|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: magnetites, the old earth's ally | |||||||||||||||||||||||
quicksink Inactive Member |
Using the small extent of my intuition in the geological field, I have discovered a major and largely overlooked flaw in the theory of creationism, one that will probably never be mended. Here is a brief explanation.
I'm sure you'll know, magnetites are rocks that are attracted by the magnetic north. here is how it works: >>You have some cake batter >>You put magnetic chocolate sprinkles on the batter >>They arrange themselves north. You bake the cake and they are then stuck permanently in that north-facing position. This is a more human demonatration of what is constantly occures on our ocean's mid-atlantic ridges, on the sides of the rift valley (we learned all this in science today, and I did a little research for myself). Lava erupts from underwater volcanoes, carrying magnetites. The lava flows down the sides of the volcano and, and in this liquid, the magnetites align themselves with the magnetic north. The lava then cools and hardens, preserving the magnetites in their position, which is always facing to the magnetic north. Now when scientists looked at core samples of the volcanoes, they found something that was unusual, something that completely baffled them. At close analyzation of the magnetites that had been preserved in the hardened lava, they found that some pointed to the current magnetic north, but others, sealed in deeper layers, pointed to what is today the south! They found changes in several layers. And they never found an exception to the patterns. How to explain this? Well, there are two theories: 1. The planet’s crust moved around the other side of the planet like the peel of an orange. Yet this would require a tremendous amout of force, and is thus unlikely to be resonsible for this anomaly. 2. The magnetic poles- well- moved, from one end of the earth to the other. Basically, something caused a polar flip, so that north was south and vice-versa. To put is even more simply, if you were holding a compass at the time of the flip, you would see the needle, pointing northm actually make a 360 degree turn to the south! But we can only guess what could cause this mind-boggling event. Now looking back at the magnetites, and using disputed dating methods, we find that the last "polar flip", if that is what it was, occurred around 200,000,000 millions years ago. Do the math, and you find that 200,000,000 years is slightly less than 1/22 of the earth's age (4.5 billions years) in question. Now here is where things start to get messy for those clever and unusually cunning creationists... According to them and their assertions, the earth is 6000-10000 years old. Assuming that this is true, the last magnetic flip occurred 272 years ago, because if you shrink 4.5 billion years of earth history into 6000 years, and then find 1/22 of 6000, you get 272. But to the untrained eye, this would be nonsense. Compasses had been invented 272 years ago, and ships and sailors were navigating the planet. I would imagine that these sailors, totally dependent on their compasses, would have noticed something out of the ordinary, had the magnetic poles flipped to the other side of the planet. But maybe that's just me. Now let's look at the other scenario- a ten-thousand year-old earth. Here we get a polar flip about 454 years ago. Let's take a look at the world at this time- The New World has been discovered, and ships are sailing to Asia via south of the Africa. And yes, compasses were around- not the ideal scenario. The compass, according to http://www.wavespring.com/justin/china/compass.htmlwas first discovered by the Chinese just a hundred or so years after the supposed birth of Jesus, and soon became "real" and usable in about 900 AD. The Europeans learned of the compass in the 15th century, or the 1400s. Of course, the last polar flip, depending on the creationist model, occurred between 270 and 450 years ago. not one single record of the magnetic poles flipping. Of course, creationists could resond with their clich-like arguments-the magnetic poles flipped only a few thousand years ago, but C14, which dates the fossils of primitve animals older than the fossils of advanced beings with stunning and seemingly flawless precision, has made a mistake by a few hundred million years. If you ask me, this is a pretty unconvincing argument. Science dates these rocks, while creationists assume that these rocks are 100s of millions of times younger than they are said to be, and also formed before or just after the proposed date of the flood. Not based on any evidence, but based on speculation and ancient mythology. Then of course, there is the outright denial that this data exists, or that the data is inaccurate, typical of less-scientifically immersed creationists. And so would begin a long duration of squawking, in which creationists would only get the chuckle from archaeologists and geologists of all calibres. Of course, the scientists would talk to them as they may to a child, explaining the symmetry at either sides of the volcanoes, and the perfect collaboration of either side, at which point the creationists would silently retreat to their reality resistant bomb shelter, ignoring evidence and truth. So, in the opinion of the scientific community, which only works on hard evidence, the creationist model is irrelvant, unless a constituent can present polished evidence (using one of those long lost dating methods that indicate the earth is no older than 10000 years) that magnetites and the lava encompassing the former are indeed 4000 or so years old, which would be a few hundred years after Noah navigated the seas without the use of a compass. (Which would mean that between the creation of the planet and the last polar flip, the planet would have undergone magnetic facelifts a number of times, all causing drastic changes in the world's climate and having disastrous effects on the human population) Or maybe someone could show us that not only did the continents split in one year at what must have been miraculous rates, but that they also moved around the entire planet, so that north was south and vice-versa, in what would have been a logic defying time. Oh, that would be the day- a creationist proving science wrong give it a break. [This message has been edited by quicksink, 03-14-2002] [This message has been edited by quicksink, 03-14-2002]
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
quicksink Inactive Member |
I would be very appreciative if TC could give her opinion (or is it he???)
