Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 73 (8962 total)
171 online now:
Faith, PaulK, Tangle (3 members, 168 visitors)
Newest Member: Samuel567
Post Volume: Total: 871,041 Year: 2,789/23,288 Month: 980/1,809 Week: 99/313 Day: 16/39 Hour: 2/10


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Too Many Meteor Strikes in 6k Years
Faith
Member
Posts: 34708
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.2


Message 226 of 304 (211709)
05-27-2005 4:29 AM
Reply to: Message 89 by DrJones*
05-24-2005 12:04 AM


Re: Science or faith etc
but what matters more than the impact is the "dust and debris" raised by the impact into the atmosphere, which is what I figure would be reduced by water

how so? Specifically how is the debris etc. ejected into the atmosphere by a land strike reduced by water?

Well, water is sprayed on dry dirt in dry parts of the country to keep down dust storms from building project areas. Same principle. Wet dust more likely to stay put than travel far in the atmosphere. Leaving aside the gigantic hits that would incinerate everything on earth according to Randy's calculations Message 85, the idea is that even if the heat is so enormous that no amount of water can affect it, and it causes steam and other heat effects, still those effects would be confined to a limited area, and the cool water both in ocean and atmosphere (which even after the rain stopped must have been full of moisture) surrounding the hit area would cool things. Yes I know climate is a worldwide system, but I see no reason to expect a lethal climate change or a long-lasting one.

This message has been edited by Faith, 05-27-2005 04:30 AM

This message has been edited by Faith, 05-27-2005 04:43 AM


This message is a reply to:
 Message 89 by DrJones*, posted 05-24-2005 12:04 AM DrJones* has not yet responded

Faith
Member
Posts: 34708
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.2


Message 227 of 304 (211711)
05-27-2005 4:41 AM
Reply to: Message 96 by ringo
05-24-2005 1:27 AM


Re: Do the math
Therefore, they must also expect the energy dissipation - i.e. the damage done - to be a million times more intense. Catastrophic impacts would be a million times more frequent than expected by science.

Yeah, but none of them had any noticeable impact whatever according to science except the very few huge ones -- five I believe -- that are postulated -- not known -- to have occurred once in five million years or so. Since it's just an estimate I see no reason to accept it at all. There are enough and big enough craters on earth to think about without bringing in all the hypothetical ones.

Of course, if most of the impacts were confined to the flood year, you're looking at a billion times the intensity.... And Noah never noticed it?

They don't have to have all happened in one year, but even over hundreds or a couple of millennia. And most of them are not big enough to do global damage, and didn't land in dangerous places. There were no people except in the Middle East for quite a long time after the Flood.

Intensity of what? Randy has the right idea but I don't think he did it right neverthless -- take the known craters and calculate the intensities involved. But since we AREN'T burnt to a crisp and Noah's ark DIDN'T get parboiled, aim to calculate for what would allow for the YEC scenario to be true -- scatter the hits over the next two or three millennia, most intense at first and slowing down over time.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 96 by ringo, posted 05-24-2005 1:27 AM ringo has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 239 by ringo, posted 05-27-2005 8:01 AM Faith has not yet responded

Faith
Member
Posts: 34708
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.2


Message 228 of 304 (211712)
05-27-2005 4:54 AM
Reply to: Message 97 by NosyNed
05-24-2005 2:27 AM


Re: evidence or assertion
But since the answers to me have ranged from scorn to unsubstantiated assertion, with hardly anything in the way of actual evidence, I've taken a certain fond interest in my humble little argument.

You have been given (recently - it did take awhile) some calculations of the effects.

The reason it has taken awhile is that those who are knowlegable already know all this. But you have some of the calculations now.

Here are some of what you should note:

1) The "dust" isn't what you think it is. It is condensed vaporized rock. Your water or mud "keeping the dust down" is yet another example of something that is, at best, very funny.

