Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 52 (9178 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: Anig
Upcoming Birthdays: Theodoric
Post Volume: Total: 918,098 Year: 5,355/9,624 Month: 380/323 Week: 20/204 Day: 20/21 Hour: 1/4


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Earth science curriculum tailored to fit wavering fundamentalists
NoNukes
Inactive Member


(1)
Message 346 of 1053 (751985)
03-07-2015 12:29 PM
Reply to: Message 342 by Faith
03-07-2015 12:06 PM


Re: headlock
Misrepresent my argument and I do feel required for the sake of preserving my point of view to post here. Since you are one of the offenders let's see you perform a headlock on yourself.
Nonsense. You were already here posting Flood nonsense before I made any remarks about your participation. I suppose this is yet another example of Faith's revisionist view of history.
The only thing you need to 'force' your participation is to know that a Flood discussion exists.
Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

Je Suis Charlie
Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)
If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass

This message is a reply to:
 Message 342 by Faith, posted 03-07-2015 12:06 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 347 by Faith, posted 03-07-2015 12:34 PM NoNukes has seen this message but not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1552 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 347 of 1053 (751986)
03-07-2015 12:34 PM
Reply to: Message 346 by NoNukes
03-07-2015 12:29 PM


Re: headlock
No, it's an example of you reading out of context as usual.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 346 by NoNukes, posted 03-07-2015 12:29 PM NoNukes has seen this message but not replied

  
edge
Member (Idle past 1814 days)
Posts: 4696
From: Colorado, USA
Joined: 01-09-2002


Message 348 of 1053 (751989)
03-07-2015 12:56 PM
Reply to: Message 345 by kbertsche
03-07-2015 12:28 PM


Re: Iridium boundary layer
In fact, postulating a worldwide flood to spread the Ir creates more problems. According to flood geology, very thick layers of rock were laid down by a worldwide flood. If the flood laid down many meters or kilometers of material, why is the Ir excess concentrated into a single layer only a few centimeters thick?
Or it should be spread out through the entire package of rocks and, hence, so diluted as to preclude the creation of an anomaly, which manifestly exists.
Oh well, don't worry. The flood explains it all,,,

This message is a reply to:
 Message 345 by kbertsche, posted 03-07-2015 12:28 PM kbertsche has not replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 349 of 1053 (751990)
03-07-2015 1:15 PM
Reply to: Message 345 by kbertsche
03-07-2015 12:28 PM


Re: Iridium boundary layer
Floods can sort material by particle size or by density. But they can't sort material by chemical composition (or by isotopic concentration)!
Iridium is fairly unique with respect to density. Almost nothing is more dense. I'm not sure you've quite made your point here.
Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

Je Suis Charlie
Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)
If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass

This message is a reply to:
 Message 345 by kbertsche, posted 03-07-2015 12:28 PM kbertsche has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 350 by kbertsche, posted 03-07-2015 1:21 PM NoNukes has replied

  
kbertsche
Member (Idle past 2239 days)
Posts: 1427
From: San Jose, CA, USA
Joined: 05-10-2007


(1)
Message 350 of 1053 (751991)
03-07-2015 1:21 PM
Reply to: Message 349 by NoNukes
03-07-2015 1:15 PM


Re: Iridium boundary layer
Iridium is fairly unique with respect to density.
But the asteroid impact hypothesis does not postulate an asteroid made of pure Ir. The asteroid would have been largely iron, with a small amount of Ir dissolved in the iron. Some of the particles thrown into the atmosphere would have been iron from the asteroid; other particles would have been composites of asteroid iron and earth crustal material.

"Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind." — Albert Einstein
I am very astonished that the scientific picture of the real world around me is very deficient. It gives us a lot of factual information, puts all of our experience in a magnificently consistent order, but it is ghastly silent about all and sundry that is really near to our heart, that really matters to us. It cannot tell us a word about red and blue, bitter and sweet, physical pain and physical delight; it knows nothing of beautiful and ugly, good or bad, God and eternity. Science sometimes pretends to answer questions in these domains, but the answers are very often so silly that we are not inclined to take them seriously. — Erwin Schroedinger

This message is a reply to:
 Message 349 by NoNukes, posted 03-07-2015 1:15 PM NoNukes has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 352 by Faith, posted 03-07-2015 1:46 PM kbertsche has replied
 Message 353 by NoNukes, posted 03-07-2015 2:10 PM kbertsche has not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1552 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 351 of 1053 (751992)
03-07-2015 1:43 PM
Reply to: Message 345 by kbertsche
03-07-2015 12:28 PM


