|
Understanding through Discussion |
|
|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
| Thread ▼ Details |
|
|
| Author | Topic: How do scientists explain the cause of the Ice Age(s)? | |||||||||||||||||||
|
Apothecus Member (Idle past 2429 days)  Posts: 275 From: CA USA Joined: |
Hey Jason.
What is the secular explanation for the cause of the Ice Age(s). Well, from a simple google search, I get this Wiki article:
The causes of ice ages are not fully understood for both the large-scale ice age periods and the smaller ebb and flow of glacial—interglacial periods within an ice age. The consensus is that several factors are important: atmospheric composition (the concentrations of carbon dioxide, methane); changes in the Earth's orbit around the Sun known as Milankovitch cycles (and possibly the Sun's orbit around the galaxy); the motion of tectonic plates resulting in changes in the relative location and amount of continental and oceanic crust on the Earth's surface, which affect wind and ocean currents; variations in solar output; the orbital dynamics of the Earth-Moon system; and the impact of relatively large meteorites, and volcanism including eruptions of supervolcanoes. I remember reading about Milankovitch cycles back in college and how axial tilt may have played a part in causing ice ages. Coincidentally (or not) I also read a work of fiction at about that same time which used this hypothesis as a large part of its theme. My point is that in order to logically, honestly and critically come to a personal conclusion about anything which may disprove some part of the Christian bible, you need to separate fact from fiction. Understand where I'm coming from? This is where I think your problem lies, jasonkthompson. You refuse to see past your dogma, and see a tree where any reasonable, fact-seeking fellow might see a forest. Look at the actual facts, not just creationist sources (they are lying to you) and open your mind a little. But like Subbie told you in the unitarian thread, be careful. You might not like what you find... Have a good one. 
|
|||||||||||||||||||
|
Apothecus Member (Idle past 2429 days) Posts: 275 From: CA USA Joined: |
Hey JKT.
From your "source":
"source" writes: It is obvious that the Ice Age occurred after the Flood, since beautiful horseshoe-shaped moraines are preserved on the surface out from many mountain valleys of the western United States. Moraines are formed at the edges (lateral moraine) and end of a glacier (end moraine) by the deposition and pushing of rocks of all sizes into ridges. These geometric features cannot be formed during Flood runoff, but are typical of glaciation.  Nothing like starting from a conclusion and working your way back. Personally, off the top of my head I can think of perhaps a couple dozen formations in nature which would have obviously had to have happened after the flood, because they sure as hell couldn't have happened before it.  This is the only portion of the web page which attempts to convey the assertion that a global flood is "backed up" by observations in nature. Everything else is conjecture. That's it? Surely you have better material that we can dissect... And as Otto mentioned, there are absolutely no supporting references. Did the author forget them? This may as well have been a personal opinion blog, for all the actual evidence presented. So can anyone disprove this web page? I don't think so. There'd have to be some actual evidence to debunk. Please present a better source. Have a good one. "My own suspicion is that the Universe is not only queerer than we suppose, but queerer than we can suppose. J.B.S Haldane 1892-1964
|
|||||||||||||||||||
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024