NOT IN THE IMMEDIATE AREA OF THE HIT, but at whatever distance the heat meets the cool of the ocean and the atmosphere, which would be determined by the size of the hit, and the water-soaked world of the FLood SHOULD, it seems to me, have some effect in reducing the expected global effect that everybody is predicting by SOME measurable degree.

2) One (just one of the bigger ones) of these things is like setting off all the world's nuclear weapons 1,000's of time over.

One of the ones that is KNOWN to have hit earth? Why wasn't ALL life incinerated by it? Why is there no evidence of such incineration? That would kill a lot more than the dinosaurs. We shouldn't even be here to talk about it.

3) The surface of the earth is actually not big enough to avoid the effects of one of the bigger ones.

Again, that degree of devastation means nothing could live. It renders the whole evolution scenario impossible.

4) You are trying to compress a very large number of them (big and little) into one year.

I never actually said it should be confined to the Flood year, merely that it would be a part of the whole catastrophe. It can be extended a couple or three millennia after the FLood, most intense at first and then tapering off I would imagine. The idea is that the Flood was part of a system that included the RELEASE of all these effects, not that they were confined to a year. I said it could have gone on for some time afterward only I didn't try to calculate how long afterward. I'd like to see the calculations for all of them to have hit over a period of three thousand years, with most in the beginning and tapering off.

This message has been edited by Faith, 05-27-2005 04:57 AM


This message is a reply to:
 Message 97 by NosyNed, posted 05-24-2005 2:27 AM NosyNed has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 233 by Wounded King, posted 05-27-2005 5:30 AM Faith has not yet responded

Wounded King
Member (Idle past 2511 days)
Posts: 4149
From: Edinburgh, Scotland
Joined: 04-09-2003


Message 229 of 304 (211713)
05-27-2005 5:03 AM
Reply to: Message 187 by Faith
05-26-2005 11:12 PM


Re: crater evidence
This site links to a number of research papers which are sceptical of the evidence for the Chicxulub impact being responsible for the K-T extinction. One small caveat is that all of the research comes from one small group of scientists, but that doesn't mean it shouldn't be seriously considered.

Pope, et al. (1998) has a number of references to the original research on the K/T boundary impact and Chicxulub crater, but I haven't been able to study that data myself.

TTFN,

WK


This message is a reply to:
 Message 187 by Faith, posted 05-26-2005 11:12 PM Faith has not yet responded

Faith
Member
Posts: 34708
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.2


Message 230 of 304 (211714)
05-27-2005 5:06 AM
Reply to: Message 98 by Nighttrain
05-24-2005 7:19 AM


Why such selective extinction?
Jupiter impacts: I'm not going to be able to read through all that tonight or in the near future, so boil it down for me: would the effects of the impacts on Jupiter at the links wipe out all life on earth or not?

If so, then how can anybody talk about a meteor or two that might have caused the extinction of a certain kind of plant or animal on earth? Surely it would have caused the extinction of a LOT more than that, and in fact we shouldn't see a progression/evolution of any sort in the fossil record after such an event but a regression to primitive sea life or amoeba level life if anything is left alive at all in boiling seas and a 1000-degree atmosphere.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 98 by Nighttrain, posted 05-24-2005 7:19 AM Nighttrain has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 232 by Arkansas Banana Boy, posted 05-27-2005 5:23 AM Faith has responded

Faith
Member
Posts: 34708
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.2


Message 231 of 304 (211715)
05-27-2005 5:10 AM
Reply to: Message 99 by Randy
05-24-2005 8:07 AM


Re: KaBoom is right.
Again, you are calculating such devastating effects that it isn't just the Flood scenario but the whole evolution scenario you are defeating. Nothing could live through that, not a primitive plant, not a dinosaur, and nothing else higher in the evo chain than a creepy crawly, and even they should have a hard time in the suffocating incinerating atmosphere you are describing.

