Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 88 (8945 total)
45 online now:
caffeine, Dawn Bertot, PaulK, xongsmith (4 members, 41 visitors)
Newest Member: ski zawaski
Post Volume: Total: 865,690 Year: 20,726/19,786 Month: 1,123/2,023 Week: 74/557 Day: 4/70 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   "Best" evidence for evolution.
Sarah Bellum
Member (Idle past 12 days)
Posts: 413
Joined: 05-04-2019


(1)
Message 121 of 196 (856250)
06-28-2019 10:42 PM
Reply to: Message 120 by Faith
06-28-2019 6:09 PM


So . . . the tectonic plates are moving slower now than in the past?

Does that mean you think the earth instead of being billions of years old is only millions? Or thousands?

Be careful, you might get cut on Occam's Razor.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 120 by Faith, posted 06-28-2019 6:09 PM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 122 by Faith, posted 06-28-2019 10:49 PM Sarah Bellum has responded

  
Faith
Member
Posts: 33708
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.2


(1)
Message 122 of 196 (856251)
06-28-2019 10:49 PM
Reply to: Message 121 by Sarah Bellum
06-28-2019 10:42 PM


Yes the tectonic plates are moving much slower now than in the past. When the continents split there was probably a lot of volcanic activity at the boundaries where they split, at what became the Atlantic ridge for instance, and of course earthquakes, so lots of jolting as the plates began to move apart at what I figured would be a speed of twenty feet per day. Outrageous, too much heat etc etc but that's what I figured nevertheless, and now they've slowed down to their current whatever-it-is inches or part of an inch.

Thousands of years, 6000 since the Creation, about 4300 since the Flood, which is when I believe the continents split, or within a few hundred years of the Flood at least.

Yes, it's hilarious, but thousands of years, and tectonic speeds of twenty feet per day at the start. If it weren't for the volcanism you could probably have stood on the western shore of Europe or the British Isles and watched North America slowly moving away. For the first day or days you could swim out to it.

I thought through how far apart various bodies of land would be from each other at different stages of continental drift and it's interesting to think of different historical events having occurred when they were a lot closer than they are today. Even Columbus' voyage would have been much shorter than if the distance were as great as it is today. That's a matter to track down historically of course, if that's possible.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 121 by Sarah Bellum, posted 06-28-2019 10:42 PM Sarah Bellum has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 123 by Sarah Bellum, posted 06-29-2019 8:40 AM Faith has not yet responded

  
Sarah Bellum
Member (Idle past 12 days)
Posts: 413
Joined: 05-04-2019


(2)
Message 123 of 196 (856268)
06-29-2019 8:40 AM
Reply to: Message 122 by Faith
06-28-2019 10:49 PM


This is like playing a super-speeded-up recording of Gone With The Wind, watching it in nine minutes and then telling everyone the movie isn't really four hours long!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 122 by Faith, posted 06-28-2019 10:49 PM Faith has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 126 by edge, posted 06-29-2019 9:33 AM Sarah Bellum has responded

  
Sarah Bellum
Member (Idle past 12 days)
Posts: 413
Joined: 05-04-2019


(1)
Message 124 of 196 (856271)
06-29-2019 8:53 AM
Reply to: Message 119 by Faith
06-28-2019 6:05 PM


Saying "I usually answer the astronomy question by saying that time is a completely different thing at that level" is an interesting approach. And time does get affected by astronomical objects: black holes and so forth. But arranging the black holes so that the photons from stars tens of thousands of light years away and galaxies millions of light years away all manage to get here in hundreds of years is a pretty contorted cosmology!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 119 by Faith, posted 06-28-2019 6:05 PM Faith has not yet responded

  
RAZD
Member
Posts: 20258
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 3.8


Message 125 of 196 (856275)
06-29-2019 9:20 AM
Reply to: Message 115 by Sarah Bellum
06-28-2019 5:00 PM


... Radioactive dating has the same implications for the YECH.

See Age Correlations and An Old Earth, Version 2 No 1 for more reasons that the YEC timetable is wrong.

