Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 52 (9178 total)
7 online now:
Newest Member: Anig
Upcoming Birthdays: Theodoric
Post Volume: Total: 918,102 Year: 5,359/9,624 Month: 384/323 Week: 24/204 Day: 24/21 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Did the Flood really happen?
Pollux
Member
Posts: 303
Joined: 11-13-2011


Message 2041 of 2370 (880435)
08-05-2020 10:17 PM
Reply to: Message 2037 by Juvenissun
08-05-2020 7:55 PM


Water in granite
Juve, if it is possible to get a clear answer from you, could you please give us a reference to this store of water in granite? Wikipedia does not mention hydrogen as a constituent of granite, let alone H2O.
Are you referring to AIG claiming a lot of water in the primary melt allowing greatly accelerated cooling of granite masses?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2037 by Juvenissun, posted 08-05-2020 7:55 PM Juvenissun has not replied

  
Pollux
Member
Posts: 303
Joined: 11-13-2011


(1)
Message 2065 of 2370 (880499)
08-06-2020 9:37 PM
Reply to: Message 2063 by Juvenissun
08-06-2020 9:02 PM


Water in granite
Juvenissun
103 posts of mainly baseless assertions and denigration of others.
Can you please provide evidence for granite holding so much water and why that is different from main stream science?
Or l will settle for you backing up any of your claims.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2063 by Juvenissun, posted 08-06-2020 9:02 PM Juvenissun has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 2067 by Juvenissun, posted 08-07-2020 10:02 AM Pollux has not replied

  
Pollux
Member
Posts: 303
Joined: 11-13-2011


Message 2076 of 2370 (880588)
08-07-2020 8:40 PM
Reply to: Message 2073 by Juvenissun
08-07-2020 6:13 PM


Re: Water in granite
Main stream science is still debating the origin of water on Earth, but one thing that does not get mentioned is its origin from granite.
Once again, can you please give us the evidence for water coming from granite?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2073 by Juvenissun, posted 08-07-2020 6:13 PM Juvenissun has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 2077 by Juvenissun, posted 08-07-2020 9:49 PM Pollux has not replied

  
Pollux
Member
Posts: 303
Joined: 11-13-2011


Message 2206 of 2370 (881433)
08-24-2020 12:21 AM
Reply to: Message 2204 by dwise1
08-23-2020 9:36 PM


Re: Time scales
Studies in ancient corals that show daily growth lines with an annual variation in thickness, show 420 days per year in the Silurian, 410 in Devonian, consistent with gradual slowing from tidal effects from the moon, and with both our state now and with current physics.
This alone makes the idea of the Earth more recently having a hugely reduced number of days per year beyond unlikely.
Also there are many studies on ancient temperatures at various times, and no evidence of the huge heating that would be induced by moving the Earth much closer to the Sun.
In following this thread, why am l reminded of Bassanio's comment re his friend in The Merchant of Venice : "Gratiano's reasons are as two grains of wheat hid in a bale of hay, you will seek all day ere you find them, and when you have them they are not worth the search." ?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2204 by dwise1, posted 08-23-2020 9:36 PM dwise1 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 2210 by dwise1, posted 08-24-2020 2:00 AM Pollux has not replied
 Message 2224 by Juvenissun, posted 08-24-2020 5:29 PM Pollux has replied

  
Pollux
Member
Posts: 303
Joined: 11-13-2011


Message 2232 of 2370 (881482)
08-24-2020 6:18 PM
Reply to: Message 2224 by Juvenissun
08-24-2020 5:29 PM


Re: Time scales
There is no need to consider a change in the length of the year from Silurian or Precambrian time compared to now, nor is there any evidence of a change.
The change in the length of the day is due to the effect of the moon on the
Earth's spin.
The evidence of the corals is just what you would expect from extrapolating our current conditions - and Physics - into the past.
I have some knowledge of Geology, and there are many here who know much more than l do. Can you tell us what your level of expertise is?
And l see dwise has given a far better answer!
Edited by Pollux, : Acknowledge dwise post

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2224 by Juvenissun, posted 08-24-2020 5:29 PM Juvenissun has not replied

  
Pollux
Member
Posts: 303
Joined: 11-13-2011


(2)
Message 2313 of 2370 (881648)
08-26-2020 6:52 PM
Reply to: Message 2304 by Juvenissun
08-26-2020 6:04 PM


Re:Earth rotation
The Earth is slowing by two milliseconds per century, not per year, and so will be faster in Jurassic times,not slower, by about 2000 seconds. This is borne out by study of growth lines in ancient corals.
Moving of mass around on the surface of the Earth will not change its orbit.
And how do eroded products from the Himalayas finish up on the mantle?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2304 by Juvenissun, posted 08-26-2020 6:04 PM Juvenissun has not replied

  
Pollux
Member
Posts: 303
Joined: 11-13-2011


(1)
Message 2317 of 2370 (881654)
08-26-2020 9:54 PM
Reply to: Message 2309 by Juvenissun
08-26-2020 6:29 PM


Himalaya erosion
Eroding mountains will not affect the length of the year, because all the eroded particles are still orbiting at the same rate, and they are tiny fraction of the Earth's mass. There is a measurable effect on the ROTATION of the Earth from quakes and redistribution of mass, but it is also tiny.
Anyway, erosion of Himalayas would only reverse the effect of their initial elevation by India colliding with Asia.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2309 by Juvenissun, posted 08-26-2020 6:29 PM Juvenissun has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 2334 by dwise1, posted 08-27-2020 1:56 PM Pollux has not replied

  
Pollux
Member
Posts: 303
Joined: 11-13-2011


Message 2370 of 2370 (886926)
06-18-2021 8:42 PM


A test for YEC
YECs are fond of trying to find little difficulties in age issues, but rather than endlessly refuting them, l thought, what would a YEC lake deposit show, such as in Lake Malawi which is quite deep, with anoxic deposits which have no bioturbation?
YEC with rapid radioactive decay in the Flood year would show more or less linear increase in C14 age with depth of deposit to about 4500 years or less if the lake is younger. Older lakes with Flood deposits would then show a rapid increase to 50,000 as you struck them.
Any tephra layers would also have very high age.
Any biotic remains would be of plants and animals from many geologic periods.
In contrast, Lake Malawi has many C14 dates, 3 tephra, and some magnetic chronology dates all falling on a line linearly increasing with depth to a date in excess of 1,000,000 years.
That would seem to falsify YEC.
Any flaws in the argument? My wife's church is hosting CMI in three months and l hope to be able to ask some pertinent questions.

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024