AND if higher forms of life COULD survive such an event, because of being at a great distance from it perhaps, then Noah and his animals would have survived it. If they couldn't, then nothing in your bazillion years of evolution could have survived it either.

This message has been edited by Faith, 05-27-2005 05:14 AM

This message has been edited by Faith, 05-27-2005 05:15 AM


This message is a reply to:
 Message 99 by Randy, posted 05-24-2005 8:07 AM Randy has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 234 by Arkansas Banana Boy, posted 05-27-2005 5:32 AM Faith has responded

Arkansas Banana Boy
Inactive Member


Message 232 of 304 (211716)
05-27-2005 5:23 AM
Reply to: Message 230 by Faith
05-27-2005 5:06 AM


The point is that the atmosphere would not be that hot ( not all heat goes into the atmosphere ). The dynamic is like most any large explosion... the immediate area would be very hot(over that 1000 degree mark). Outside the fireball air temperatures would dissipate quickly as distance from the impact increases. On the other side of the world a change of temp might be hard to detect. I recall some site that suggested that a major imact might affect the climate by increasing global temps by 10 degrees C. You are fixating on that 1000 degree figure and strawmanning it like you did with the 'photo'.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 230 by Faith, posted 05-27-2005 5:06 AM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 237 by Faith, posted 05-27-2005 5:54 AM Arkansas Banana Boy has not yet responded

Wounded King
Member (Idle past 2511 days)
Posts: 4149
From: Edinburgh, Scotland
Joined: 04-09-2003


Message 233 of 304 (211717)
05-27-2005 5:30 AM
Reply to: Message 228 by Faith
05-27-2005 4:54 AM


Re: evidence or assertion
NOT IN THE IMMEDIATE AREA OF THE HIT, but at whatever distance the heat meets the cool of the ocean and the atmosphere, which would be determined by the size of the hit, and the water-soaked world of the FLood SHOULD, it seems to me, have some effect in reducing the expected global effect that everybody is predicting by SOME measurable degree.

Provided the iridium particles were fine enough they could easily reach the stratosphere given the supposed intensity of an impact. In the stratosphere they could easily stay suspended for years, as has been observed with nuclear fallout.

TTFN,

WK


This message is a reply to:
 Message 228 by Faith, posted 05-27-2005 4:54 AM Faith has not yet responded

Arkansas Banana Boy
Inactive Member


Message 234 of 304 (211718)
05-27-2005 5:32 AM
Reply to: Message 231 by Faith
05-27-2005 5:10 AM


Since 95% of species died at the Permian, I suspect most of the higher forms of life died out with most all the rest. The simple, more resistant forms evolved to form life as we know it now.

Noah could have lived thru it. So what. If it was a big one he better have a bunch of canned goods as growing food might be hard with all that darkness and total saltwater inundation of all arable land.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 231 by Faith, posted 05-27-2005 5:10 AM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 236 by Faith, posted 05-27-2005 5:50 AM Arkansas Banana Boy has not yet responded

Faith
Member
Posts: 34708
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.2


Message 235 of 304 (211719)
05-27-2005 5:41 AM
Reply to: Message 106 by Randy
05-24-2005 10:22 PM


Re: Meteorite:Tsumani causes and effects

1) NO KNOWN METEORITE IMPACTS HAVE PRODUCED A TSUNAMI. ONE is postulated nevertheless to have done so 65 million years ago -- sorry, not postulated, "KNOWN" since modern science KNOWS stuff like this, right? even though all REALLY TRULY EMPIRICALLY KNOWN historic meteorite impacts have not caused a tsunami.

No meteorite in historic times has left a crater 10's to 100's of kilometers wide and yet there are many such found on earth.

Within the span of the ToE of life? If so, how did any life at all survive these things?

3) SHIPS AT SEA DO NOT NORMALLY EVEN NOTICE A PASSING TSUNAMI. This is the most important information to answer those who claimed the effects would be devastating to Noah's ark. The ark was a huge ship by the way. 450' x 75' x 45' with three stories.

