|
Author
|
Topic: Catastrophic Plate Tectonics - Fact or Fiction?
|
Joe Meert
Member (Idle past 5711 days) Posts: 913 From: Gainesville Joined: 03-02-2002
|
Oh dear
I regret not getting you into UF. What the heck are they teaching you at USF....better yet, why are you not taking good notes? Cheers Joe Meert
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 188 by jar, posted 07-18-2005 7:01 PM | | Joe Meert has not replied |
|
Joe Meert
Member (Idle past 5711 days) Posts: 913 From: Gainesville Joined: 03-02-2002
|
|
Message 195 of 301 (224517)
07-18-2005 9:20 PM
|
|
|
Here's a discussion
GES DISC Unfortunately, I've not been to this area, but the explanation here maybe something to think about. Cheers Joe Meert
|
Joe Meert
Member (Idle past 5711 days) Posts: 913 From: Gainesville Joined: 03-02-2002
|
|
|
Message 196 of 301 (224519)
07-18-2005 9:25 PM
|
Reply to: Message 190 by Philip
07-18-2005 7:36 PM
|
|
Re: Baumgardner and His Paleontology Debunk
quote:
Cross-comparing these 2 sites suggests to me that the Himalayan tectonics (my rising mountain range dilemma) doesn’t *fit* with uniformatarianistic or *slow-moving* PT paradigms
JM: Depends on what you mean by 'slow moving'. The formation of the Himalayas and the collision of India with Asia was pretty fast in a plate tectonic sense (20 cm/yr). At the same time, the scenario proposed for the formation of the Himalayas is a neat confirmation of plate tectonics. Evidence exists for the rapid motion, the composition of India (continent) being dragged under continental crust (Asian continent) via the pull of the ancient Tethyan slab is completely consistent with the rapid uplift of the Himalayas. What exactly is your geodynamic issue with the Himalayas? Cheers Joe Meert
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 190 by Philip, posted 07-18-2005 7:36 PM | | Philip has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 199 by Philip, posted 07-18-2005 10:58 PM | | Joe Meert has replied |
|
Joe Meert
Member (Idle past 5711 days) Posts: 913 From: Gainesville Joined: 03-02-2002
|
|
|
Message 208 of 301 (224651)
07-19-2005 3:00 PM
|
Reply to: Message 199 by Philip
07-18-2005 10:58 PM
|
|
Re: Baumgardner and His Paleontology Debunk
quote:
Its the fossils, Joe. I just can't see OEC, GAP theory, or bio-ToE in the fossils.
JM: What exactly does this mean? The argument you are making is not an argument at all, it's a statement of personal incredulity. What is it that YOU see in the fossils? Can you be more specific? What do the fossils tell you about your ideas? Cheers Joe Meert
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 199 by Philip, posted 07-18-2005 10:58 PM | | Philip has not replied |
|
Joe Meert
Member (Idle past 5711 days) Posts: 913 From: Gainesville Joined: 03-02-2002
|
|
|
Message 220 of 301 (224948)
07-20-2005 4:37 PM
|
Reply to: Message 218 by Philip
07-20-2005 3:42 PM
|
|
Re: Looking for evidence
quote:
The magnetic pattern in the volcanic rock formed on the sea-floor at the mid-ocean ridges suggests very rapid processes, not millions of years. The patchwork patterns of polarity are evidence for rapid formation of the rock.
JM: LOL. Why is that? Why must it be fast? This is a bald assertion with no evidence to support it. Science has been studying these reversals for over 50 years, not a single study hints at a young earth explanation. Most recently, Clement (NAture 2004) showed evidence that a reversal takes about 7000-10000 years to complete. That puts ONE reversal outside the young earth limits. Look, the bottom line is that anyone can say "So and so is a problem for an old earth", but that's not the same as offering evidence. Do you have any evidence? Is the Earth Cheers Joe Meert
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 218 by Philip, posted 07-20-2005 3:42 PM | | Philip has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 226 by Philip, posted 07-20-2005 6:51 PM | | Joe Meert has replied |
|
Joe Meert
Member (Idle past 5711 days) Posts: 913 From: Gainesville Joined: 03-02-2002
|
|
|
Message 227 of 301 (224990)
07-20-2005 7:02 PM
|
Reply to: Message 226 by Philip
07-20-2005 6:51 PM
|
|
Re: Looking for evidence
I have no frigging idea what you mean. Then again defending your statements does not appear to be a strong point. Can you supply some substance please? Cheers Joe Meert
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 226 by Philip, posted 07-20-2005 6:51 PM | | Philip has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 233 by Philip, posted 07-20-2005 7:24 PM | | Joe Meert has replied |
|
Joe Meert
Member (Idle past 5711 days) Posts: 913 From: Gainesville Joined: 03-02-2002
|
|
|
Message 234 of 301 (225008)
07-20-2005 8:01 PM
|
Reply to: Message 233 by Philip
07-20-2005 7:24 PM
|
|
Re: Looking for evidence
Ok, then how do you decide Ken Ham's opinion is worth squat? For the record, I do not refute reversals, I refute the Young earth creationists explanation for magnetic reversals. It really would be good for you to read for comprehension. Cheers Joe Meert
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 233 by Philip, posted 07-20-2005 7:24 PM | | Philip has not replied |
|
Joe Meert
Member (Idle past 5711 days) Posts: 913 From: Gainesville Joined: 03-02-2002
|
|
|
Message 244 of 301 (225102)
07-21-2005 10:35 AM
|
Reply to: Message 243 by Percy
07-21-2005 10:24 AM
|
|
Re: Any ideas left on CPT?
quote:
Percy writes:
But we're here, aren't we. Life on earth did not go extinct. Therefore accelerated radioactive decay never happened.
JM: It's not just the lethal doses of radiation, it's also the intense heat. Each decay is energetic and produces heat. Accelerated decay in the amounts needed to yield an 'old looking' earth would have positively cooked the planet. Here is a rather simple look at how much heat. ROASTING ADAM-Creationism's Heat Problem WHy doesn't the flood story mention the boiling of the oceans? The intense heat produced by rapid decay? Why does the bible not talk of the heat shield technology needed to keep the water surrounding the ark from boiling away and the ark itself (along with its contents) from being fried to a crisp? Cheers Joe Meert
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 243 by Percy, posted 07-21-2005 10:24 AM | | Percy has not replied |
|
™ Version 4.2