|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
Member (Idle past 1405 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Age Correlations and An Old Earth, Version 2 No 1 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Tanypteryx Member Posts: 4344 From: Oregon, USA Joined: Member Rating: 5.9 |
You thought the crater was responsible for all deposits on earth? Ha. No one said that but you. The asteroid was responsible for the Iridium in the KT Boundary Layer.
Prove the impacts were from above rather than below? Ruptured fountain of the deep? That doesn't even make sense. The iridium suspected to be inside the Earth is at the fucking core more than 3000 miles down. No one knows for sure that there is iridium there because no one has ever had a sample of the Earth's core material to analyze. On a molten planet the heaviest elements would be drawn to the center by gravity.
You guesses and beliefs are not of great import. Words you should live by.What if Eleanor Roosevelt had wings? -- Monty Python One important characteristic of a theory is that is has survived repeated attempts to falsify it. Contrary to your understanding, all available evidence confirms it. --Subbie If evolution is shown to be false, it will be at the hands of things that are true, not made up. --percy The reason that we have the scientific method is because common sense isn't reliable. -- Taq
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
creation Member (Idle past 1942 days) Posts: 654 Joined: |
So you say that all iridium on earth in the KT layer is from Yucatan?
As for what is deep in the earth, the bible sys water came up from there. If iridium was really down there as science claims (haa) why not have some of it come up also? Edited by creation, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
creation Member (Idle past 1942 days) Posts: 654 Joined: |
You cannot declare beings that lived long ago fictional just because you seem sore there is no real Santa. Not all kids are taught Santa is real FYI.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1405 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined:
|
Excellent...so we can scratch off DNA claims from your so called correlation pile. It isn't part of the correlations for age measurement systems and never was, so it wasn't on the list to be scratched off. Your false claim(s) can be discussed on other threads. Enjoyby our ability to understand Rebel☮American☆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)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
AZPaul3 Member Posts: 8513 From: Phoenix Joined: Member Rating: 5.3
|
Prove the impacts were from above rather than below? Ruptured fountain of the deep? The lines of evidence for the Chicxulub crater and the spread of its affects worldwide are many, well known and open to anyone to research, see, taste, feel, rub in their umbilicus. Multiple independent lines of evidence from various science disciplines from all around the globe. You are the one denying the science. So, where are your multiple lines of independent evidence against these facts?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1405 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
Look, you post some moronic graph of C14 levels supposed into the far past, ... That correlates with other chronologies based on their results for age and C14 levels. Calling it moronic does not refute the actual evidence as depicted in the graph.
rather than focus on the pine tree rings you cited...you know, the ones pre 4500 that you have no pics/details on? Again, I refer you to the papers cited and the authors of those papers for specific details that are immaterial to the overall data showing the chronological pattern and the correlations. You pick an arbitrary date, with no specific value, as if somehow it is different from the rest of the dates. What's the point? Your nit-picking on details doesn't explain the correlations.
The pine trees that saw an unprecedented spike, unseen in all history for the C14 levels back near the time I place the nature change! And yet you haven't produced any evidence of this claimed "unprecedented spike" ... you claimed a link but it was not to be found. There are many spikes, many different sizes, due to the variation in atmospheric C14, which is tied to the solar clock of sunspot activity. Your purported spike does not appear in any of these graphs at 4500 years ago (2500 BCE or 4500 BP):
These graphs all show the basic correlation between C14 and dendrochronological calendar age. There is no remarkable spike at your arbitrarily chosen date. Perhaps you are deceiving yourself again. That happens when you don't look at all the evidence.