We are talking about a very different kind of wave here. Did you look at what I posted above. An asteroid 10 km in diameter hitting the ocean would create a transient hole in the ocean about 70 mile in diameter all the way to the now molten ocean floor. That is going to make waves thousands of feet high, not a ripple hardly noticed by passing ships.

And at what distance will these multi-thousand-foot waves dissipate to a ripple? And events like this are supposed to have happened within the period of the ToE of life?

Then there is the blast. An asteroid the size of the one that created the Vredefort impact in South Africa would create a blast wind of 200 mph 3,000 miles from the impact site. Then there is ejecta. Hot ash would rain down over wide areas around the impact site. Then there is the heat released from the kinetic energy in all these impacts which I calculated in post 85. All of these objects raining down on earth during the "flood year" would release 10 times more energy than that required to heat the atmosphere to 200 degrees F.

Yes, well I'm not the one who confined all these to one year, I merely suggested they STARTED then. This should all be recalculated to spread them out over three or four thousand years in a gradation from very intense to very minimal over that time.

3) TSUNAMIS HAVE VARIABLE EFFECTS: This is an academic point if we're talking about effects while the Flood covered the entire earth, but it might have relevance to Noah's having arrived on land before the flood fully receded and meteorites landed in the ocean: Tsunami effects are variable, may cause damage in one place, not in one nearby, so that there is no absolute certainty about how they might affect a given location 4000+ years ago.

We are not talking about a "normal" tsunami here as I pointed out above.

Now consider if you dare what must have happened to earth when the moon and the rest of the inner solar system were being bombarded during the lunar bombardment I have mentioned before.

That's all hypothetical and there is no direct evidence that the same kind of bombardment happened to the Earth.

The Arizona University researchers said at least 17,000 impacts would have occurred on earth at the time of the moon bombardment. "The largest of these probably produced an immense amount of ejecta, temporarily changed the atmosphere and boiled away large quantities of surface water." It coincides with the earliest evidence of life on earth.

(bold added)
What see remaining on earth are the scars from a tiny fraction of the impacts that must have occured during the history of the planet as analysis of the moon makes clear.

There was simply no way for complex life on earth to have survived the asteroid storm that created the lunar bombardment even if it was spread over a few million years, let alone crammed into either preflood times or the "flood year" in the YEC model.

Well, drop the one year as I've said. Somebody else jumped to that conclusion before I'd thought through my views. I merely said it STARTED then.

I doubt the lunar bombardment of earth. It's all hypothetical and there is no actual direct evidence for it. Why should I believe it?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 106 by Randy, posted 05-24-2005 10:22 PM Randy has not yet responded

Faith
Member
Posts: 34708
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.2


Message 236 of 304 (211720)
05-27-2005 5:50 AM
Reply to: Message 234 by Arkansas Banana Boy
05-27-2005 5:32 AM


Since 95% of species died at the Permian, I suspect most of the higher forms of life died out with most all the rest. The simple, more resistant forms evolved to form life as we know it now.

That's not what the fossil record supposedly shows. The ToE shows a steady progression, not a having to start all over with "simple more resistant forms."

Noah could have lived thru it. So what. If it was a big one he better have a bunch of canned goods as growing food might be hard with all that darkness and total saltwater inundation of all arable land.

Salt accumulates in the ocean from the continents. There's some idea that the salt level has remained constant but there is constant input which would seem to defeat that idea. The land wasn't salty. Noah grew a vineyard. I prefer written description to hypotheticals.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 234 by Arkansas Banana Boy, posted 05-27-2005 5:32 AM Arkansas Banana Boy has not yet responded

Faith
Member
Posts: 34708
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.2


Message 237 of 304 (211721)
05-27-2005 5:54 AM
Reply to: Message 232 by Arkansas Banana Boy
05-27-2005 5:23 AM


Well which is it?
The point is that the atmosphere would not be that hot ( not all heat goes into the atmosphere ). The dynamic is like most any large explosion... the immediate area would be very hot(over that 1000 degree mark). Outside the fireball air temperatures would dissipate quickly as distance from the impact increases. On the other side of the world a change of temp might be hard to detect. I recall some site that suggested that a major imact might affect the climate by increasing global temps by 10 degrees C. You are fixating on that 1000 degree figure and strawmanning it like you did with the 'photo'.