and PS- this information was obtained through a morally corrupt and brainwashed evolutionist drone, more commonly known as a science teacher. All data is property of the International Organization for the Propagation of God-defaming and Morally Unjust Theories, all rights reserved. The organization reserves the right to assasinate you and your family if you know too much. [This message has been edited by quicksink, 03-14-2002] [This message has been edited by quicksink, 03-14-2002] [This message has been edited by quicksink, 03-14-2002]
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Floris O Inactive Member |
quote: Now you ruined it, damnit! We were supposed to keep it secret, and after decades of hard work you blew it! Now we all have to become creationists
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
quicksink Inactive Member |
quote: The guilt overwhelmed me- participating in a world-wide conspiracy to propagate false theories, defame god, and degrade social and moral values, while at the same time conducting time-consuming scientific research to plant false facts- all for a low salary- just drained the energy out of me. [This message has been edited by quicksink, 03-14-2002] [This message has been edited by quicksink, 03-14-2002]
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
RetroCrono Inactive Member |
quote: Well, I'm not gonna deny that this is true, but can anyone give me some referrences to look into this. You've intrigued me to check this out. But, with only your word to go on at the moment, can anyone shoot me in the right direction to investigate this? BTW, what causes a polar flip?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
quicksink Inactive Member |
Veery fair- I think I will find a reference, although I will say that I learned this in seventh-eighth period science from my science teacher. As I write this, my hands are covered in notes.
But for the sake of relability-
http://www.britannica.com/this provides a scientifically technical definition- doesn't mean much. http://www.britannica.com/ --> htt p://Encyclopedia Britannica | Britannica...< !--UE-->Another for those who are very scientifically literate... not me. http://www.britannica.com/the above site provides articles from brittanica. If you look, you'll see a very small picture of a volcano, which is unfortunataely only available to premium members of Brittanica, which doesn't include me. http://www.pilgrimpromo.com/here is a creationist site that refers to magnetites. Unfortunately, they cling to their belief that there was a pre-flood vapor shield, which would have crushed all humans under intense atmospheric pressure. But perhaps I have heard wrong from my teacher, or perhaps my teacher i'm wrong. I don't know... Could someone help me out here. {Did my best shot at shortening the display forms of several long, messy URL's, to restore page width to normal - I can't figure out what the problem is with that 3rd one - Hope I didn't blotch the effort to badly - Adminnemooseus} [This message has been edited by Adminnemooseus, 09-17-2003]
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
quicksink Inactive Member |
quote: I was mistaken, but not so that my argument is weakened. According to http://abcnews.go.com/sections/science/DailyNews/magneticfield990521.html (go to "edit", and "find on this page"-[last]) the last polar flip occurred 780,000 years ago. This is such a small part of earth's history, that squashing it into 6000 years would mean it happened a few days ago. Or we could all assume that this polar flip occurred just before man discovered the compass, which would be around the time of jesus... all this based on absolutely keine evidence.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
quicksink Inactive Member |
http://www.nasca.org.uk/Strange_relics_/reversal/reversal.html
this site reaffirms the "polar-flip", and stresses that it is long-overdue. It also highlights the sheer catastrophe that such an event would cause. Surely, if this event did indeed occur, it would be, and I quote the site:
quote: If this event had occurred during the times of humans, all life would have been wiped out. now I can see a coming rebuttle on the horizon- the flood was the result of this flip well, there is a difference. a) a flip would not cause torrential rains. b) damage would be permanent, and a mere boat would not save anyone. That is, unless, god comes in and miraculously saves the planet from total destruction, which goes well beyond science.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Joe Meert Member (Idle past 5710 days) Posts: 913 From: Gainesville Joined: |
Hmm, an interesting topic and one that I am keenly familiar with
http://www.clas.ufl.edu/users/jmeert Here's the problem QS. Ye-creationists originally denied reversals. Now they accept them, but they claim they are due to the flood (at least according to Humprehys). In terms of your sea-floor story, i think it is very important to point out that the reversal pattern observed in the magnetic tows are actually intensity fluctuations that were interpreted as reversals. Later drilling on the ocean floor and land sequences confirmed the reversal signature interpreted from the magnetic anomalies and helped place continental drift on firm footing. Cheers Joe Meert
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
quicksink Inactive Member |
i don't quite understand what you are trying to say...
