|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: What does the Great Barrier Reef tell us about both Evolution and the Age of things? | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 394 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
The Great Barrier Reef has been around for something over two million years. Since it began growing sometime after the break up of the super continent, there have been several periods of glaciation where the sea level fell and the reef died followed by rising sea levels and new reef building.
What lessons can be learned from the Great Barrier reef? Aslan is not a Tame Lion
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
AdminAsgara Administrator (Idle past 2302 days) Posts: 2073 From: The Universe Joined: |
Thread moved here from the Proposed New Topics forum.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
johnfolton  Suspended Member (Idle past 5591 days) Posts: 2024 Joined: |
jar, where the sea level fell and the reef died followed by rising sea levels and new reef building. What lessons can be learned from the Great Barrier reef?
If what you say is true that the sea level fell, then this supports the biblical deluge, psalm kjv 104:8 that God prepared a place for the Waters, so its interestingly in agreement with God's Word that the Ocean's settled, all the sediments of the flood eruption, probably explains why your just off on the age of the Great Barrier Reef by couple million years, I mean the rocks sediments would of dated old even before they erupted out from the earth, not to mention all the capillary reverse osmosis of solute concentrations within the micro-pore rock lattice structures seeking to equalize solute concentrations constantly over the last 4,350 years, would likely be affecting any believed accurcies of any dating method, you would have to assume no leaching of elemental solutes have been occurring in the micro-pores via capillary osmosis, not just normal leaching of water solutes within the macro-pores, etc... P.S. Its just interesting that water is a solvent, doesn't seem to matter much from my point of view if its happening via the capillary driven solute pump driven by differences in solute concentrations within immeasurable numbers of micro-pores, or the free flowing macro-pore waters, etc... If the biblical flood occurred, then a whole lot of leaching was occurring, and your evidence suggests it did indeed happened(them glaciers formed, etc...), cause it agrees with the bible that oceans settled, and the waters flowed there, cause it was the place prepared for the waters, so they would not turn again and recover the earth (kjv psalm 104:9), etc...
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
crashfrog Member (Idle past 1466 days) Posts: 19762 From: Silver Spring, MD Joined: |
Slight changes in salinity, temperature, or silt density will murder a coral reef. They simply won't survive.
If the reef is that old, and it would have to be, at the rate that they grow, then there has never been flooding in that area. By definition this means that a global flood has never occured.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
johnfolton  Suspended Member (Idle past 5591 days) Posts: 2024 Joined: |
crashfrog, I'd think the tides are continually bringing in sediments, and that the coral reefs act as a catch pan, as the tides sweep the sediments through the coral reefs, tidal currents would cause the sediments to continually to settle around the coral's, helping the reef growth rates upward (mineral rich sediments), the silts in the ocean shouldn't affect the coral's growth cause they would settle quite quickly (due to the sea salts) almost immediately after the daily tidal deposition of sediments within the reefs, so shouldn't be affecting the clarity of the water, affecting sunlight reaching the corals, silt contributions should just help the reef's growth, in the mineral rich sediments contributions, the tidal currents daily contributions continually accelerating the rate of the coral reefs growth upward, etc...
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
crashfrog Member (Idle past 1466 days) Posts: 19762 From: Silver Spring, MD Joined: |
Corals aren't plants, Whatever. They don't need sunlight. They're invertebrates. They don't grow from minerals - minerals kill them.
Corals feed on small plankton. Too much sediment in the water chokes their feeding areas. A change in temperature shocks them to death. A change in salinity destroys the osmotic balance of their cells. Coral are notoriously fragile. They're not plants. They're little tiny non-motile animals with very specific environmental requirements.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
johnfolton  Suspended Member (Idle past 5591 days) Posts: 2024 Joined: |
crashfrog, It would seem that the coral's primary food sources (plankton) would benefit by the mineral rich sediments depositions and would be affected by the depth & clarity and temperature of seawater, for their photosynthesis growth. In essense as long as the sediments settle around the corals, it would support the plankton, which is the coral's primary food source, etc...
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Jack Member Posts: 3514 From: Immigrant in the land of Deutsch Joined: Member Rating: 8.7 |
Don't you just love creation science?
