Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   How do YECs explain why there are no short-lived radioisotopes found in nature?
R. Planet
Inactive Member


Message 10 of 31 (12087)
06-24-2002 8:14 PM


quote:
Preliminary work by flood geologists estimates that 2.5 km of water is sufficent to protect Noah and the animals from catastrophic radiation damage.
What was the rate of this accelerated decay compared to current levels?
2.5 km of water ‘might’ shield the merry crew and passengers on the ark from accelerated decay from the bottom of the sea, but what about the air they breath, the food they eat, cosmic sources, the ocean itself, the radioisotopes already in their bodies when this accelerated decay began? What about the wood the ark was built from, the water stored on the ark?
We each receive about .3 Rem. a year from these sources of ionizing radiation. How many times do you think you can multiply that figure and live to tell the tale?
Also, do you have a reference for the claim that 2.5 km of water shielded the ark? I am very interested in reviewing it.
This may seem like a lot of questions asked of you for my first post here, but, they are relevant to the health and well being of those on the ark.
Thanks in advance for your reply.

Replies to this message:
 Message 17 by Tranquility Base, posted 06-24-2002 9:09 PM R. Planet has replied

  
R. Planet
Inactive Member


Message 21 of 31 (12176)
06-25-2002 7:09 PM
Reply to: Message 17 by Tranquility Base
06-24-2002 9:09 PM


quote:
The envelope of acceleration is unknown but as a detailed flood model emerges we will be able to predict it's shape. Obviously at its peak it was about five orders of magnitude faster.
Each of us receives about .3 Rem of ionizing radiation a year from natural background radiation. If you multiply that by five orders of magnitude it’s 2,430,000,000 Rem a year, 6,657,534 Rem a day, 277,397 Rem an hour, 4,623 Rem a minute. An acute dose of about 400 Rem is deadly.
quote:
Can I give you one analogy here that means something to me (but probably not to you). The Bible makes it clear that the flood is like the 'rebirth' or baptism of the earth. In humans the hormone levels skyrocket in a woman during birth and then settle down again. I see radioisotpoes like this. If you measured the hormone levels in a woman prior or post birth you would predict that birth would take centuries. Fortunately it only takes a matter of hours becasue the hormone levels skyrocket.
Doesn’t address the over exposure issue.
quote:
Most abundant decaying isotopes are in rocks. The issues about air/wood/water would be orders of magnituyude less.
Only about 8% of the radiation we receive comes from terrestrial sources which you ’claim’ would be shielded by 2.5 km of water. Of course you’re overlooking the radio isotopes in the ocean itself. The largest single source of dose received is from the air we breath. That being about .2 Rem a year. Accelerating that by five orders of magnitude alone would be enough to fry those on the ark. Just the radioactivity in your body right now if accelerated by the amount you propose would amount to 11.6 Rem an hour or 280 Rem in just one day.
quote:
Interestingly the lifesapn of man dropped from about 1000 years to about 120 within in 3 or 4 generations.
Interestingly you have no evidence other than your faith that humans once lived about 1000 years. What does this have to do with accelerated decay? I fail to see your point.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 17 by Tranquility Base, posted 06-24-2002 9:09 PM Tranquility Base has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 23 by Tranquility Base, posted 06-25-2002 8:50 PM R. Planet has replied

  
R. Planet
Inactive Member


Message 28 of 31 (12661)
07-03-2002 2:07 AM
Reply to: Message 23 by Tranquility Base
06-25-2002 8:50 PM


Unfinished business
quote:
I've already explained that kilometers of water would have protected those on the ark. The peak deay rates may have been well into the flood.
And in both my posts in this thread I have concentrated on sources of radiation that would not be at the bottom of the sea. Why belabor this point when it isn’t relevant? I hope it isn’t necessary for me to repeat this.
quote:
You have a very good point about the radiation contributions from the air - and it would seem to be a sceanrio killer. I think it is the argon in the air that is most dangerous(???) Guess where it comes from? Radioactive decay of heavy elements. It would have taken time for the argon to diffuse out of the rocks. Anybody - feel free to correct me on this paragraph. The message - there are a hundred potential reasons why the flood could be a myth but we need to look at it within our scenario not the mainstrem scenario and, as with mainstream science, allow for future developments.
Okay, I’ll look at this with a flood geologists point of view.
Radon is a decay product of Radium. Much of the Radium in the environment is found in sediments and is water soluble. You say that much of the sediments found on earth were transported and laid down by this flood, so it only stands to reason that the Radium in those sediments were distributed throughout the water column.
Radon itself is water soluble and highly volatile. It enters the atmosphere readily from water. Especially aerated water.
The flood scenarios I have seen you propose in these pages surely must have been a turbulent affair bringing much of the sediments containing Radium near the waters surface. This would aid Radon entering the atmosphere.
You said in Message 5 of this thread:
quote:
Preliminary work by flood geologists estimates that 2.5 km of water is sufficent to protect Noah and the animals from catastrophic radiation damage.
And now you admit some sort of damage was caused by this accelerated decay.
quote:
My point on the longevity drops is that the radiation may have been the cause! Assume I'm not being irrelevant and you'll find my posts easier to understand.
Maybe you would care to describe what this damage was, and how it manifested itself over a number of generations.
BTW, I wasn’t able to find anything at ICR that deals with 2.5 km of water shielding those on the ark.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 23 by Tranquility Base, posted 06-25-2002 8:50 PM Tranquility Base 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