|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Polar ice caps and possible rise in sea level | |||||||||||||||||||||||
riVeRraT Member (Idle past 443 days) Posts: 5788 From: NY USA Joined: |
Of course in matters.
However small the effect. Air=resistance. It can be calculated.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
riVeRraT Member (Idle past 443 days) Posts: 5788 From: NY USA Joined: |
Jesus, RR, you don't have a clue what's going on in this question, do you? It's a simple problem in angular momentum, one that a first-year physics major might encounter as a "refresher" on the first day.
Of I would have a clue, if was described right. I haven't had to do this problem before. But maybe for someone who went to college, and was taught this as a standard in problems, he would reconize it.
Shouldn't matter. Remember, you're the one that claimed that you could do just as well as "jerk scientists" equipped with nothing more than your own common sense. Well, go to. Employ common sense and solve the problem as well as a first-year physics student.
A first year physics student would not have to figure the formulas out on his own. He would just apply the formulas that was taught to him. Some else did all the hard work for him already. Someone much smarter than him. I am telling you , that I can try and come up with the formula bymyself without anyones help, or college education. I'm sure the person who invented the formula for angular momentum didn't do it in 20 mintues. You called it angular momentum, I'm calling resistance from getting the wheel in motion. Of course I was including that in my formula, that is so obvious. Thats why you included the radius, and the wieght on the block, so I would know how much torque is being applied to the wheel. So if I figure this out, you gonna kiss my Christian ass right?The odds are way stacked up against me. I've been thinking about it for the past day, how I am going to attack this. It's freaking driving me crazy, but I love a challenge. It might take me a while, but I promise I won't cheat.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
riVeRraT Member (Idle past 443 days) Posts: 5788 From: NY USA Joined: |
Is there more? There is a huge amount of data that this can not explain. You may start with the sea shells which many creationists say is evidence for the flood being over the top of the mountains. So you should really go and argue with them to get your speculation accepted.
I asked someone here already if the areas where they are finding the seashells could have been the ocean floor already. And if it was wouldn't be easy to prove that, by examining the soil. I was told yes it was most likely ocean floor before. So I am not subscribing to what creationalist say. I do not stand by either camp. I do agree that both sides are scinece, and any science is good science because of the evidence it creates. I only believe in God.
No, they will not produce, or you haven't described how they could produce, what we actually see when examining the geological record. To do this you first have to learn what the geology shows us then and only then figure out an alternative explanation for how it got that way.
Agreed, can you point me towards some links?Thats what I wanted to hear.
Then figure it out. You don't have a 'theory' if you don't do the calculations to show what would happen. You may start by calculating the rate of arrival of water on a mountain side, determing how fast gravity can move it off and by doing so determine the depth of water at each elevation down the mountain.
I was trying to find a program that would do this for me. Its out there already, so I wouldn't have to do all the work of figuring that out which would take me quite a while, and probably still not get it right due to all the variables. So I have contacted a water run-off specialist.
Then, if you want a 'theory', you would suggest what kind of specific evidence this would leave on all the high mountains of the world that could be looked for to check your hypothosis.
The evidence would be lack of soil on anything with a slope. Other than the accumlation of dust, or compost from the time of the flood until now. This amount should be the same throughout the world, I guess. I don't have these figures, but around here in NY, in the appalachian mountains there is very little compost, or dirt on the hills. The rock is very exposed.If my theory was correct. ground water would rise so high that it pour out of every crack and crevis on a mountain, that it would wash away all dirt. *edit* I witness this first hand, it is my observation. It gets so bad after only one day and 5 inches of rain, that it washes out roads, and I see ground water shooting up through the cracks in the mountain. Even the cracks in my driveway. I guess the only way there would be dirt on a mountain is if the mountain was formed after the flood.
Since you haven't done any of that you have nothing. The fact that you think you have is enough to engender significant disrepect of your abilities. I'm not the one who thinks they can contribute anything by making stuff up and not thinking it through.
I have thought this through for over 2 years. But only casually. I do not know all that is needed to prove that it happened or not. That is why I put it you guys, who I think are pretty smart. I just don't appreciate the fact that you think I couldn't be smart too, just because I didn't go to college, or because I believe in God, and then proceed to insult me. I'll admit that typing, and vocabulary are not my strong points at all, and that can make it appear that I am not smart. It is an obsticle I've had to get over all my life. I am better at math and science than English, or history. This message has been edited by riVeRraT, 09-21-2004 08:16 AM
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
riVeRraT Member (Idle past 443 days) Posts: 5788 From: NY USA Joined: |
My main problem with scientists is that the make mistakes too. But that doesn't stop them from preaching what the think is true.
