Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
5 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Too Many Meteor Strikes in 6k Years
mikehager
Member (Idle past 6466 days)
Posts: 534
Joined: 09-02-2004


Message 91 of 304 (210770)
05-24-2005 12:36 AM
Reply to: Message 75 by Faith
05-23-2005 8:29 PM


Re: We are not arguing about the flood
That is not what this thread is about. It is not about the evidence for the flood, it's about whether or not a bombardment of meteors would have the devastating effects predicted in the first post, and the flood is my suggestion why they might not.
In response to all the reasonable posts pointing out the massive amounts of energy in cometary impacts, you propose a few kilometers of water or a few tens of feet of soft mud being sufficient to soften these massive impacts. Oh, and since no one saw it, we can't know anything about it.
Fine. Whatever. I'm done with you in this discussion. It's just to tiring watching you dance in greater and greatye desperation around every fact raised that doesn't immediatley reinforce your preconceptions. Feel free to have the last word.
Mud? Please...

This message is a reply to:
 Message 75 by Faith, posted 05-23-2005 8:29 PM Faith has not replied

wnope
Inactive Member


Message 92 of 304 (210771)
05-24-2005 12:36 AM
Reply to: Message 79 by Faith
05-23-2005 9:08 PM


Re: Science or faith etc
"The meteor strikes weren't that lethal."
Like that a huge meteorite that smashedinto the Earth 251 million years ago and caused the greatest extinction event in the planet's history, killing about 90 percent of all life.
or the fact that it is estimated a mass-extinction meteor struck once every 5 million years or so.
And large meteors would have caused Tsunamis that reached across the world if it was during the flood.
Take into account that these are all dated to be at very different times, not all in the same year. I'm not sure how you can justify all the meteors in earths history hitting then.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 79 by Faith, posted 05-23-2005 9:08 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 94 by Faith, posted 05-24-2005 12:59 AM wnope has not replied

mikehager
Member (Idle past 6466 days)
Posts: 534
Joined: 09-02-2004


Message 93 of 304 (210772)
05-24-2005 12:48 AM
Reply to: Message 83 by lfen
05-23-2005 10:44 PM


Re: Not 6000 years, 4000.
I agree with you completely, Yiou are exactly right. faith and her ilk are lost causes to reason. They have their spirits and magic
(praying to a god for intervention is simply a form of magic) and all that. I do not think for a moment the fanatical, YEC believer can be helped by me or this forum.
That isn't why I make my small efforts to rebut theist and YEC misconceptions. As I type this, there are 6 registered members and 18 guests on this page. Of those 18 visitors some may be people, especially young people or students, who are honestly wondering if all the creationist nonesense is really valid. It is they that the real academics and educated laymen (as I flatter myself to be) owe our efforts too.
Sorry for the off-topic post. Admins, don't be too mad.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 83 by lfen, posted 05-23-2005 10:44 PM lfen has not replied

Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 94 of 304 (210773)
05-24-2005 12:59 AM
Reply to: Message 92 by wnope
05-24-2005 12:36 AM


Re: evidence or assertion
The meteor strikes weren't that lethal."
Like that a huge meteorite that smashedinto the Earth 251 million years ago and caused the greatest extinction event in the planet's history, killing about 90 percent of all life.
I guess I can't expect you to have read all my posts in this thread but I already answered this somewhere back there. There is no real proof of this, it is all a hypothesis in the service of other hypotheses based on the barest of actual facts which are completely inscrutable in themselves. I will try to find my post and link it for you.
or the fact that it is estimated a mass-extinction meteor struck once every 5 million years or so.
Ditto. Nothing but an imaginative scenario based on other imaginative scenarios, with no empirical evidence for it whatever.
And large meteors would have caused Tsunamis that reached across the world if it was during the flood.
Yes, well so many have said, and for all I know it's possible and would in fact be a big problem for an ark, but so far all anyone has done is assert that it's so without any attempt to explain to me the forces involved. Heck I can assert all kinds of things too as ought to be apparent by now, only at least I have some arguments for mine, so they aren't JUST assertions.
Take into account that these are all dated to be at very different times, not all in the same year. I'm not sure how you can justify all the meteors in earths history hitting then.
This started out as "just a thought." I am surprised that it went anywhere at all. I would have predicted others would answer the first post and my passing thought would just evaporate. I have no major investment in it at all. But since the answers to me have ranged from scorn to unsubstantiated assertion, with hardly anything in the way of actual evidence, I've taken a certain fond interest in my humble little argument.
But first I would like to go back and do some thinking about those links you posted in your first message. I really want to get to that tomorrow if I can.
This message has been edited by Faith, 05-24-2005 01:00 AM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 92 by wnope, posted 05-24-2005 12:36 AM wnope has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 95 by DrJones*, posted 05-24-2005 1:23 AM Faith has not replied
 Message 96 by ringo, posted 05-24-2005 1:27 AM Faith has replied
 Message 97 by NosyNed, posted 05-24-2005 2:27 AM Faith has replied
 Message 98 by Nighttrain, posted 05-24-2005 7:19 AM Faith has replied
 Message 99 by Randy, posted 05-24-2005 8:07 AM Faith has replied