Enjoy


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAmerican☆Zen☯Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


• • • Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click) • • •

This message is a reply to:
 Message 115 by Sarah Bellum, posted 06-28-2019 5:00 PM Sarah Bellum has acknowledged this reply

  
edge
Member (Idle past 23 days)
Posts: 4696
From: Colorado, USA
Joined: 01-09-2002


(2)
Message 126 of 196 (856276)
06-29-2019 9:33 AM
Reply to: Message 123 by Sarah Bellum
06-29-2019 8:40 AM


This is like playing a super-speeded-up recording of Gone With The Wind, watching it in nine minutes and then telling everyone the movie isn't really four hours long!

That's a good analogy. Faith is well-known for denying geological time and her calculations can be ignored.

The most rapid plate speeds are on the order of 10cm/year (relative motions) while the slowest are about a magnitude less. These speeds are directly measured and are also calculated from rock ages versus distance from their origin.

The geological evidence shows that the average rates of 'drift' have not changed much outside of the modern ranges over the last half-billion years. There have been times when the rates increased by (IIRC) 2x, such as during the Cretaceous Period. The evidence for this is greater volcanic production and transgression of the Cretaceous seas. I believe that this type of acceleration has occurred about 6 times since the beginning of the Cambrian Period about 540 million years ago.

Prior to that, it's hard to say as the evidence becomes sketchier. However, based on reasoning, higher heat-flows and thinner crust might have resulted in more rapid plate motion.

The kind of velocities that Faith declares is ridiculous in that it would produce such volumes of volcanic rock in such a short time that the planet would have been sterilized by the heat and the toxic gasses. The thought that this would have happened only 4000 years ago is laughable. And yet, Faith simply ignores this in a monumental exercise in denial.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 123 by Sarah Bellum, posted 06-29-2019 8:40 AM Sarah Bellum has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 128 by Faith, posted 06-29-2019 1:33 PM edge has not yet responded
 Message 129 by Faith, posted 06-29-2019 2:13 PM edge has not yet responded
 Message 138 by Sarah Bellum, posted 06-29-2019 9:20 PM edge has not yet responded

  
RAZD
Member
Posts: 20258
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 3.8


Message 127 of 196 (856278)
06-29-2019 9:39 AM
Reply to: Message 119 by Faith
06-28-2019 6:05 PM


... I usually answer the astronomy question by saying that time is a completely different thing at that level. ...

A self-serving assumption that is invalidated by SN1987A ... see Falsifying a young Universe. (re: Supernova 1987A), particularly Message 238

Enjoy


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAmerican☆Zen☯Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


• • • Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click) • • •

This message is a reply to:
 Message 119 by Faith, posted 06-28-2019 6:05 PM Faith has not yet responded

  
Faith
Member
Posts: 33708
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.2


Message 128 of 196 (856308)
06-29-2019 1:33 PM
Reply to: Message 126 by edge
06-29-2019 9:33 AM


Well, all I can do is work with what I've got and what I've got is 4300 years for the continents to move apart. And among the other things I deny of course is that there is any such thing as "Cretaceous seas" or "Cambrian" anything.

Of course to deal with the heat problem there had to be something to counteract it. How about the A ir Conditioning effect, by which the ice age must have developed due to the great heat generated in the Flood and the tectonic movement?

Heat dissipating rapidly as huge clouds of vapor up to the cold regions above where it turns to rain or snow or sleet or hail and falls over a huge swath of the planet bringing on the ONE ice age. Something llke that.