Re: Iridium boundary layer
The thing is, the existence of a worldwide deposition of iridium can be explained in terms of the Flood of Noah too, as evidence of a meteor hit during the Flood, dispersing its iridium along with all the sediments the Flood deposited. I've mentioned it many times here and HERE's one of those posts.
Faith, the problem with your position is not the Bible, or Creation, or even Noah's Flood. The problem is flood geology, which is extra-biblical, pseudo-scientific nonsense.
Well, I can't discover anything in the Bible that justifies any age determinations older than 6000 years from Creation or about 4300 years from a worldwide Flood that there is absolutely no doubt occurred. Just can't. All the efforts to make any of it older violate the Bible and are clearly just a giving-in to worldly thinking. As for "flood geology" there are different ways of putting it together and I don't see it as a finished theory but a work in progress, though I don't think anything I've said, or any creationists I'm aware of either, violates observed facts.
The problem is illustrated by what you say above. Flood geology does not help with the source of Ir. You still need an asteroid/meteor to provide the Ir.
Why is this a problem? Nobody's trying to EXPLAIN everything by the Flood, simply understand how it all works together so that there is no contradiction. There are lots of reasons creationists think asteroid or meteor activity would have been associated with the Flood. The only real disconnect with contemporary science is the timing, and all I can do with that is wait for it to be resolved. I really do seriously think that establishment science's explanation of the strata and the fossils is absurd on the face of it, no matter what difficulties we may encounter in trying to explain it all by the Flood.
The big problem for a Christian is the scientific contradiction of God's word so casually accepted by modern science, and I really don't see how any Christian can just blithely ignore this and accept unbelievers' science over God's word. Sure, in the service of defending God's word we can run afoul of actual facts, but I'm trying not to do that and don't see that I have.
If you've got a large asteroid, which would have thrown lots of particles into the upper atmosphere, you've already got a good mechanism for spreading and dispersing the Ir worldwide. You don't need a worldwide flood to spread the Ir.
I'm not arguing for NEEDING the Flood to explain it, just for its being explainable in the context of the Flood. If such an asteroid hit during the Flood period it would most likely have hit IN the flood waters which were carrying all the sediments and dead creatures washed off the land mass as well. It COULD have hit either while the water was rising or falling and not completely covering the land so that's another scenario to consider, depends on when the layers got laid down. But the task is to explain how the iridium got dispersed in the Flood context that sees the strata as built up during that event.
In fact, postulating a worldwide flood to spread the Ir creates more problems. According to flood geology, very thick layers of rock were laid down by a worldwide flood. If the flood laid down many meters or kilometers of material, why is the Ir excess concentrated into a single layer only a few centimeters thick? Floods can sort material by particle size or by density. But they can't sort material by chemical composition (or by isotopic concentration)! The Ir should have been spread throughout most, if not all, of the flood sediments, not concentrated into a thin layer.
So we have to find an explanation for that. I can't just dismiss it based on your ponderings you know, I can't see any other explanation for the strata than the Flood, the establishment explanations hitting me as extreme absurdity besides flying in the face of God's word, so I have to expect that there is yet to be found a good explanation for how the iridium got dispersed in a thin clay layer at the boundary of one of the layers.
ABE: But you make a very common error here when you talk about what "floods" can do. THE Flood simply cannot be compared with any other "floods." It covered the earth, it would have involved ocean movements among other differences. /ABE
This is the problem with flood geology. It may sound superficially plausible to a non-scientist, but as you drill down you will find that it does not and can not account for scientific details.
So it's incomplete, so establishment geology has a head start. I can't see any other way to make sense of God's word and I'm already convinced of the basic facts about the strata and the fossils so for me it's just a matter of time before we have a good explanation for the details you think it can't account for. But you know what, I think you are most likely overlooking some good explanations that are already accepted by creationists.
Flood geology is not much more than a hand-waving plausibility argument.
That's how I see establishment geology despite its greater plausibility in some areas.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 345 by kbertsche, posted 03-07-2015 12:28 PM kbertsche has not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1552 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 352 of 1053 (751993)
03-07-2015 1:46 PM
Reply to: Message 350 by kbertsche
03-07-2015 1:21 PM