DrJones*
Member
Posts: 2284
From: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
Joined: 08-19-2004
Member Rating: 6.8


Message 95 of 304 (210778)
05-24-2005 1:23 AM
Reply to: Message 94 by Faith
05-24-2005 12:59 AM


Re: evidence or assertion
There is no real proof of this, it is all a hypothesis in the service of other hypotheses based on the barest of actual facts which are completely inscrutable in themselves.
So all the geologists out there are dirty liars? What evidence do you have?

*not an actual doctor

This message is a reply to:
 Message 94 by Faith, posted 05-24-2005 12:59 AM Faith has not replied

ringo
Member (Idle past 412 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 96 of 304 (210779)
05-24-2005 1:27 AM
Reply to: Message 94 by Faith
05-24-2005 12:59 AM


Do the math
As one of the more math-challenged members of the board, I look at it something like this:
The mainstream age of the earth is about 4.5 billion years. The YEC time since the flood is about 4500 years.
That's a factor of one million - i.e. - YECs must compress all of the meteor and comet impacts into one-millionth of the mainstream time frame.
Therefore, they must also expect the energy dissipation - i.e. the damage done - to be a million times more intense. Catastrophic impacts would be a million times more frequent than expected by science.
Of course, if most of the impacts were confined to the flood year, you're looking at a billion times the intensity.... And Noah never noticed it?
Pretty far-fetched, Faith.

People who think they have all the answers usually don't understand the questions.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 94 by Faith, posted 05-24-2005 12:59 AM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 227 by Faith, posted 05-27-2005 4:41 AM ringo has replied

NosyNed
Member
Posts: 8996
From: Canada
Joined: 04-04-2003


Message 97 of 304 (210783)
05-24-2005 2:27 AM
Reply to: Message 94 by Faith
05-24-2005 12:59 AM


Re: evidence or assertion
But since the answers to me have ranged from scorn to unsubstantiated assertion, with hardly anything in the way of actual evidence, I've taken a certain fond interest in my humble little argument.
You have been given (recently - it did take awhile) some calculations of the effects.
The reason it has taken awhile is that those who are knowlegable already know all this. But you have some of the calculations now.
Here are some of what you should note:
1) The "dust" isn't what you think it is. It is condensed vaporized rock. Your water or mud "keeping the dust down" is yet another example of something that is, at best, very funny.
2) One (just one of the bigger ones) of these things is like setting off all the world's nuclear weapons 1,000's of time over.
3) The surface of the earth is actually not big enough to avoid the effects of one of the bigger ones.
4) You are trying to compress a very large number of them (big and little) into one year.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 94 by Faith, posted 05-24-2005 12:59 AM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 228 by Faith, posted 05-27-2005 4:54 AM NosyNed has not replied

Nighttrain
Member (Idle past 3993 days)
Posts: 1512
From: brisbane,australia
Joined: 06-08-2004


Message 98 of 304 (210801)
05-24-2005 7:19 AM
Reply to: Message 94 by Faith
05-24-2005 12:59 AM


Re: evidence or assertion
Yes, well so many have said, and for all I know it's possible and would in fact be a big problem for an ark, but so far all anyone has done is assert that it's so without any attempt to explain to me the forces involved. Heck I can assert all kinds of things too as ought to be apparent by now, only at least I have some arguments for mine, so they aren't JUST assertions.
The Shoemaker-Levy 9 strike on Jupiter, bearing in mind Jupiter has almost 11 times the diameter of earth.
http://seds.lpl.arizona.edu/sl9/sl9.html
Edited to add more detail
Comet/Jupiter Collision FAQ - Post-Impact
This message has been edited by Nighttrain, 05-24-2005 07:31 AM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 94 by Faith, posted 05-24-2005 12:59 AM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 230 by Faith, posted 05-27-2005 5:06 AM Nighttrain has not replied