... near the time I place the nature change! There is no evidence of any change in nature found anywhere on earth or the universe, that is just you deceiving yourself. Nobody is buying your fantasy, because the evidence is against it. Enjoyby our ability to understand Rebel☮American☆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)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1405 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
Faith based dates based solely on the unsupportable belief that nature was the same (so they attribute years to the rings). Only IF there was a same nature in the past would we be able to do this. This does not show nature was the same! This is built squarely on the belief it was. Unless you prove it was, the dates lose all meaning beyond where we know our current nature/state existed. Correction: the very same identical baseless belief in a same nature past was used also. I use older rings than the live trees also. However, I do not use them as if they were slow grown present nature rings from the dead trees. It was those rings that showed the astounding absolutely unprecedented spike in C14 levels in a short period!!!!!!! Your attempts to chart the rings as if they represent yearly cycle, present nature growth are truly pathetic religion. You are getting worse than Mr, Bean. The principle of what nature trees grew in must be addressed. Instead you take your comedy act to another continent, and run the same show. Same thing with varves, and the unknown rapid deposition of the former nature...you try to insist it had to have been laid down in this nature...for no apparent reason. Same thing fr coral growth and ice. Religion. Religion. Religion. Once again you try to use dead trees added with the rings of the living tree and say they all represent present nature growth for no reason! Then you have no pics of the rings in the pine tree older than 4500! No data on the specific rings either! Once you provide some objective empirical evidence for any change of nature, what that change was, when it occurred and what was affected, your comments based on this fantasy are worthless drivel.
Excuse me???!!! You want to claim that when YOU bring up tree rings and dates from them, that it is irrelevant info to look at the actual old rings and data from them, from the specific time in question?? What I have provided is the documentation for the ages of all the tree rings and their respective ages forming an accurate and precise dendrochronology. The specific location in a picture of one specific ring is irrelevant to the total set of data consistently showing age measured by annual rings. This data is published in scientific oeer reviewed journals that are accessible by the public (see references given), and thus any inquiry into any single ring should be taken up with the authors of these papers, or by reading them. The information is there, documented (by several sources), peer reviewed (several times) and available. Now if you want to propose a correlation for that date with evidence from your personal fantasy chronology, then provide the objective empirical evidence for that date and how you developed your chronology. Otherwise you comment is pointless: it doesn't address the accuracy and precision of the dendrochronology, and it doesn't explain the correlations. Enjoyby our ability to understand Rebel☮American☆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)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Tanypteryx Member Posts: 4344 From: Oregon, USA Joined: Member Rating: 5.9
|
So you say that all iridium on earth in the KT layer is from Yucatan? No, I am saying that science says that all the iridium in the KT Boundary layer came from the asteroid strike.
As for what is deep in the earth, the bible sys water came up from there. It does not say that it came from the Earth's core and iridium is not water soluble. The KT event was 65 million years before your fictional flood.
f iridium was really down there as science claims (haa) why not have some of it come up also? Actually it is just an hypothesis.What if Eleanor Roosevelt had wings? -- Monty Python One important characteristic of a theory is that is has survived repeated attempts to falsify it. Contrary to your understanding, all available evidence confirms it. --Subbie If evolution is shown to be false, it will be at the hands of things that are true, not made up. --percy The reason that we have the scientific method is because common sense isn't reliable. -- Taq
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Tanypteryx Member Posts: 4344 From: Oregon, USA Joined: Member Rating: 5.9 |
You cannot declare beings that lived long ago fictional just because you seem sore there is no real Santa. Well, that one went right over your head. Santa and your biblical characters are all fictional. Edited by Tanypteryx, : spellingWhat if Eleanor Roosevelt had wings? -- Monty Python One important characteristic of a theory is that is has survived repeated attempts to falsify it. Contrary to your understanding, all available evidence confirms it. --Subbie If evolution is shown to be false, it will be at the hands of things that are true, not made up. --percy The reason that we have the scientific method is because common sense isn't reliable. -- Taq
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
edge Member (Idle past 1706 days) Posts: 4696 From: Colorado, USA Joined:
|
No, I am saying that science says that all the iridium in the KT Boundary layer came from the asteroid strike.
