Carbon Dating DOESN'T work beyond 4500 years

quote:

---

The problem is, the magnetic field is decaying around the earth. The earth is covered in a magnetic field, which is STEADILY losing its strength by 1/2 every 1400 years. There are no magnetic reversals--there are only areas of stronger and weaker magnetism...

---

--I take it you've never even heard of paleomagnetism have you?Cheers,
-Chris Grose

quote:

---

Creation Scientist = filtered data set with a dash of ego.

---

--Personally, I don't even like to refer to them as 'creation scientists', isn't it true that you either are a scientist, or your not? Nevertheless, most creationist 'researchers', do unfortunatelly fit in or around that catagory.

quote:

---

Anyway, on the previous page I have a graph that shows mirror images of magnetic measurements (not sure what the technical jargon is for these measurements) on either side of an ocean ridge. Things got pretty silent after that.

​

I was trying to find a better graph of the data, but the graph I listed was the best I could find. Do you have better data handy? I have seen some pretty nifty graphs before, but wasn't able to find them.

---

--Most of the data I have is from my access to some of the AGU and GSA journals (eg. Geophysical Research Letters, Reviews of Geophysics, Journal of Geophysical Research (Solid Earth and Planets), Computational seismology and Geodynamics (largely useless for your inquiry), GSA Bulletin and GSA journal, Geology) as well as Geophysical monographs (AGU) and some copies from the AGU geodynamcis series.--You can also check out:Lowrie, William; 1997, Fundamentals of Geophysics, pp 295 - 303.Naar and Hey; 1989, Recent Pacific-Easter-Nazca Plate Motions, pp. 9 - 30. from Geophysical Monogrpah 57: Evolution of Mid Ocean Ridges. Editor; J. Sinton--I also have some geomagnetic data that I posted who knows how many years ago on evcforum:Data from:Cox, Allan; 1973, Plate Tectonics and Geomagnetic Reversals^check this book out, you'll love it if you are looking for plenty of geomagnetic data. It also anylizes the seafloor magnetic anomaly data against DRM (deposition [or detrital] remnant magnetism) paleomagnetic data which means the seafloor geomagnetic data wasn't just the result of tectonic activity on the seafloor or near a ridge (eg, like is implied by Brown's hydroplate theory).--There is a lot we can learn from the study of geomagnetic data, and not just the unequivocally clear inference that there has been geomagnetic reversals and also that seafloor spreading is real. Probably the most intriguing thing observed in the history of the geomagnetic field is the change in frequency of reversal rate over time, especially since the breakup of pangea as is seen in the data:--Why this pattern exists is interesting and may unlock many mysteries regarding what has influenced the behaviour of the geodynamo over time.--Here is the Geomagnetic polarity time scale for 0 - 160 Mya:--Of course you don't really get a full appreciation of geomagnetic anomalies until you've seen the actual intensity data plotted against 3D bathymetric data in full color. I don't have an image of that, but I'll be on the lookout if I have time.Cheers,
-Chris GroseThis message has been edited by TrueCreation, 05-12-2004 09:19 PMThis message has been edited by TrueCreation, 05-12-2004 09:21 PMThis message has been edited by TrueCreation, 05-12-2004 09:25 PM

Adminnemooseus,
Well, I directly addressed a point brought up in booboo's initial post. I can see that discussing discussing the change in the frequency of geomagnetic reversals over time would be off topic, but I just thought I would inject that bit of information.Cheers,
-Chris Grose

quote:

---

That is intriguing. A ca. 30 million year period with no reversals.

---

--The Cretaceous superchron (or Cretaceous Long Normal) also oddly corresponds with a period where there was very significant volcanism. But anyways, I don't want to drift too far off topic.

quote:

---

I smell a Nobel Prize for the first accurate theory.

---

--I was able to attend a geophysical lecture by Joe Meert (an EvCforum participant and assistant professor of geology (geophysics) at the University of South Florida) a few months ago on the topic of geomagnetism. If I recall correctly, he smells a nobel prize for the first coherent potentially falsifiable, well substantiated theory explaining how the geodynamo behaves. Probably the only Nobel to be awarded for scientific research in geology/geophysics. He also humorously said that that might be one of those incipient (precocious?) students in the classroom. Then he winked at me . Well, ok, he didn't--but I like to wish! lol.Anyways, I too would like to see booboo comment on some of this. The worst mistake he can make is closing his mind when things get daunting. I should hope that he would endorse the mind-set that he can leave the fact that there is a possibility that we are wrong in the back of his mind if he wants, but acknowledge the fact that he cannot rebuttle this data and the argument with what he knows--or possibly with what he may ever know.--[edit] - If anyone wants to discuss in more depth geomagnetism and associated phenomena, I'd be happy to discuss it in another thread as adminnemooseus has suggested.Cheers,
-Chris GroseThis message has been edited by TrueCreation, 05-13-2004 02:04 PM

quote:

---

1) I think Booboocruise is long gone.

---

--After checking out his posting list, I guess your right.Cheers,
-Chris Grose