Doesn't matter to me one way or the other. Either it was too hot for anything whatever to live which defeats evolutionism, or on the other side of the world a change of temp might be hard to detect which is what I've been postulating all along, in which case Noah and company would do just fine.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 232 by Arkansas Banana Boy, posted 05-27-2005 5:23 AM Arkansas Banana Boy has not yet responded

Faith
Member
Posts: 34708
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.2


Message 238 of 304 (211722)
05-27-2005 6:00 AM
Reply to: Message 108 by Randy
05-24-2005 10:40 PM


Re: Gotta support Faith on this.
However, wave height is inversely proportional to distance and since the radiant heat and air blast travel faster it seems to me more likely that the ark would be blown to bits or burned to a crisp before it was rolled over by the water wave from the blast.

Unless of course it was far enough away to be unaffected, and if there was nowhere on earth to be "far enough away" then your scenario would kill all life anyway, thus causing a big problem for that fossil record that shows a lot of living things that didn't get blasted away but were apparently buried alive.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 108 by Randy, posted 05-24-2005 10:40 PM Randy has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 241 by Randy, posted 05-27-2005 8:29 AM Faith has responded

ringo
Member
Posts: 17924
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 2.5


Message 239 of 304 (211746)
05-27-2005 8:01 AM
Reply to: Message 227 by Faith
05-27-2005 4:41 AM


Re: Do the math
Faith writes:

...none of them had any noticeable impact whatever according to science except the very few huge ones -- five I believe -- that are postulated -- not known -- to have occurred once in five million years or so.


I'm not following your math here. If the huge ones occur every five million years (your number), that's 900 of them spread out over 4.5 billion years. If you squeeze them all into 4500 years, that's one every five years. And that's only the huge ones. I don't see how you can hand-wave that away.

As for whether or not they are "known": take a look at the moon. We do have a good idea how many imactors there were.

There are enough and big enough craters on earth to think about without bringing in all the hypothetical ones.

They are not hypothetical. Look at the moon. It's surface is literally covered with impacts. Are you suggesting that the earth's surface is not?

They don't have to have all happened in one year, but even over hundreds or a couple of millennia.

A "couple of millenia" would take you almost up to the time of Christ. Are you saying that nobody noticed a "huge" impact (your word) every five years? Nobody in all the records of early civilizations thought to mention that?

...most of them are not big enough to do global damage....

A "huge" impact every five years and no global damage?

...aim to calculate for what would allow for the YEC scenario to be true....

My point is: I can't come up with any calculation that would allow for the YEC scenario to be remotely close to true. If you can, why don't you do the calculation instead of just hand-waving?


People who think they have all the answers usually don't understand the questions.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 227 by Faith, posted 05-27-2005 4:41 AM Faith has not yet responded

Yaro
Member (Idle past 4912 days)
Posts: 1797
Joined: 07-12-2003


Message 240 of 304 (211751)
05-27-2005 8:15 AM


A usefull visual representation

This is an artists rendition of the asteroid that killed the dinosaurs. It is to scale.

Make your own conclusions.

EDIT: Another nice visual aid:

I just don't think Faith has an idea of the scale of these things.

A usefull accompanying article: http://robots.cnn.com/TECH/space/9803/12/collision/

I think you get the picture now. This is what we are talking about in this thread.

This message has been edited by Yaro, 05-27-2005 08:45 AM


Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2020