Randy
Member (Idle past 6247 days)
Posts: 420
From: Cincinnati OH USA
Joined: 07-19-2002


Message 99 of 304 (210808)
05-24-2005 8:07 AM
Reply to: Message 94 by Faith
05-24-2005 12:59 AM


KaBoom
quote:
Yes, well so many have said, and for all I know it's possible and would in fact be a big problem for an ark, but so far all anyone has done is assert that it's so without any attempt to explain to me the forces involved. Heck I can assert all kinds of things too as ought to be apparent by now, only at least I have some arguments for mine, so they aren't JUST assertions.
Trixe pointed out the Impact calculator You can use it to get some idea of the forces invovled. A 10000 meter diameter rocky asteroid going 17 Km/sec would make a final crater of about 74 miles diameter. There are 6 about this size known on earth and 4 that are significantly bigger. Here are some effects both locally and at 500 miles distance.
"The crater opened in the water has a diameter of 114 km = 70.9 miles
For the crater formed in the seafloor:
Transient Crater Diameter: 68.4 km = 42.5 miles
Transient Crater Depth: 24.2 km = 15 miles
Final Crater Diameter: 119 km = 74 miles
Final Crater Depth: 1.25 km = 0.775 miles
The crater formed is a complex crater.
The volume of the target melted or vaporized is 1850 km3 = 444 miles3
Roughly half the melt remains in the crater , where its average thickness is 503 meters = 1650 feet
Thermal Radiation:
What does this mean?
Time for maximum radiation: 7.18 seconds after impact
Visible fireball radius: 71.8 km = 44.6 miles
The fireball appears 20.4 times larger than the sun
Thermal Exposure: 8.32 x 107 Joules/m2
Duration of Irradiation: 1580 seconds
Radiant flux (relative to the sun): 52.5
Effects of Thermal Radiation:
Clothing ignites
Much of the body suffers third degree burns
Newspaper ignites
Plywood flames
Deciduous trees ignite
Grass ignites
Seismic Effects:
What does this mean?
The major seismic shaking will arrive at approximately 160 seconds.
Richter Scale Magnitude: 9.8 (This is greater than any earthquake in recorded history)
Mercalli Scale Intensity at a distance of 800 km:
IV. Felt indoors by many, outdoors by few during the day. At night, some awakened. Dishes, windows, doors disturbed; walls make cracking sound. Sensation like heavy truck striking building. Standing motor cars rocked noticeably.
V. Felt by nearly everyone; many awakened. Some dishes, windows broken. Unstable objects overturned. Pendulum clocks may stop.
Ejecta:
What does this mean?
The ejecta will arrive approximately 434 seconds after the impact.
Average Ejecta Thickness: 38.2 cm = 15 inches
Mean Fragment Diameter: 3.28 mm = 0.129 inches
Air Blast:
What does this mean?
The air blast will arrive at approximately 2420 seconds.
Peak Overpressure: 142000 Pa = 1.42 bars = 20.2 psi
Max wind velocity: 225 m/s = 503 mph
Sound Intensity: 103 dB (May cause ear pain)
Damage Description:
Multistory wall-bearing buildings will collapse.
Wood frame buildings will almost completely collapse.
Highway truss bridges will collapse.
Glass windows will shatter.
Up to 90 percent of trees blown down; remainder stripped of branches and leaves.
"
You will also find a link to a pdf file that explains how they do the calculations.
Note that another factor of all these strikes is ejecta raining down all over the earth. So in addition to the rain from the flood there would be a rain of hot rocks. That would be just a little tough on a wooden boat and of course air temperatures would eventually pass those where life would survive anyway as I pointed out earlier.
Now keep in mind that we only see the reminants of a tiny fraction of the objects that have impacted earth in its history. The rain of destruction during the lunar bombardment would probably have vaporized the oceans and melted a significant fraction of the earths crust.
Added in edit: I used a water depth at the impact point of 1000 meters for the above calculation.
Randy
This message has been edited by Randy, 05-24-2005 08:09 AM
This message has been edited by Randy, 05-24-2005 08:10 AM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 94 by Faith, posted 05-24-2005 12:59 AM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 100 by roxrkool, posted 05-24-2005 9:52 AM Randy has replied
 Message 231 by Faith, posted 05-27-2005 5:10 AM Randy has not replied

roxrkool
Member (Idle past 988 days)
Posts: 1497
From: Nevada
Joined: 03-23-2003


Message 100 of 304 (210836)
05-24-2005 9:52 AM
Reply to: Message 99 by Randy
05-24-2005 8:07 AM


