Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total)
5 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,901 Year: 4,158/9,624 Month: 1,029/974 Week: 356/286 Day: 12/65 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   polonium halos
Joe T
Member (Idle past 2198 days)
Posts: 41
From: Virginia
Joined: 01-10-2002


Message 61 of 265 (484949)
10-03-2008 3:59 PM
Reply to: Message 60 by AlphaOmegakid
10-03-2008 9:16 AM


Re: Poppycock is Radon 222 theories
quote:
AOK: Ummmmm. We wouldn't be having this discussion if this evidence did not involve the primordial oldest rocks of the earth.
But these aren't the oldest rocks on earth. Creationist work since Gentry's has falsified that Halos occur in primordial rock.
quote:
The discovery and documentation of the three types of Po radiohalos in the biotites within three granitic plutons that were clearly sourced and formed during the Flood year falsifies the hypothesis for the formation of these Po radiohalos and their host granitic rocks during the Creation Week.
from: ANDREW A. SNELLING, Ph.D, Presented: Fifth International Conference on Creationism August 4-8, 2003
found at: http://globalflood.org/papers/2003ICCradiohalo.html
This paper also references other work by creationists such as Kurt Wise that falsifies Gentry's ideas about the Halos being remnants of creation. Current creationist thinking is that the Po Halos are from some sort of intrusion during the Flood.
quote:
AOK: . There is no evidence that Radon mobility can create a polonium halos. There is no peer reviewed publications on this subject. Fasification happens through evidence and observation. But none has been presented.
Actually Snellings references much peer reviewed literature that there can indeed by Po halos as a result of transport. Go to his paper and see his references. Again from Snellings:
quote:
. there are now significant reports of 210Po as a detectable species in volcanic gases, in volcanic/hydrothermal fluids associated with subaerial volcanoes and fumaroles, and associated with mid-ocean ridge hydrothermal vents and chimney deposits [73, 92, 112], as well as in ground waters [61, 91]. The distances involved in this fluid transport of the Po are several kilometers (and more), so there is increasing evidence of the potential viability of the secondary transport of Po by hydrothermal fluids during pluton emplacement, perhaps in the waning stages of the crystallization and cooling of granitic magmas [117, 118].

This message is a reply to:
 Message 60 by AlphaOmegakid, posted 10-03-2008 9:16 AM AlphaOmegakid has not replied

  
Joe T
Member (Idle past 2198 days)
Posts: 41
From: Virginia
Joined: 01-10-2002


Message 75 of 265 (485457)
10-08-2008 4:14 PM
Reply to: Message 74 by AlphaOmegakid
10-08-2008 2:59 PM


Re: More Evo Babble scriptures
AOK:
quote:
Yes let's look at those "credible???" credential facts. You quote an article by Thomas A. Baillieul who doesn't once challenge Gentry's credentials. The reason he doesn't do this is because "Thomas A Baillieul" doesn't seem to have any credentials himself. I tracked him to his personal website, and you can look at his articles. This is nothing more than evo-babble web rhetoric. There is nothing scientific on his site. Including the Po article that you are citing as your evidence.
Wouldn't it have been easier to Google or Google Scholar Mr (Dr?) Baillieul to see what his geological creditentials are? Alternatively you could go to Amazon and you'll find eight or so publications there relating to uranium geology. It seems he is a retired geologist, painter and member of the UU church.
Also I would appreciate a response to the creationist geologists criticisms of Dr. Gentry's hypothesis I cited earlier.
Joe T.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 74 by AlphaOmegakid, posted 10-08-2008 2:59 PM AlphaOmegakid has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 76 by AlphaOmegakid, posted 10-08-2008 5:55 PM Joe T has not replied

  
Joe T
Member (Idle past 2198 days)
Posts: 41
From: Virginia
Joined: 01-10-2002


Message 145 of 265 (487215)
10-28-2008 4:17 PM
Reply to: Message 141 by AlphaOmegakid
10-28-2008 3:38 PM


Re: Your (fudged) evidence is as bad as Haeckel's Embryos
AOK:
quote:
The part in yellow there is a clear indicator of the fraud that Brawley presents. If you know anything about Oak Ridge National Labratories, then you know that this is an extremenly secure facility. This is a DoE facility which has many areas that are the highest level "Q" clearance. The area that Gentry was in may not be a "Q" level area, but with the level of equipment that Gentry was using I suspect that it was one of the highest level clearance areas.
WOW! Maybe while Brawley was there he just looked up Justin Kirk Dickens, which you can currently do on the ORNL website, and called him and arranged a meeting. Isn't this a more reasonable supposition that to go around calling people liars. Maybe you can call Mr Dickens yourself to see if the meeting happened.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 141 by AlphaOmegakid, posted 10-28-2008 3:38 PM AlphaOmegakid has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 147 by AlphaOmegakid, posted 10-28-2008 5:16 PM Joe T has not replied

  
Joe T
Member (Idle past 2198 days)
Posts: 41
From: Virginia
Joined: 01-10-2002


Message 204 of 265 (487708)
11-03-2008 7:14 PM
Reply to: Message 202 by AlphaOmegakid
11-03-2008 3:27 PM


Re: Still no evidence of Rn222 decay
quote:
By the way, I guess Meiers (a degreed and published geologist was also confused about these rocks being granites.?!?!?!?!? He also used Biotie samples from the Faraday Province in Ontario Canada.
Just to be clear, Dr Meier (not Meiers) who you cited earlier is a chemist and is not a geologist (Meier, H. and W. Hecker. 1976. Radioactive halos as possible indicators for geochemical processes in magmatites. Geochemical Journal 10:185-195.)
quote:
I opened my mind. I did five minutes of research on the Silver Crater mine, and I found Wakefield to be ignorant of the facts. Yet Meiers a real geologist does not once question Gentry's geology nor his discovery of Po halos. That's why all your "evidence" is nothing more than evo babbling. None of it is credible.
Again, Dr. Meier is not a geologist, but a well respected chemist. I am neither a geologist or chemist, so maybe you can tell me something from the paper you cite that supports Gentry’s geology or his interpretation of the Po Halos.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 202 by AlphaOmegakid, posted 11-03-2008 3:27 PM AlphaOmegakid 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