ABE: Oh and by the way this one ice age has been retreating ever since, and what is now called "global warming" is no doubt just the continuing retreat of the ice age.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 126 by edge, posted 06-29-2019 9:33 AM edge has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 133 by RAZD, posted 06-29-2019 4:22 PM Faith has not yet responded

  
Faith
Member
Posts: 33708
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.2


Message 129 of 196 (856312)
06-29-2019 2:13 PM
Reply to: Message 126 by edge
06-29-2019 9:33 AM


problem?
Oh, and isn't there a bit of a problem with the usual understanding of when the continents split? Llke in the Permian period or something llke that? But then the full geological column would not yet have developed, only up to that level. Yet we have complete stacks showing continuous deposition.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 126 by edge, posted 06-29-2019 9:33 AM edge has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 130 by PaulK, posted 06-29-2019 2:32 PM Faith has responded

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 15567
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 3.0


Message 130 of 196 (856313)
06-29-2019 2:32 PM
Reply to: Message 129 by Faith
06-29-2019 2:13 PM


Re: problem?
quote:

Oh, and isn't there a bit of a problem with the usual understanding of when the continents split?

No there isn’t

quote:

But then the full geological column would not yet have developed, only up to that level

That’s part of the evidence.

quote:

Yet we have complete stacks showing continuous deposition.

We don’t actually have continuous deposition anywhere. But continental drift is certainly not going to stop deposition. All that happens is that as the continents drift apart you are going to tend to get different deposits, in the newly-separated regions, as would be expected.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 129 by Faith, posted 06-29-2019 2:13 PM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 131 by Faith, posted 06-29-2019 3:49 PM PaulK has responded

  
Faith
Member
Posts: 33708
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.2


Message 131 of 196 (856323)
06-29-2019 3:49 PM
Reply to: Message 130 by PaulK
06-29-2019 2:32 PM


Re: problem?
O blithering blather. When the continents split at the very least the existing geo column would have been disturbed. And you are not getting anything new anyway, just the continuation of the stack, and that isn't going to happen after that kind of upheaval. It's really remarkable that the strata of the British Isles just continue in a llne without any interruption at the Permian level although there they are right at the boundary of a continental split.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 130 by PaulK, posted 06-29-2019 2:32 PM PaulK has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 132 by PaulK, posted 06-29-2019 4:20 PM Faith has not yet responded
 Message 134 by 14174dm, posted 06-29-2019 4:34 PM Faith has responded

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 15567
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 3.0


Message 132 of 196 (856332)
06-29-2019 4:20 PM
Reply to: Message 131 by Faith
06-29-2019 3:49 PM


Re: problem?
quote:

O blithering blather. When the continents split at the very least the existing geo column would have been disturbed

In your scenario it would have been quite drastically disturbed (especially as a lot of it would still be soft sediment). I don’t believe the slower rates we observe now would have caused huge disruption.

quote:

And you are not getting anything new anyway, just the continuation of the stack, and that isn't going to happen after that kind of upheaval

You are making no sense. Deposition is continuing now with the same sort of “disruption” - the tectonic plates are still moving.

quote:

It's really remarkable that the strata of the British Isles just continue in a llne without any interruption at the Permian level although there they are right at the boundary of a continental split.

Have you actually checked what happened to the British Isles at that time (if you haven’t you shouldn’t even be arguing about it). But they did start drifting off - and if it doesn’t show immediately in the geology - that would be more evidence for slow rates of drift.

What you are missing is that the reconstructions of continental drift comes from the geological evidence. If you are arguing that the entire local geological column was in place before the continents started moving you are creating problems for your view.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 131 by Faith, posted 06-29-2019 3:49 PM Faith has not yet responded

  
RAZD
Member
Posts: 20258
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 3.8


Message 133 of 196 (856334)
06-29-2019 4:22 PM
Reply to: Message 128 by Faith
06-29-2019 1:33 PM


One good piece of evidence for evolution is the actual age of the earth ...
Well, all I ca do is work with what I've got and what I've got is 4300 years for the continents to move apart. And among the other things I deny of course is that there is any such thing as "Cretaceous seas" or "Cambrian" anything.

Except that 3 living trees are over 4800 years old, with one of which is over 5,000 years old (The Age of the Earth (version 3 no 1 part 1), Message 3), ... with no sign of a flood disturbing their growth ...