Re: Iridium boundary layer
But the asteroid impact hypothesis does not postulate an asteroid made of pure Ir. The asteroid would have been largely iron, with a small amount of Ir dissolved in the iron. Some of the particles thrown into the atmosphere would have been iron from the asteroid; other particles would have been composites of asteroid iron and earth crustal material.
But then I'd like to know exactly what the "iridium layer" is composed of. Not pure iridium but some iron, and what about the "clay" it's part of?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 350 by kbertsche, posted 03-07-2015 1:21 PM kbertsche has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 354 by NoNukes, posted 03-07-2015 2:14 PM Faith has replied
 Message 355 by kbertsche, posted 03-07-2015 2:27 PM Faith has replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 353 of 1053 (751994)
03-07-2015 2:10 PM
Reply to: Message 350 by kbertsche
03-07-2015 1:21 PM


Re: Iridium boundary layer
But the asteroid impact hypothesis does not postulate an asteroid made of pure Ir.
Right. But one of your points was the discredit of a 'flood hypothesis'. You said that material being sorted by density was understandable. Well, iridium is really dense.

Je Suis Charlie
Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)
If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass

This message is a reply to:
 Message 350 by kbertsche, posted 03-07-2015 1:21 PM kbertsche has not replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 354 of 1053 (751995)
03-07-2015 2:14 PM
Reply to: Message 352 by Faith
03-07-2015 1:46 PM


Re: Iridium boundary layer
But then I'd like to know exactly what the "iridium layer" is composed of. Not pure iridium but some iron, and what about the "clay" it's part of?
Why don't you tell us? One of the criticisms of 'Creation Science' is that no one cannot discovery anything by employing it. Creation Science is limited to 'explaining away' anomalies that contradict creation and flood stories.
If Creation Science really worked it ought to be able to predict stuff like this.

Je Suis Charlie
Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)
If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass

This message is a reply to:
 Message 352 by Faith, posted 03-07-2015 1:46 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 356 by Faith, posted 03-07-2015 2:32 PM NoNukes has replied

  
kbertsche
Member (Idle past 2239 days)
Posts: 1427
From: San Jose, CA, USA
Joined: 05-10-2007


Message 355 of 1053 (751996)
03-07-2015 2:27 PM
Reply to: Message 352 by Faith
03-07-2015 1:46 PM


Re: Iridium boundary layer
But then I'd like to know exactly what the "iridium layer" is composed of. Not pure iridium but some iron, and what about the "clay" it's part of?
According to one paper, the sediments at the K-T boundary layer (the "Ir layer") vary in iron content, and can be up to about 15% iron in some places. The iridium concentration in the K-T boundary layer is typically about 1-100 ppb (parts per billion). This is much higher than the normal concentration of Ir in earth's crust, which is typically less than 0.1 ppb. While the Ir concentration in the K-T boundary layer is much higher than normal, Ir is still only a trace element in the sediment.

"Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind." — Albert Einstein
I am very astonished that the scientific picture of the real world around me is very deficient. It gives us a lot of factual information, puts all of our experience in a magnificently consistent order, but it is ghastly silent about all and sundry that is really near to our heart, that really matters to us. It cannot tell us a word about red and blue, bitter and sweet, physical pain and physical delight; it knows nothing of beautiful and ugly, good or bad, God and eternity. Science sometimes pretends to answer questions in these domains, but the answers are very often so silly that we are not inclined to take them seriously. — Erwin Schroedinger

This message is a reply to:
 Message 352 by Faith, posted 03-07-2015 1:46 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 357 by Faith, posted 03-07-2015 2:43 PM kbertsche has not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1552 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 356 of 1053 (751997)
03-07-2015 2:32 PM
Reply to: Message 354 by NoNukes
03-07-2015 2:14 PM


Re: Iridium boundary layer
Maybe Creation Science can predict and explain a lot of things I'm not personally able to do since I'm not a scientist.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 354 by NoNukes, posted 03-07-2015 2:14 PM NoNukes has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 422 by NoNukes, posted 03-08-2015 1:34 PM Faith has not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1552 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 357 of 1053 (751998)
03-07-2015 2:43 PM
Reply to: Message 355 by kbertsche
03-07-2015 2:27 PM


