|
Understanding through Discussion |
|
QuickSearch
|
|
| Tangle (1 member, 185 visitors)
| ||||||
| Chatting now: | Chat room empty | ||||||
| paradigm of types | |||||||
| Astrophile | |||||||
|
| Thread ▼ Details |
|
|
| Author | Topic: A Game of Pretend: Vapor Canopy and magnetic fields | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
PhiloNibbler Junior Member (Idle past 179 days)  Posts: 10 Joined: |
Let's pretend that vapor canopy is viable (it's not) and see if we can work out how it could work in relation to carbon dating. I've engaged in dialog with others and they have brought up two issues. Magnetic field and vapor canopy. My two questions are how thick would the canopy have to be to block cosmic rays? What formulas are needed to figure this out? I know from reading that there are several problems with the vapor canopy, so it's not even viable, but like I said pretend and show how crazy it really is. How strong would the magnetic field have to be to block cosmic rays from interacting with nitrogen in the upper atmosphere? What are the formulas for this calculations? Are there any other considerations needed to be taken into? Sunspot cycles? Finally, assuming a perfect combination of these, what is the best case scenario YECs could hope for? And then based on that, what pressure, heat from rain, etc would result? Basicly, I'd like to be able to say to someone "well, you maybe right but if you are, the implications are so crazy it wouldn't work and here's why..." without having to get a phd in physics myself. Edited by PhiloNibbler, : No reason given. Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind." - Albert Einstein "All that is deformed ought to be reformed. The Word of God alone teaches us what ought to be so..." - Franks Lambert "If you want to change the world, pick up a pen and write" - Martin Luther
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Admin Director  Posts: 12560 From: EvC Forum Joined: |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
RAZD Member  Posts: 19570 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: Member Rating: 3.0
|
Not only do the sunspot cycles show up in the tree ring vs 14C data but you have annual data from the tree rings that shows an overall trend for 14C decay that matches the exponential decay curve. IFF there is some process that causes hundreds of tree rings to be formed in one day, THEN there must be a mechanism to exactly create the 14C data in the tree rings -- from ring to ring to ring to ring. The sunspot data also shows up in the Berillium-10 data in lake varves and ice cores
So you need a system to explain the Berillium-10 data as well, data with a different embeded decay correlation. This means you can posit without evidence a system to produce a 10% reduction in the production of Carbon-14 to bollix the carbon data, but you then need to produce a different, smaller, reduction in the production of Berillium-10 for the same layer -- as well as hyper-production of ice layers and lake varve layers. The only answer that comes close is magic by god/s intentionally fabricating deceiving evidence. Enjoy Edited by RAZD, : . Edited by RAZD, : day not year 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) • • •
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
PhiloNibbler Junior Member (Idle past 179 days) Posts: 10 Joined:
|
 Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind." - Albert Einstein "All that is deformed ought to be reformed. The Word of God alone teaches us what ought to be so..." - Franks Lambert "If you want to change the world, pick up a pen and write" - Martin Luther
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
NoNukes Inactive Member
|
The idea that the amount of C-14 depends on the amount those variables is seemingly an easy attack vector for carbon dating. And if the amount of Carbon varies, then Carbon dating is not reliable. I believe it is feasible for the amount of carbon in the atmosphere to be much lower in the past. If that happened in a way that was not corrected for then carbon dating would give ages that are too old. The main problem is that we know that such was not the case. We have data other such as ice-cores, and c-14 in tree rings that allow us to calibrate the amount of C-14 to ages. And the data shows us that the speculative stuff you are talking about did not happen in the relevant time frame. Carbon dating with some calibration for the variations in C-14 that we know about is accurate for at least 30,000 years of dating from today. I don't think your plan show the implausibility of the vapor canopy or the impossibility of lowered cosmic rays is what I would use to address dating. Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given. Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846) "Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, the wretched refuse of your teeming shore. Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed to me, I lift my lamp beside the golden door!” We got a thousand points of light for the homeless man. We've got a kinder, gentler, machine gun hand. Neil Young, Rockin' in the Free World. Worrying about the "browning of America" is not racism. -- Faith I hate you all, you hate me -- Faith
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2015 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2018
(1)