad circle is well beyond this. I'll put up an exploded image when I have a minute.