Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total)
5 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,764 Year: 4,021/9,624 Month: 892/974 Week: 219/286 Day: 26/109 Hour: 0/2


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   polonium halos
edge
Member (Idle past 1732 days)
Posts: 4696
From: Colorado, USA
Joined: 01-09-2002


Message 5 of 265 (28950)
01-12-2003 10:31 PM
Reply to: Message 3 by Tranquility Base
01-12-2003 7:18 PM


quote:
Originally posted by Tranquility Base:
The whole issue is being reopened Gene.
With the recent helium retention work creationists are now accepting all of the radiodecay data (finally!) and now we can start looking back at Gentry's stuff again. The halos document that (i) radiodecay occurred but that (ii) it was accelerated. I believe that claims that all of Gentry's stuff was refuted in the 1980s are exaggerated, but I am not an expert.
Please explain what He diffusion has to do with Po haloes.
And no, the haloes do not indicate any kind of accelerated decay. This conclusion has been completely debunked numerous times. It is embarrassing to see creationists bring this up again.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 3 by Tranquility Base, posted 01-12-2003 7:18 PM Tranquility Base has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 9 by Tranquility Base, posted 01-13-2003 6:38 PM edge has not replied

  
edge
Member (Idle past 1732 days)
Posts: 4696
From: Colorado, USA
Joined: 01-09-2002


Message 6 of 265 (28954)
01-12-2003 10:38 PM
Reply to: Message 4 by Tranquility Base
01-12-2003 7:24 PM


quote:
Originally posted by Tranquility Base:
The really solid new stuff is the measurement of helium diffusion that shows that too much helium is still in the rocks. It is based on earlier work by Gentry (the halo guy). Late last year creationists refined the technique to generate a new dating scheme based on helium diffusion from radiodecay centres. They dated 'billion year old' rocks at between 4,000 and 14,000 years old. It is a major creatonist breakthrough:
Acts and Facts Magazine | The Institute for Creation Research
LOL! If this is so bullet proof, why have you not answered the responses on the other thread about He diffusion. We Happy among others has been waiting for responses for a month now.
quote:
Thanks for pointing out Gentry's new videos. I suspect (without being an expert) that much of Gentry's 1980s claims are still valid.
Sorry, my humor quota has been exceeded for the evening. Gentry can describe the haloes all he wants and he is good at it. However, his interpretation is so skewed by his rigid adherence to a young earth that he has made himself a spectacle. Check all of his references. No one supports his interpretations of a 'genesis rock' (among other wild extrapolations) except a few fringe creationists. These guys are WAY outside the second standard deviation.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 4 by Tranquility Base, posted 01-12-2003 7:24 PM Tranquility Base has not replied

  
edge
Member (Idle past 1732 days)
Posts: 4696
From: Colorado, USA
Joined: 01-09-2002


Message 10 of 265 (29018)
01-13-2003 7:41 PM
Reply to: Message 8 by Tranquility Base
01-13-2003 6:21 PM


quote:
Originally posted by Tranquility Base:
...
Nevertheless, Gentry is also responsible for the early helium retention work whihc is what I was actually alluding to. I am unaware whether halos are involved in that or not.
Does this mean you are ready to answer questions and respond to our posts on the helium retention thread? So far, you are not doing well over there...

This message is a reply to:
 Message 8 by Tranquility Base, posted 01-13-2003 6:21 PM Tranquility Base has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 11 by Tranquility Base, posted 01-13-2003 8:13 PM edge 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