but I ask how the flood could have caused reversals... and i am very interested in this manetite issue... we are learning plate tectonics and our teacher did mention that the issue solidified the drifter's beliefs. But how could a creationist consistently explain this unexplained phenomena? Because the scientific community is so eager for an answer, wouldn't they pay a little attention to the creationist's claims? and as I did a little more prying, I found that the pattern of magnetic reversals is actually a method of dating, like c14 and the like. Could anyone confirm this? (I found that information from: http://home.austarnet.com.au/stear/hominid_succession_helen_lawrence.htm) well, anyway [This message has been edited by quicksink, 03-14-2002]
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Joe Meert Member (Idle past 5710 days) Posts: 913 From: Gainesville Joined: |
quote: JM: Their claim is that the flood caused rapid reversals of the earth's magnetic field. Go figure. If correct, it requires some alternative inner core-outer core dynamics that don't make any sense to me. You are correct that magnetostratigraphy is used as a chronological tool. The reversal pattern in the rocks is random which makes matching patterns easy. The reversal stratigraphy is tied to an absolute time scale via radiometric dating. The nice thing is that magstrat can be used to date rocks that are otherwise undateable (lack of fossils or radioactive material). It works quite well. In fact, it works so well that oil companies are willing to pay to use this information in exploration. That tells you all you need to know about how valuable this information is! Cheers Joe Meert
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
quicksink Inactive Member |
thanks for the clarification
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
TrueCreation Inactive Member |
--The 'Magnetic Flips', more accuratelly magnetic reversals are indeed real. This should account for special effects of a liquid conductor, like the molten metal of the earth’s outer core. If the liquid flowed upwards (by the effects of convection cold fluids sink and hot fluids rise) this would sometimes make the field reverse swiftly. These plates would have sharply cooled the outer parts of the core, driving the convection.
1. - D.R. Humphreys, ‘Reversals of the earth’s magnetic field during the Genesis Flood,’ Proceedings of the First International Conference on Creationism, Creation Science Fellowship, Pittsburgh, 2:113—126, 1986. 2. - Humphreys, D.R., Physical mechanism for reversals of the earth’s magnetic field during the flood, Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Creationism, Creation Science Fellowship, Pittsburgh, 2:129—142, 1991.
quote: quote: 1 - R.S. Coe and M. Prvot, ‘Evidence suggesting extremely rapid field variation during a geomagnetic reversal’, Earth and Planetary Science 92(3/4):292—298, April 1989. 2 - .S. Coe, M. Prvot and P. Camps, ‘New evidence for extraordinarily rapid change of the geomagnetic field during a reversal’, Nature 374(6564):687—692, 1995 AiG - http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs/3317.aspAiG - http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs/3397.asp -------------------------Coe, R. S., Prvot, M. and Camps, P., 1995. New evidence for extraordinarily rapid change of the geomagnetic field during a reversal. Nature, 374:687—692. ------------------------- http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs/3397.asp ------------------------- quote: ------------------
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Joe Meert Member (Idle past 5710 days) Posts: 913 From: Gainesville Joined: |
JM: TC, you and your creationist colleagues should stay up with the literature and should try to read it with an eye toward understanding. Coe and Prevot did not document a rapid reversal. They did document (what they thought) was a rapid excursion---different than a full reversal. They have now backed off their earlier claim after examining more of the Steen's mountain. As for Humphrey's, he misused a diagram out of a text book and called it rapid reversals. The diagram he used (copied incorrectly) did not show reversals in the archeomagnetic record, but showed intensity fluctuations (no reversals) through time. Humprhey's doctored the diagram and argued they were reversals! Poor scholarship (if not downright dishonesty) does not make a strong case for your argument.
Let me ask you a question. People generally won't spend money on ideas that don't work. Petroleum companies pay geologists a lot of money. How much money have petroleum companies thrown at ye-creationist geology in order to help them increase the bottom line? How much have they thrown at Humprhey's? Cheers Joe Meert [This message has been edited by Joe Meert, 03-14-2002]
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
mark24 Member (Idle past 5226 days) Posts: 3857 From: UK Joined: |
TC, For the third time in recent days, message 181 in http://www.evcforum.net/cgi-bin/dm.cgi?action=page&f=1&t=29&p=12 has come back to haunt you.....
quote: Mark ------------------Occam's razor is not for shaving with. [This message has been edited by mark24, 03-14-2002]
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024