Re: KaBoom
Excellent post, Randy!
I have a question, do any YEC organizations state what they believe the water depth was at the peak of the flood? I suspect it may be deeper than what you used (1000 meters). Did you try doubling or tripling that number?
It might be interesting to see if there is a threashold water depth where the effects are minimal.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 99 by Randy, posted 05-24-2005 8:07 AM Randy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 101 by Randy, posted 05-24-2005 10:41 AM roxrkool has replied

Randy
Member (Idle past 6247 days)
Posts: 420
From: Cincinnati OH USA
Joined: 07-19-2002


Message 101 of 304 (210843)
05-24-2005 10:41 AM
Reply to: Message 100 by roxrkool
05-24-2005 9:52 AM


Re: KaBoom
Excellent post, Randy!
I have a question, do any YEC organizations state what they believe the water depth was at the peak of the flood? I suspect it may be deeper than what you used (1000 meters). Did you try doubling or tripling that number?
It might be interesting to see if there is a threashold water depth where the effects are minimal.
Thanks.
The main effect of really deep water is to reduce final crater size and reduce ejecta. Of course a lot more steam will be produced from vaporizing more water.
Here we have a calculation with the same object hitting 10,000 meter deep water (about as deep as you could get at at 45 degree angle 500 miles away.
The crater opened in the water has a diameter of 102 km = 63.1 miles
For the crater formed in the seafloor:
Transient Crater Diameter: 47.3 km = 29.4 miles
Transient Crater Depth: 16.7 km = 10.4 miles
Final Crater Diameter: 78.5 km = 48.8 miles
Final Crater Depth: 1.1 km = 0.683 miles

The crater formed is a complex crater.
The volume of the target melted or vaporized is 413 km3 = 99 miles3
Roughly half the melt remains in the crater , where its average thickness is 235 meters = 771 feet
Thermal Radiation:
Time for maximum radiation: 7.18 seconds after impact
Visible fireball radius: 71.8 km = 44.6 miles
The fireball appears 20.4 times larger than the sun
Thermal Exposure: 8.31 x 107 Joules/m2
Duration of Irradiation: 1580 seconds
Radiant flux (relative to the sun): 52.4
Effects of Thermal Radiation:
Clothing ignites
Much of the body suffers third degree burns
Newspaper ignites
Plywood flames
Deciduous trees ignite
Grass ignites
Seismic Effects:
The major seismic shaking will arrive at approximately 160 seconds.
Richter Scale Magnitude: 9.4
Mercalli Scale Intensity at a distance of 800 km:
Ejecta:
The ejecta will arrive approximately 434 seconds after the impact.
Average Ejecta Thickness: 8.72 cm = 3.43 inches
Mean Fragment Diameter: 2.13 mm = 0.0839 inches
Air Blast:
The air blast will arrive at approximately 2420 seconds.
Peak Overpressure: 142000 Pa = 1.42 bars = 20.2 psi
Max wind velocity: 225 m/s = 503 mph
Sound Intensity: 103 dB (May cause ear pain)
Damage Description:
Multistory wall-bearing buildings will collapse.
Wood frame buildings will almost completely collapse.
Highway truss bridges will collapse.
Up to 90 percent of trees blown down; remainder stripped of branches and leaves.
Of course a wave a few thousand feet high will also form.
Added in edit. Even the impacts that produced the dozens of craters between 5 and 50 km in diameter would have produced blast winds over 100 mph for long distances as you can see if you play around with the calculations.
Randy
This message has been edited by Randy, 05-24-2005 10:56 AM
This message has been edited by Randy, 05-24-2005 10:57 AM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 100 by roxrkool, posted 05-24-2005 9:52 AM roxrkool has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 103 by roxrkool, posted 05-24-2005 4:06 PM Randy has not replied

Alasdair
Member (Idle past 5749 days)
Posts: 143
Joined: 05-13-2005


Message 102 of 304 (210894)
05-24-2005 3:12 PM


Have the AiG crew answered this before? I'm curious as to their answer.

roxrkool
Member (Idle past 988 days)
Posts: 1497
From: Nevada
Joined: 03-23-2003


Message 103 of 304 (210910)
05-24-2005 4:06 PM
Reply to: Message 101 by Randy
05-24-2005 10:41 AM


Re: KaBoom
Yikes.
Cool model.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 101 by Randy, posted 05-24-2005 10:41 AM Randy has not replied

Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 104 of 304 (210989)
05-24-2005 9:42 PM