... and that two bristlecone pine dendrochronologies extend further into the past, showing that (Message 8):

  1. The earth is at least 8,309 years old (2019) by the combined Methuselah/Schulman Master bristlecone pine Chronology.
  2. The "long tree ring chronology for bristlecone pine ... developed independently of previous work" agreed with the master chronology:

    The difference found was that two rings were missing from the second chronology and they matched two rings in the older chronology that were narrow growth rings rather than extra rings. The new chronology did not extend the age of the old chronology, but it did validate and strengthen the Master absolute Bristlecone pine dendrochronology from 1970 CE through 3,435 BCE.

An error of 2 years in 5404 years of overlap is a remarkable high 99.963% accuracy. This gives us high confidence in the master chronology. There is no evidence of any flood disrupting the growth or the area, with many of the samples used found lying on the ground.

Plus there are two European oak chronologies:

  1. The Irish oak chronology (Message 10), confirming that the earth is at least 7,307 years old (2019), and
  2. The German oak chronology (Message 11), showing that the earth is at least 10,039 years old (2019)

The final result is a combined Irish and German Oak chronology with a high degree of confidence in the accuracy and precision of this Combined European Oak Chronology. The mean difference between the Irish Oak Chronology and the German Oak Chronology was <10 (Message 16) which extends the age of the earth even further into the past by absolute annual tree ring counts :

The earth is at least 12,479 years old (2019)

There was no major catastrophic event that would have disturbed the growth of any of the overlapping trees -- ie no catastrophic flood occurred in this time as the wood samples were not moved nor were there any gaps in the data.

There is further evidence of an older earth by the counting of annual layers (see rest of The Age of the Earth (version 3 no 1 part 1)) and (The Age of the Earth (version 3 no 1 part 2) Message 9), show the earth is at least 808,010 years old (2019) by the EPICA Dome C (EDC) data.

Annual counts that are not disrupted by any catastrophic event, including a purported world wide flood.

YEC beliefs about the age of the earth are totally at odds with reality. What else are they wrong about?

Of course to deal with the heat problem there had to be something to counteract it. How about the A ir Conditioning effect, by which the ice age must have developed due to the great heat generated in the Flood and the tectonic movement?

TOTALLY BOGUS. WOW. LOL. That's a kicker!

Note that air conditioners generate more heat than cold, meaning a net heat gain, but more to the point the ice ages were not caused by great heat. Reality doesn't work that way. This is bogus fantasy at it's finest!!!

Enjoy

Edited by RAZD, : .


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAmerican☆Zen☯Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


• • • Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click) • • •

This message is a reply to:
 Message 128 by Faith, posted 06-29-2019 1:33 PM Faith has not yet responded

  
14174dm
Member
Posts: 151
From: Cincinnati OH
Joined: 10-12-2015


Message 134 of 196 (856335)
06-29-2019 4:34 PM
Reply to: Message 131 by Faith
06-29-2019 3:49 PM


Re: problem?
There is evidence of interruptions to deposition in the British Isles.

How about Siccar Point in Scotland?

Across the bottom of the picture is Silurian layers that were laid down horizontally, lithified, then tilted by plates colliding. The tilt plates were eroded from the top and a layer of new sediment laid down & lithified (left center of picture).


This message is a reply to:
 Message 131 by Faith, posted 06-29-2019 3:49 PM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 135 by Faith, posted 06-29-2019 8:05 PM 14174dm has not yet responded
 Message 136 by edge, posted 06-29-2019 9:04 PM 14174dm has not yet responded

  
Faith
Member
Posts: 33708
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.2


Message 135 of 196 (856343)
06-29-2019 8:05 PM
Reply to: Message 134 by 14174dm
06-29-2019 4:34 PM


Re: problem?
There should be interruption at the Permian level EVERYWHERE anywhere near the edge of the continent but there isn't. And I guess you've missed my multitudinous posts on Siccar Point or you wouldn't be acting llke I'd never heard of it before.

Actually I do believe the disturbance there WAS created by the jolt of the continents separating, also many other instances of angular unconformities elsewhere but since there are other places where the whole stack is llned up as a unit I assume that was the case at this location originally too.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 134 by 14174dm, posted 06-29-2019 4:34 PM 14174dm has not yet responded

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019