If you take offence I am sorry. You should know better if you are a jerk or not. I wasn't specifically calling anyone out, or trying to take away from the smart ones. I have a 80% rule in life. 80% of all people in all their respective professions aren't that good at what they do. This is a direct observation, and I have yet to see it fail. Try to find a good mechanic to work on your car, try to find a doctor who can actually find out whats wrong with you. you understand my point? I think if my theory was correct. that it would look more like a local flood, than anything else. Maybe there is another explanation? If you just kept it in mind, that would be awesome of you, thanks. I doubt I would fully understand your field study, unless it was written in plain English. But I would like to try and read it.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
CK Member (Idle past 4155 days) Posts: 3221 Joined: |
quote: we have a process called Peer-review that's pretty good at catching those things. The "scientists" you want to worry about are those who don't submit to peer-review. So next time you see one making fantastic claims - find out where they have published.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
riVeRraT Member (Idle past 443 days) Posts: 5788 From: NY USA Joined: |
What I am asking has nothing to do with a flood. I was mearly wondering if the level of the land where these seashells are found was once maybe ocean floor. Then the land was pushed up by other means, tetonic forces, or volcanic ativity.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 22500 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 4.9 |
riVeRraT writes: A first year physics student would not have to figure the formulas out on his own. He would just apply the formulas that was taught to him. Some else did all the hard work for him already. Someone much smarter than him. I am telling you , that I can try and come up with the formula bymyself without anyones help, or college education. I'm sure the person who invented the formula for angular momentum didn't do it in 20 mintues. Crash has already made his point, so there's no reason for you to continue trying to solve this problem. Crash's point was not that scientists are smarter than you, but that they have received training. That's why the jerk physics major who perhaps can't find his way from the cafeteria to his office can solve the problem in a minute and you won't be able to solve it in your lifetime, unless you look up the equations in a book or on the Internet. If you like puzzles then keep working at it, but be forewarned that the derivations for rotational energy equations are far from simple. This thread is more geology than physics, but the same principles hold. Geologists receive training. They know a great deal about how various forces shape the earth. And you can share in this knowledge simply by reading an elementary geology book, and then you'll be able to propose scenarios that are consistent with both the evidence and with the forces and timeframes necessary to produce that evidence. --Percy
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
crashfrog Member (Idle past 1494 days) Posts: 19762 From: Silver Spring, MD Joined: |
But maybe for someone who went to college, and was taught this as a standard in problems, he would reconize it. I have no training in physics whatsoever - absolutely none - but I was able to recognize this as a problem in angular momentum.
So if I figure this out, you gonna kiss my Christian ass right? No, I'm going to point out that, so far, it's taken you 2 days and 3 tries to do what first-year physics students do in 10 minutes.
The odds are way stacked up against me. Yes, by virtue of the fact that you have no education in physics. But see, that's the point. Contrary to what you claimed, you're at a significant disadvanatge to all those "jerk scientists" you so casually dismissed. Now that you've admitted that, the problem has served its purpose. You can solve it if you like, but you don't have to. If you do, though, show your work.
I've been thinking about it for the past day, how I am going to attack this. I'll give you a hint. A wheel is just a round lever.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Rei Member (Idle past 7040 days) Posts: 1546 From: Iowa City, IA Joined: |
quote: True.
quote: At completely different points in time, in some areas dozens of times, and in some areas, never. And many layers have shown quite clearly that they were *not* underwater, especially not under violent underwater conditions.
quote: And for all of the people who think the K-T boundary was the flood boundary, the "seashells" are all well below the K-T boundary. Furthermore, much of the area is made of this limestone, which itself is a problem for a creationist stance. Limestone is made of calcium carbonate deposited by dead marine organisms. Care to postulate how the world's 5.1e19 kg of limestone came to be deposited in a YEC scenario?
quote: Note the "on occasion". Creationism has yet to offer a good explanation for multiple layers of salt being "layed down" by a flood. And lets not even get into corals... "Illuminant light, illuminate me."
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
NosyNed Member Posts: 9004 From: Canada Joined: |
What I am asking has nothing to do with a flood. I was mearly wondering if the level of the land where these seashells are found was once maybe ocean floor. Then the land was pushed up by other means, tetonic forces, or volcanic ativity. Exactly. And this is far more than speculation. If you'd like to discuss sea shells some more, say so, and I'll start a thread (I thought I had actually but it ain't there).
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Adminnemooseus Administrator Posts: 3976 Joined: |
quote: A good theme for a new topic. That theme should not be lost in this topic. For the record, Bill Birkeland (IMO) answered the topic title question back in message 14. Closing this topic. Adminnemooseus Comments on moderation procedures (or wish to respond to admin messages)? - Go to Change in Moderation? or Thread Reopen Requests or Considerations of topic promotions from the Proposed New Topics forum
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024