Re: Iridium boundary layer
According to one paper, the sediments at the K-T boundary layer (the "Ir layer") vary in iron content, and can be up to about 15% iron in some places. The iridium concentration in the K-T boundary layer is typically about 1-100 ppb (parts per billion). This is much higher than the normal concentration of Ir in earth's crust, which is typically less than 0.1 ppb. While the Ir concentration in the K-T boundary layer is much higher than normal, Ir is still only a trace element in the sediment.
Very interesting. If you look at the pictures of the iridium layer at GOOGLE IMAGE it stands out quite dramatically from the surrounding rock and often has a very regular look to it, like a neat ribbon of material. It also seems to look shiny or metallic, but if it's such a small part of the layer it must be something else that's giving it that look.
Its density might not have all that much to do with how it could have been dispersed in the Flood then, there being so little of it. The clay that carries it may be the bigger factor in how it got dispersed.
what does the iridium layer look like - Google Search
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 355 by kbertsche, posted 03-07-2015 2:27 PM kbertsche has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 359 by edge, posted 03-07-2015 5:32 PM Faith has replied
 Message 360 by RAZD, posted 03-07-2015 5:49 PM Faith has not replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1513 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 358 of 1053 (752009)
03-07-2015 5:20 PM
Reply to: Message 344 by ThinAirDesigns
03-07-2015 12:17 PM


Re: Carbon dating paper sought
... but as it turns out, Robert Lee is repeatedly throughout the paper trying to make the point that reported carbon dates are TOO YOUNG. While he does mention a few situations (mostly hypothetical rather than examples) that could cause older dates, it's clear his problem with carbon dating up that that point was one of it reporting dates that were younger than what he considered reality.
This was a rather common criticism at the time of that paper, and it is due to several factors:
1.) the amount of 14C in the atmosphere is not constant as was initially assumed, and
B.) the actual half-life of 14C is 5,730 40 years years, not 5568 years as measured by Libby.
ζ.) the proportion of 14C in the atmosphere had been declining since the start of the industrial revolution due to the release of fossil carbon into the atmosphere, with no 14C faction.
More 12C than in the past means the constant level 14C assumed was too low compared to pre-industrial artifacts atmosphere.
A couple of half-lives out and you are getting dates that are noticeably too young.
Enjoy

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAmerican☆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)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 344 by ThinAirDesigns, posted 03-07-2015 12:17 PM ThinAirDesigns has not replied

  
edge
Member (Idle past 1814 days)
Posts: 4696
From: Colorado, USA
Joined: 01-09-2002


Message 359 of 1053 (752011)
03-07-2015 5:32 PM
Reply to: Message 357 by Faith
03-07-2015 2:43 PM


Re: Iridium boundary layer
Very interesting. If you look at the pictures of the iridium layer at GOOGLE IMAGE it stands out quite dramatically from the surrounding rock and often has a very regular look to it, like a neat ribbon of material. It also seems to look shiny or metallic, but if it's such a small part of the layer it must be something else that's giving it that look.
Exactly. These are geochemical iridium values, not visible to the naked eye, and yet are highly anomalous. The visuals on this layer are not due to iridium alone, but other chemical and textural factors as well.
To have such a precisely defined iridium layer would be impossible in a global flood environment that is is depositing thousands of meters of sediment in a year.
Edited by edge, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 357 by Faith, posted 03-07-2015 2:43 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 361 by RAZD, posted 03-07-2015 5:52 PM edge has not replied
 Message 362 by RAZD, posted 03-07-2015 6:02 PM edge has replied
 Message 374 by Faith, posted 03-07-2015 11:38 PM edge has replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1513 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 360 of 1053 (752014)
03-07-2015 5:49 PM
Reply to: Message 357 by Faith
03-07-2015 2:43 PM


Re: Iridium boundary layer
Its density might not have all that much to do with how it could have been dispersed in the Flood then, there being so little of it. The clay that carries it may be the bigger factor in how it got dispersed.
Luis Walter Alvarez - Wikipedia
quote:
... In the years following the publication of their article, the clay was also found to contain soot, glassy spherules, shocked quartz crystals, microscopic diamonds, and rare minerals formed only under conditions of great temperature and pressure.[1]
The clay would have formed from the ash like particles around the iridium particles from the impact ash cloud dust (the cause of the "atomic winter" scenario), which would be similar to a volcanic ash cloud in that respect ... the clay and soot particles should have separated from the iridium, glass and quartz crystals in water, settling at different rates due to density. On land it would be mixed and appear like a volcanic tuff.
It also appears that the layer varies in thickness from location to location
Enjoy

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAmerican☆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)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 357 by Faith, posted 03-07-2015 2:43 PM Faith 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