Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,423 Year: 3,680/9,624 Month: 551/974 Week: 164/276 Day: 4/34 Hour: 1/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   How do scientists explain the cause of the Ice Age(s)?
Taq
Member
Posts: 10038
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.3


Message 22 of 96 (548268)
02-26-2010 2:45 PM
Reply to: Message 10 by jasonkthompson
02-26-2010 1:06 AM


Re: so what is the explanation
Oh, and here's what I've been looking at: The Ice Age Model
Can you actually falsify it or just vaguely say it's been dis-proven or it's a lie.
The ice core data rips this to shreds. Ice cores from Greenland and Antarctica have 450,000 years worth of annual ice layers. It is from this data that the link between the Milankovitch cycles and ice ages was first inferred. Here is the temp and CO2 data from the Vostok ice core:
Notice first the time scale at the bottom. 400,000 years. During that time there have been 4 ice ages (4 valleys) that are evenly spaced. It is the even spacing of hot and cold periods that suggests a cyclical cause, most likely the Milankovitch cycles.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 10 by jasonkthompson, posted 02-26-2010 1:06 AM jasonkthompson has not replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 10038
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.3


Message 41 of 96 (581215)
09-14-2010 3:20 PM
Reply to: Message 40 by Jeff Davis
09-14-2010 12:14 PM


First of all, we are still in an ice age.
Actually, this isn't quite accurate. We are in an interglacial period. Take a look at this chart:
source here: http://www.global-warming-and-the-climate.com/...rgument.htm
You will see that we are at a temperature peak right now (the y-intercept). The valleys in the chart represent the ice ages.
I would like also to address the question about colder temperatures producing less precipitation. If this were the case, then why do we have devastating snowstorms in below freezing temperatures?
It is because of warm ocean waters that push water vapor into the air. The moisture that falls as snow comes from warmer areas of the globe. This is why you see such a difference between snow accumulation on the coasts of Greenland (several feet a year) compared to the middle of Greenland (just a few inches a year). The warm, moist air hits the cold air on the continent and precipitates out. By the time it gets to the middle of Greenland there is hardly any moisture left.
Since the Sun produces nearly 50 billion kilowatts of energy to the Earth per day, the energy source is here to stay.
You also have to factor in the rate at which this energy is absorbed. Ice reflects this energy back into space while bare ground and liquid water absorb the energy.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 40 by Jeff Davis, posted 09-14-2010 12:14 PM Jeff Davis has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 44 by Jeff Davis, posted 09-14-2010 9:48 PM Taq has not replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 10038
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.3


Message 53 of 96 (605844)
02-22-2011 12:42 PM
Reply to: Message 49 by Robert Byers
02-22-2011 12:07 AM


Its just been wrong interpretations about basic facts and processes from those not first accepting biblical boundaries.
It would really help if you would present evidence which would demonstrate that these interpretations are wrong. Simply making up a story is not a valid way to falsify scientific interpretations that are based on literal mountains of evidence.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 49 by Robert Byers, posted 02-22-2011 12:07 AM Robert Byers has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 56 by Robert Byers, posted 02-22-2011 7:47 PM Taq has replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 10038
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.3


Message 58 of 96 (605930)
02-22-2011 7:48 PM
Reply to: Message 56 by Robert Byers
02-22-2011 7:47 PM


The evidence is the same evidence as used now to draw conclusions. Just a better interpretation is given here.
And this evidence is . . .? And your interpretation is better because . . .?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 56 by Robert Byers, posted 02-22-2011 7:47 PM Robert Byers has not replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 10038
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.3


Message 59 of 96 (605932)
02-22-2011 7:49 PM
Reply to: Message 55 by Robert Byers
02-22-2011 7:36 PM


No problem and in fact these days they are used to demonstrate that it was all from mega floods and not slow moving glaciers.
How do mega floods produce these features?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 55 by Robert Byers, posted 02-22-2011 7:36 PM Robert Byers has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 64 by Robert Byers, posted 02-23-2011 10:51 PM Taq has replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 10038
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.3


Message 70 of 96 (606496)
02-25-2011 6:12 PM
Reply to: Message 67 by Robert Byers
02-24-2011 1:19 AM


In fact it is said that the Med sea was carved out by fast flowing water into it.
It is also said that Mikey from the Life cereal commercials died when he ingested Pop Rocks and Pepsi. People say a lot of things. What matters is the evidence. Do you have any?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 67 by Robert Byers, posted 02-24-2011 1:19 AM Robert Byers has not replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 10038
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.3


Message 71 of 96 (606497)
02-25-2011 6:16 PM
Reply to: Message 64 by Robert Byers
02-23-2011 10:51 PM


Studies on mega floods show almost all formations in sediment or bedrock are from fast flowing water.
What type of formation could a mega flood not produce? How does a mega flood produce 400 foot thick chalk deposits made up of coccolithophores? How do mega floods create lake varves where the insect and leaf debris is sorted by minute differences in 14C? How do megafloods produce fossilized windswept sand dunes like those seen in the Cocconino sandstones in the Grand Canyon? How do megafloods produce incised gooseneck meanders like those seen here:

This message is a reply to:
 Message 64 by Robert Byers, posted 02-23-2011 10:51 PM Robert Byers has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 74 by Robert Byers, posted 02-28-2011 5:38 AM Taq has not replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 10038
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.3


Message 91 of 96 (608045)
03-08-2011 12:10 PM
Reply to: Message 89 by Robert Byers
03-08-2011 4:50 AM


It simply was so powerful it lowered the basin and threw the sediment on top of the boundaries.
The great fossil assemblages on all sides i see as from this short event about a century or two after the flood.
Based on what evidence?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 89 by Robert Byers, posted 03-08-2011 4:50 AM Robert Byers has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 93 by Robert Byers, posted 03-10-2011 3:14 AM Taq 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