|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
Member (Idle past 1432 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Mid-ocean Ridges and Age of Formation | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1472 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
Did I say I personally can interpret anything you throw at me?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Pollux Member Posts: 303 Joined: |
A straightforward interpretation of the data would be that the seamounts formed over a long time, the given dates match the rate of movement of the Pacific plate, and this is good confirmation of the accuracy of RM dating. Why should I not accept that? How would you interpret it?
Data like this are significant for accepting long age for geologic features such as the GC, which is why I would like your opinion.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1472 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
If you just want a shot at it off the top of my head, I'd say of course there's a difference in age, just not millions of years difference, just as there's a difference in age between lower and upper layers of sediments, just not millions of years. Same as with the separation of the continents, it takes time, just not millions of years.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 439 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined:
|
Faith writes:
The Flintstones is not a documentary.
I've watched all the animations, I know the basics about tectonics.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Pollux Member Posts: 303 Joined: |
The seamounts are volcanic, not sedimentary.
The H-E chain extends roughly N-W from Hawaii, having been formed from a hot spot which is currently S-E of Hawaii feeding the currently active volcanoes on the island and making a new seamount off-shore. The extinct volcanoes on Hawaii are in the N-W and show increasing evidence of age as you go N-W. The chain extends for more than 2000 miles with undersea mountains, exposed islands, and coral atolls. More than forty have been dated and the dates correspond pretty well with what would be expected for current rates of movement of the Pacific plate. Possible interpretations of the data : 1. This is good confirmation of RM dating and the Earth is at least tens of millions of years old. 2.(a) The mounts were formed at a fantastic rate as the plate zipped over a furious hot spot at many feet per day for a thousand years (or faster rates for a shorter time)(b) Something happened to RA decay rates simultaneously so that the dates appear to coincide with distance. 3. As for 2(a) but those reporting RM dates are lying or deluded or devil-led or something. 4. It was made that way with attendant artificial appearance of age. #1 is the most reasonable interpretation and is supported by a mountain (or FLOOD!) of other evidence. #2 or #3 is necessary for a YEC interpretation but still has a lot of problems associated with it, among which is thesubmerged coral reefs on some of the undersea mountains. #4 means God is a trickster. IMHO nailing the dates is relevant to debating how the GC was formed, or in fact for most discussion about YECSo what is your interpretation? Edited by Adminnemooseus, : Add blank lines.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
TrueCreation Inactive Member
|
quote: See message 25 here: EvC Forum: Heat release from tectonic friction Such rates will generate enough heat to boil more than a hundred oceans. The state of oceanic lithosphere (temperature, density, buoyancy, surface heat flow) is as expected from spreading over timescales on the order of 10^8 years, not less.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1472 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
Yeah, so you all say and of course you MUST be right because you were there and witnessed it. No, there has to have been a cooling factor you aren't taking into account. In any case, it would be nice to have it acknowledged that twenty feet a day is not the miles a day the anti-Floodists impute to creationists. And as I've been fiddling with the numbers recently it comes out to less than that anyway. Well, I'm no mathematician. Get four and a half feet one time and ten feet another. Oh well.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
TrueCreation Inactive Member |
quote:How have you determined this to be a reasonable conclusion?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
JonF Member (Idle past 195 days) Posts: 6174 Joined:
|
Yeah, so you all say and of course you MUST be right because you were there and witnessed it. No, we all know and have often demonstrated that eyewitness accounts are unreliable and events in the past leave traces. We are right because the traces your scenario would leave aren't there and the traces our scenario would leave are there.
In any case, it would be nice to have it acknowledged that twenty feet a day is not the miles a day the anti-Floodists impute to creationists. YEC's have all sorts of wacky fantasies. Walt Brown and John Baumgardner have the continents moving at many miles per day.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
JonF Member (Idle past 195 days) Posts: 6174 Joined: |
How have you determined this to be a reasonable conclusion? You've been a YEC, you should know; she made it up because she's infalible and is never wrong.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1472 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
I don't understand how anyone can get miles a day out of the simple problem of three thousand miles of distance covered in 4300 years.
Etewitness acciounts are certainly a lot more reliable than conjurings about the past from the present could possibly be. If he was there and died of the heat then we'd know he was right about the heaty.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
JonF Member (Idle past 195 days) Posts: 6174 Joined:
|
I don't understand how anyone can get miles a day out of the simple problem of three thousand miles of distance covered in 4300 years. Nobody does. Your fantasy doesn't incorporate miles per day, other YEC fantasies do. Waltie and Johnnie and many other YECs think all the continental movement happened during the fludde year.
Etewitness acciounts are certainly a lot more reliable than conjurings about the past from the present could possibly be It's been proven, insofar as anything can be proven in science, that eyewitness accounts are unreliable. But your claim that we cannot discover the past from the traces in the present is just an unsupported and disproven assertion.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1432 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined:
|
I don't understand how anyone can get miles a day out of the simple problem of three thousand miles of distance covered in 4300 years. Which doesn't account for all the other movements of the plates http://pubs.usgs.gov/gip/dynamic/understanding.html
quote: The divergent boundaries are the mid-ocean ridges and the rift valley in Africa.
quote: 2.5 cm is 1 inch. per year.
quote: So the movement you calculated relates to the slow end of the rates of motion, and the fastest is 6 times faster (6 inches per year).
quote: Thus there is a wide range of information about time and rates of movement that are consistent around the world. This includes age of formation of the rock and ages of magnetic reversals.
Etewitness acciounts are certainly a lot more reliable than conjurings about the past from the present could possibly be. If he was there and died of the heat then we'd know he was right about the heaty. And that is probably a good reason why trained observers who are knowledgeable about geology and physics end up with results that are certainly a lot more reliable than your conjurings about the past based on fantasy.
Message 37: ... No, there has to have been a cooling factor you aren't taking into account. ... That is you hoping for a miracle again ... as you do for every piece of contrary evidence that is so inconvenient for your fantasy. Now you want thermodynamics to change on your whim. If you change the thermodynamics so that water doesn't boil then you change the thermodynamics of everything else ... fresh water lakes and rivers would freeze solid by the same process of miraculous heat removal. Hilarious. Enjoyby 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)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
shalamabobbi Member (Idle past 2876 days) Posts: 397 Joined:
|
No, there has to have been a cooling factor you aren't taking into account.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Pollux Member Posts: 303 Joined:
|
Faith you don't seem to understand that your feet per day scenario means that there is still rapid movement while there are lots of people around to notice the attendant quakes and volcanism. That is why other YEC postulate miles per day. This of course multiplies the attendant problems, like those seamounts and other volcano chains which have to be built more quickly.Then there's those little things like frantic magnetic pole reversals, vast changes in radioactive decay rates, and how to get rid of the accompanying heat.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024