If iridium were derived from terrestrial sources (meaning earth itself), the pattern of iridium distribution would be more local and spotty. And, in fact we do see that pattern at places like Sudbury or the Bushveld complex and other locations. Those are places where we have more deep-sourced magmas, but AFAIK, there is nothing thought to be emanating from the core. On the other hand, the K-T deposit is contemporaneous and global in extent. probably derived from the pulverization and vaporization of an extraterrestrial object. My understanding is that there are other, less well-known iridium layers on the planet. Here is an interesting comparison:
We don't know the Ir composition of the core, but there is a suggestion that it is much higher and possibly comparable to asteroids.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
creation Member (Idle past 1942 days) Posts: 654 Joined: |
That may be the case, that an impact came from a large object from space.
What I have asked, is whether that impact/force could have actually been from below, in a gigantic ancient fount of the deep, bring up water and various stuff with the water!? That would leave the same evidences at great distances. That would still leave the markings at the crater rock, the issue is whether anyone can show that the direction was from up to down or not. I will note that stuff did come from under the earth...even in the impact theory! "A 2016 drilling project into the Chicxulub peak ring confirmed that the peak ring comprised granite ejected within minutes from deep in the earth," wiki
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
creation Member (Idle past 1942 days) Posts: 654 Joined: |
quote: What is in question, is not how patterns of C14 exist in ancient tree rings and other sources. The ehing that is off kilter here is that you were asked about specific tree rings (pre 4500 year old rings) in a certain tree, and the response involved a chart that had nothing to do with that. Instead it charted some patterns supposed going far far back in time.
quote: Let's be mature here, just because you failed to be able to produce the pics/data for the pine tree rings you bragged about doen''t mean you need to call it nit picking to be asked!
quote: Well, if you had problems with the link you should have said so. I just clicked on the link and it works fine! Just a moment... In that link it does say this "In any case, the 14C variation of the 5480 BC event indicates an unprecedented anomaly in solar activity compared to other periods." Try to accept the evidences. The unprecedented anomaly at the time in question in the tree rings.The confluence of historical data that shows that ages were longer. (China, Sumer, Scripture..etc). Guess who actually has correlations here for the evidences!!? Ha. Let's note also, that history was REWRITTEN by the bristlecone pine tree rings!!! The radiocarbon dates were tweaked drastically to fit the rings, which forces a reevaluation of the ages that had been used!!!!!!! It is becoming clear that the so called correlations of science are inbred circular religion!
quote:Excellent! So when you get the link provided, that shows there was a spike will you renounce your faulty charts!!?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
creation Member (Idle past 1942 days) Posts: 654 Joined: |
quote: You were asked about the HUNDREDS of rings on the specific tree that was living that YOU made specific claims about actually! Not 'one' ring'! Cut the smoke and mirrors and admit the astounding fail. Edited by creation, : No reason given. Edited by creation, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
creation Member (Idle past 1942 days) Posts: 654 Joined: |
Actually, I place the flood (my current opinion, subject to evidences) to be about the time of the KT layer!
The dating system used to date the deposits is based only on beliefs. The actual age for the KT is probably closer to around 4500 years ago ..real time. Looking at the conclusions in an article on the impact crater, I see this "Conclusions. So where do we stand in understanding the K-T extinctions today? Clearly, some extinctions occurred in the 10 My before the K-T boundary, and these appear to be related to terrestrial causes such as a fall in sea level or a temperature drop. However, the numerous extinctions that occurred from 65 to 66 Ma seem to require a catastrophic cause. In Table 7.3, various evidences for impact are compared with flood-basalt eruption to explain the K-T extinctions. Although it would appear that both impact and volcanic causes may explain the Ir anomalies, only impact can readily account for the wide distribution of glass spherules and soot and the presence of shocked quartz and stishovite." https://www.sciencedirect.com/...-planetary-sciences/iridium So basically there was some sort of impact, (from below would fit also) that was associated with a very major change in what life existed on earth. The flood was also a time when a major change in life occurred!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
creation Member (Idle past 1942 days) Posts: 654 Joined: |
No. If there was a major release of water (and other things it carried with it) that came from under the earth, and erupted violently, that also would be an impact. The results would be the same, stuff would get all over the world.
We should remember also that science really doesn't know what is in the inner earth. They are in no position to tell us what Ir would be like there. The claims they would make would be based on their foolish origin or earth theories. Edited by creation, : No reason given.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024