Meteorite:Tsumani causes and effects
OK. It will take me a while to catch up with this thread. This post is to answer the claims that a meteorite hitting in the ocean would generate a tsunami and that the tsunami would cause severe effects on any supposed ship/ark floating on the ocean.
The information I've discovered is that
1) NO KNOWN METEORITE IMPACTS HAVE PRODUCED A TSUNAMI. ONE is postulated nevertheless to have done so 65 million years ago -- sorry, not postulated, "KNOWN" since modern science KNOWS stuff like this, right? even though all REALLY TRULY EMPIRICALLY KNOWN historic meteorite impacts have not caused a tsunami.
3) SHIPS AT SEA DO NOT NORMALLY EVEN NOTICE A PASSING TSUNAMI. This is the most important information to answer those who claimed the effects would be devastating to Noah's ark. The ark was a huge ship by the way. 450' x 75' x 45' with three stories.
3) TSUNAMIS HAVE VARIABLE EFFECTS: This is an academic point if we're talking about effects while the Flood covered the entire earth, but it might have relevance to Noah's having arrived on land before the flood fully receded and meteorites landed in the ocean: Tsunami effects are variable, may cause damage in one place, not in one nearby, so that there is no absolute certainty about how they might affect a given location 4000+ years ago.
Interesting reading:
No EMPIRICALLY KNOWN meteorite-caused tsunamis:
While no historic examples of meteorite impacts are known to have produced a tsunami, the apparent impact of a meteorite at the end of the Cretaceous Period, about 65 million years ago near the tip of what is now the Yucatan Peninsula of Mexico, produced tsunami that left deposits all along the Gulf coast of Mexico and the United States.
The effects are variable:
A small tsunami at one beach can be a giant a few miles away. Do not let modest size of one make you lose respect for all.
http://www.tulane.edu/~sanelson/geol204/tsunami.htm
Variable effects cont'd.
Where sea-floor topography and orientation are optimal for a tsunami from a given direction, the wave can hump up into a breaking wall of water 9 meters (30 feet) or more high, and rush onto shore to cause enormous destruction. Nearby coastal points, where the bottom configuration is different, may record the same wave only as a rapid surge and withdrawal of water, with much lower height.
http://www.sles-riyadh.org/tsunami.htm
People in ships normally do not notice tsunamis
... Tsunami wave heights at sea are usually less than one meter, and the waves are not frequently noticed by people in ships. As tsunami waves approach the shallow water of the coast, their heights increase and sometimes exceed 20 meters. ...
... Ships at sea cannot detect a passing tsunami, nor can the waves be seen from aircraft. While passing through deep oceans, a tsunami consists of a series of waves that are only a few feet high and a hundred miles or more apart. These waves typically travel at speeds of about 600 mph.
... Tsunamis only really become dangerous as they approach land
As they reach shallow water, the waves slow down but greatly increase in height, and the distance between them shrinks. When the tsunami finally strikes the coast, the waves may crest to heights of 100 feet and travel inland at speeds of 30 mph. A series of waves may reach the coast at intervals of 5 to 40 minutes; the first wave is frequently not the largest.
... To someone on a ship in the open ocean, the passage of a tsunami wave would barely elevate the water surface. However, when it reaches shallower water near the coastline and "touches bottom," the tsunami wave increases in height, piling up into an enormous wall of water. As a tsunami approaches the shore, the water near shore commonly recedes for several minutes -- long enough for someone to be lured out to collect exposed sea shells, fish, etc. -- before suddenly rushing back toward land with frightening speed and height.
USGS: Volcano Hazards Program Glossary
This message has been edited by Faith, 05-24-2005 09:44 PM

Replies to this message:
 Message 105 by jar, posted 05-24-2005 10:08 PM Faith has not replied
 Message 106 by Randy, posted 05-24-2005 10:22 PM Faith has replied
 Message 109 by Harlequin, posted 05-24-2005 10:45 PM Faith has replied

jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 105 of 304 (210994)
05-24-2005 10:08 PM
Reply to: Message 104 by Faith
05-24-2005 9:42 PM


Gotta support Faith on this.
Tsunamis won't be much of a threat to most vessels as long as it wasn't near shallow water or a land mass and since the Flood myth imagines water covering the highest mountains, most of the earth would have about five miles of water under the hull.
Of course, that has little to do with this thread.

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 104 by Faith, posted 05-24-2005 9:42 PM Faith has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 107 by NosyNed, posted 05-24-2005 10:23 PM jar has not replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024