|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 63 (9162 total) |
| |
popoi | |
Total: 916,387 Year: 3,644/9,624 Month: 515/974 Week: 128/276 Day: 2/23 Hour: 0/0 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Earth science curriculum tailored to fit wavering fundamentalists | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Adequate Member (Idle past 305 days) Posts: 16113 Joined: |
* blushes *
You're very welcome.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Adequate Member (Idle past 305 days) Posts: 16113 Joined: |
They were looking for the evidence in particular layers, not in the entire geological column. You remember how I proved that you were completely wrong about that? So you should probably stop saying it. Once you did so out of ignorance, now it smacks of dishonesty.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1465 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
No I don't remember.
Doesn't matter though, there IS a ton of evidence for the rapid deposition of the entire column. I'll try to make a list of it.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Adequate Member (Idle past 305 days) Posts: 16113 Joined:
|
No I don't remember. Perhaps you should try to retain facts in your memory rather than fictions.
Doesn't matter though, there IS a ton of evidence for the rapid deposition of the entire column. ... which generations of practicing geologists couldn't find even though they were looking for it in the geological record, but which you have apparently discovered single-handed while barely glancing at a rock.
I'll try to make a list of it. Good. You do that.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
JonF Member (Idle past 188 days) Posts: 6174 Joined:
|
They were looking for the evidence in particular layers, not in the entire geological column. Some people still have that wrong idea.
They were looking at everything they could find, which was a lot. You don't need to see much of the geologic record to see there was no global flood and the Earth and life are old. Of course we've seen much more now, and all that we have found reinforces their conclusions.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
edge Member (Idle past 1726 days) Posts: 4696 From: Colorado, USA Joined: |
While SO may people contributed and continue to contribute to my knowledge regarding the basics of geology, I want to especially thank Dr. Adequate and Edge for their patience and sharing. The online ebook from Dr. Adequate was a particularly valuable resource.
You are welcome.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Pressie Member Posts: 2103 From: Pretoria, SA Joined:
|
Faith writes:
Oh well, the relevant scientists do study "particular layers". The relevant scientists even study small parts of "particular layers". The relevant scientists even study small parts of small areas on "particular "layers". What's your problem with that?
They were looking for the evidence in particular layers,.... faith writes: What on earth is "the entire geological column"? Never seen one of those in my life. Is that another of your creationist fantasies? ... not in the entire geological column. Some people still have that wrong idea. Edited by Pressie, : Spelling
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Admin Director Posts: 13014 From: EvC Forum Joined: Member Rating: 1.9
|
Please, let's stop the off-topic jabber and nitpicking. Just post information, suggestions, corrections, additions, etc.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Admin Director Posts: 13014 From: EvC Forum Joined: Member Rating: 1.9 |
So when a shale layer is great in extent it implies an underlying wide continental shelf, such as the one off our east coast?
The continental runoff suspended in the water that makes up shale deposits doesn't just disappear at the edge of the continental shelf, where the depth increases rapidly. What do deep water shale deposits look like?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
edge Member (Idle past 1726 days) Posts: 4696 From: Colorado, USA Joined:
|
So when a shale layer is great in extent it implies an underlying wide continental shelf, such as the one off our east coast?
Well, it's a fairly complex picture, but basically yes. Most of the deposits I'm familiar with are continental basins with some enclosure.
The continental runoff suspended in the water that makes up shale deposits doesn't just disappear at the edge of the continental shelf, where the depth increases rapidly. What do deep water shale deposits look like?
The deep sea deposits usually exist primarily in the sea. That sounds kind of moronic, but what I mean is that they are often incorporated into the rock record as highly deformed and accreted to the continent, or they are subducted. An exception would be something like the Gulf of Mexico, where huge accumulations of mud will someday become an epic mudstone (shale) basin. Depending on the course of plate tectonics it could also be deformed. Another case where they are not subducted is in the Great Basin where they have been overthrust onto the slope and shelf rocks. In that location, they are called the Western Assemblage or the Upper Plate rocks, etc. But, they are different in having a lot more chemical sediments such as cherts, along with turbidites and oceanic volcanics associated with them. Here is what can happen to the deep sea sediments:
This is a passive margin or trailing continental margin such as the Atlantic side of NA.
Huge shale deposit could be built out onto the oceanic crust as in the Gulf. I hope this helps in some small way. The message board environment isn't the best for explaining such broad and variable topics.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1425 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined:
|
Here is a 25 second clip where he makes an amazing claim regarding saline and carbon dating. Normally I can find stuff like this floating around and figure out where it came from, but I'm coming up blank in this regard on this topic. Any suggestions? My first impression is the same as 46&2's and Coyotes's that he is misusing the reservoir effect. My second impression is that, where ever it comes from, this argument can be refuted by comparing the Cariaco Basin varves (laid down under sea water) and the Lake Suigetsu varves (laid down under fresh water) and show that the slopes of the curves for 14C levels are the same. The Cariaco Basin varves are displaced by the reservoir effect, by (iirc) ~100 years apparent older age, and this displacement appears to be fairly constant. If what he said were true then:
This difference in decay is just not seen, as the wiggle-match for these three sets of data shows:
quote: The Cariaco-pine overlap is 1370 years. The consilience of these three sets of data showing the same pattern of variation in 14C levels, with hundreds of points of agreement, is rather hard to explain by purported endemic errors. Finally, his effect would depend on the length of time an artifact was in salt water, rather than the time that the salt water had been away from the ocean surface, and you would not see the apparent 1,300 age of freshly killed seal at McMurdo Sound , so this creationist argument refutes his creationist argument ... (you can't have it both ways ...) they can't both be true (but they can both be false). One wonders what effect he thinks salt water has on carbon molecules and how it can affect different isotopes differentially. Enjoy Edited by RAZD, : . Edited by RAZD, : ..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)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1425 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined:
|
The website archeologyexpert.co.uk in discussing problems in C14 dating (not arguing against it) says "C14 leaches at an accelerated rate from organic matter saturated in water, especially saline water". Well that looks like one source for the claim.
quote: We already know the McMurdo Pratt. Note that "Organic matter, being porous, can easily be contaminated by organic carbon in groundwater. This increases the C12 content and interferes with the carbon ratio" has it backwards -- it would increase the C14 content more than the C12 content because it is younger. Creationists making stuff up again. 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)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Pollux Member Posts: 303 Joined:
|
Hi RAZD.
The comments about dating problems I saw at the site were brief and reasonable - I did not see the ones you and Coyote pointed out. The article I mentioned in message 836 was looking at the effect of calcite on RC dating of GROUNDWATER. It found a 10% effect. This is of course no comfort to YEC because it is not dating once-living things, and is too small to materially affect dates. As you show, any actual effect of saline is minimal at best.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
46&2 Junior Member (Idle past 3174 days) Posts: 24 From: Kailua-Kona Joined: |
I was similarly confused by Coyote's assertion of the creationist tilt of that site, as I undoubtedly saw the same page/s you did, which were reasonable, if amateurish. So I went back to the site, and saw the page he was talking about, and it is very clearly typical creationist propaganda.
Here's the page: Radio Carbon Dating - Archaeology Expert Also, the Radiocarbon article you posted is behind a paywall, since it is fairly new-- 2013. I'd eventually like to read the whole article. But being so new, it certainly wasn't the source of the claim, since the video is a couple years older. Edited by 46&2, : No reason given. Edited by 46&2, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ThinAirDesigns Member (Idle past 2394 days) Posts: 564 Joined: |
46&2 writes: ...it certainly wasn't the source of the claim, since the video is a couple years older. The video was recorded 2005. JB
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024