"Look! It doesn't work like that.""Oh well, here's some pseudoscience babbling. Let's pretend that solves all the problems." You have addressed nothing that Crash has told you, just made up nonsense to protect your existing nonsense, and added an 'etc.' to make it look like it follows in some manner. This message has been edited by Mr Jack, 05-07-2004 09:35 AM
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 394 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
nothing will kill off a coral reef faster than sediments.
Aslan is not a Tame Lion
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
gene90 Member (Idle past 3822 days) Posts: 1610 Joined: |
quote: Scleractinian corals do. They have a commensalic relationship with an algae. Seds will kill reefs. It's happening today off tropical America following deforestation. This message has been edited by gene90, 05-07-2004 10:10 AM
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
AdminNosy Administrator Posts: 4754 From: Vancouver, BC, Canada Joined: |
whatever, you are continuing to create utter nonsense off the top of your head.
I suggest that you restrict yourself to things that you find from external sources. It would even be ok if they are the worst of creationist sources (e.g., hovind ). However, you are wasting time with this propensity to simply make up stuff. You know so little about everything that you only make yourself look foolish. For your good and others please stop it. It may be time to restrict you again if you continue with your little game.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
crashfrog Member (Idle past 1466 days) Posts: 19762 From: Silver Spring, MD Joined: |
It would seem that the coral's primary food sources (plankton) would benefit by the mineral rich sediments depositions Hypothetical situation: I shoot you in the head and kill you. Are you less dead because you were at the All-you-can-eat buffet? The extra food source won't matter - the change in environment will kill the coral, all by itself.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
AdminNosy Administrator Posts: 4754 From: Vancouver, BC, Canada Joined: |
If whatever was restricted in his access to some topics and fora when he continues to post unsupported nonsense it might kill that line of discussion completely. This is the case where he is the only opposing poster.
I don't want to wreck anyones fun. I also don't want to appear to be ignoring guideline violations. I'd ask those posting or interested in reading the topic to give me an indication to lay off if I start to post warnings. If no one says lay off then the warning stands. To many warnings without contrary views and restrictions start to be put in place.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 394 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
some enlightenment about what we might be able to learn from something that is a relatively continuous record for more than 2 Million Years. I wondered if it was another correlation method and just what it showed.
Whatever's contributions, here or in every other thread were he has posted, have simply been childish stream of conciousness showing absolutely no informational content, no capability to understand even basics, no willingness to learn and an absolute propensity for utter foolishness. Unless he can add information to the discussion there is no reason for him to participate. If that kills the line of discussion, then I will simply persue other avenues of research. Aslan is not a Tame Lion
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
johnfolton  Suspended Member (Idle past 5591 days) Posts: 2024 Joined: |
crashfrog, I find it interesting that most of those posting apparently doesn't feel nutrients are needed for corals, perhaps true but the food source, zooplankton growth is benefited, and while sunlight might not be needed for corals the food source needs sunlight, so depth affects their growth, that sunlight is needed for zooplanktons to grow, (this is the food source for the planktons for your corals to feed on, etc...)
I always thought that iron salts, aluminum salts and other factors in sea water salts is why there is no varves in the oceans sediments, and responsible for the silt coagulating so you don't have the silt layers, with this problem of silt affecting corals, unless of course massive clear cuttings, causing excess soil erosion, or excess herbicides in the runoff carrying over into the nutrient washed by the tides into the coral reefs, which could kill those fragile corals, the zooplanktons or both, etc... P.S. I have no problem that the massive killoff of your Great Barrier Reef that sank 4,350 years ago, could of been killed off by the massive amounts of silts in the biblical flood waters, and only find it interesting that scientists admit the seas lowered, supports the hydro-plate theory, psalms 104:8, the oceans settling, the waters flowing to the settled oceans levels, etc... Zooplankton http://www.chesapeakebay.net/info/plankton.cfm Zooplankton are planktonic animals that range in size from microscopic rotifers to macroscopic jellyfish. Their distribution within the Chesapeake Bay is governed by salinity, temperature and food availability. The smallest zooplankton can be characterized as recyclers of water-column nutrients and often "are closely tied to measures of (nutrient enrichment"). Larger zooplankton are important food for forage fish species and larval stages of all fish. They also link the primary producers (phytoplankton) with larger or higher trophic-level organisms. The zooplankton community is composed of both primary consumers, which eat phytoplankton, and secondary consumers, which feed on other zooplankton.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024