Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,483 Year: 3,740/9,624 Month: 611/974 Week: 224/276 Day: 0/64 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   continental drift
menes777
Member (Idle past 4341 days)
Posts: 36
From: Wichita, KS, USA
Joined: 01-25-2010


Message 45 of 65 (544451)
01-26-2010 2:45 PM


For TC
In the rocks of the Atlantic Ocean there are magnetic lines of reference that align themselves with the magnetic conditions under which they were formed. The reference lines form when the rock is still molten and those lines align themselves with the current magnetic conditions of the Earth's core. When the rocks cool and harden that particular orientation is recorded in stone (literally) and forms stripes recording that particular era of time. As time passes and the magnetic poles shift and the ocean crust grows stripes form that can be visibly measured and mapped. In fact it does this all over the ocean floor, but just look at it in reference to the Mid-Atlantic Ridge.
Are you telling me that not only was the mechanism for spreading the Atlantic much faster in the past (for a very short period of time), but that the earth's magnetic poles went through a spastic flipping phase only to come to an almost complete dead stop when it become convenient?

  
menes777
Member (Idle past 4341 days)
Posts: 36
From: Wichita, KS, USA
Joined: 01-25-2010


Message 46 of 65 (544459)
01-26-2010 3:11 PM


quote:
6. Scaling laws are ignored. In other words continental drift is impossible due to the fact that at a global scale a continent is merely a congealed pile of sand or better yet dust. Massive movement on a global scale would result in ALL land crumbling and we would end up with one giant ocean after this event. In effect, we would have liquefaction on a mega scale.
Actually Sand is more accurate (Silicon Oxide) as the earth's crust is 60.6% Silicon Oxide.
This appears to invalidate the flood entirely. Either the earth was as it is now (huge mountains and deep ocean trenches) and the flood would be impossibly deep and there would be nowhere for the water to go. Or the Earth was more flat like and Pangaea like (smaller mountains and no ocean trenches) and the continental spread happened afterward. Of course at the speed it would take to do this would mean the destruction of the continents.
Someone else was trying to tell you this earlier about Mount Everest. The amount of energy required to make the mountain in a short amount of time would also be more than enough energy to destroy the material that is made of.
Also Archie, are you aware of how fast continental movement is? It's about as fast as fingernails grow (The usual rate of growth for adults, ~0.9 inches a year).

  
menes777
Member (Idle past 4341 days)
Posts: 36
From: Wichita, KS, USA
Joined: 01-25-2010


Message 62 of 65 (544793)
01-28-2010 12:49 PM


quote:
I make the figures just about spot on. Taking the distance between Norway and Greenland as the narrowest point between the plates, 60 million years since the rifting of Laurasia, and the figure of 2cm/year as the current measured rate of drift, I get that they should be about 2400 km apart. The true figure is 2200 km. That's a good fit of prediction to observation.
Just in case HN needed the figures to be sure... (Edit: N not M)
60,000,000 Years
2 Centimeters/year
120,000,000 Centimeters total
1,200,000 Meters (100 Centimeters in a Meter)
1,200 Kilometers (1,000 Meter in a Kilometer)
2,400 Kilometers (1,200 Kilometer x 2 sides of movement)
Also just a quick fact check and it appears to be spot on.
Edited by menes777, : No reason given.

  
menes777
Member (Idle past 4341 days)
Posts: 36
From: Wichita, KS, USA
Joined: 01-25-2010


Message 63 of 65 (544809)
01-28-2010 1:46 PM
Reply to: Message 52 by hawkes nightmare
01-27-2010 6:59 PM


quote:
...and that we were VERY close to the sun. those combined together make the earth uninhabitabe by ANYTHING up until 125 miles in space closer to the sun than our current position. now i'm too lazy to look anything more up so you'll have to do it yourself, and do the math. but i'm estimating that we were approximately where mercury currently is...
Two sites I have found show very different rates of the earth moving away from the sun.
15 CM
Why is the Earth moving away from the sun? | New Scientist
1.5 CM
http://curious.astro.cornell.edu/question.php?number=317
Let's use both though to be sure.
Ok if the earth formed 4.5 billion years ago and the earth is moving away at 15CM per year, here is what we get.
15 CM/year
4,500,000,000 years
67,500,000,000 CM total
675,000,000 M
675,000 KM
Ok if the earth formed 4.5 billion years ago and the earth is moving away at 1.5CM per year, here is what we get.
1.5 CM/year
4,500,000,000 years
6,750,000,000 CM total
67,500,000 M
67,500 KM
Yet evolution goes by life forming 1 billion years ago.
15 CM/year
1,000,000,000 years
15,000,000,000 CM total
150,000,000 M
150,000 KM
1.5 CM/year
1,000,000,000 years
1,500,000,000 CM total
15,000,000 M
15,000 KM
According to the following site the "Goldilocks zone", where water can exist in a liquid state is the following.
0.5 to 1.4 Astronmical Units
Source: Circumstellar habitable zone - Wikipedia
How much is an AU?
149,598,000 KM = 1 AU
So our "Goldilocks zone" is the following
74,799,000 KM to 209,437,200 KM
Ok so we put it together and as you can see even 4.5 Billion years ago Earth was still within the habitable zone in this solar system. Of course evolutionists don't claim life started that long ago so see the second figure. As you can tell it's not even breaking through the 149 Million Kilometer range.
4.5 Billion years
149,598,000 - 675,000 = 148,923,000 KM
1 Billion years
149,598,000 - 150,000 = 149,448,000 KM
So in other words, please check your work before presenting it as fact. No not even close to where Mercury is now (which orbits between 49 Million and 69 Million KM).

This message is a reply to:
 Message 52 by hawkes nightmare, posted 01-27-2010 6:59 PM hawkes nightmare 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