Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Forums
New posts
Forum list
Search forums
Leaderboards
Games
Our Blog
Blogs
New entries
New comments
Blog list
Search blogs
Credits
Transactions
Shop
Blessings: ✟0.00
Tickets
Open new ticket
Watched
Donate
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
More options
Toggle width
Share this page
Share this page
Share
Reddit
Pinterest
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Email
Share
Link
Menu
Install the app
Install
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Physical & Life Sciences
Creation & Evolution
Craters
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="ardipithecus" data-source="post: 216357" data-attributes="member: 2305"><p>Craters are the result of impacts. They are something</p><p>that is completely at odds with YEC timescales. With</p><p>the exception of were geologic activity is obvious (i.e.</p><p>erosion, volcanism, etc.) every planetary body with</p><p>a solid observable surface is just plain litered with</p><p>craters. </p><p></p><p>Callisto:</p><p></p><p><img src="http://photojournal.jpl.nasa.gov/catalog/PIA00745.jpg" alt="" class="fr-fic fr-dii fr-draggable " style="" /></p><p><a href="http://photojournal.jpl.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/PIAGenCatalogPage.pl?PIA00745" target="_blank">Source</a></p><p></p><p>Mercury:</p><p></p><p><img src="http://photojournal-b.jpl.nasa.gov//catalog/PIA02943.jpg" alt="" class="fr-fic fr-dii fr-draggable " style="" /></p><p><a href="http://photojournal.jpl.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/PIAGenCatalogPage.pl?PIA02943" target="_blank">Source</a></p><p></p><p>Tethys (a moon of Saturn):</p><p></p><p><img src="http://photojournal-b.jpl.nasa.gov/catalog/PIA01397.jpg" alt="" class="fr-fic fr-dii fr-draggable " style="" /></p><p><a href="http://photojournal.jpl.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/PIAGenCatalogPage.pl?PIA01397" target="_blank">Source</a></p><p></p><p>Think of the Moon. It is just plain loaded with them including</p><p>some that are hundreds of miles wide. The Moon is extremely close to</p><p>the Earth (in astronomical terms). Earth, because it has 81 times the</p><p>mass of the Moon, has 81 times the gravity. Hense one would expect</p><p>that Earth has been hit even more often. If all those hits had</p><p>happened in the last 10,000 years it would have been very noticable</p><p>to anyone living at the time to say the least. And we should be</p><p>surounded by many very obvious craters since there has not been enough</p><p>time for them to be eroded away, subducted, etc. One of the few</p><p>obvious craters is in Arizona (and it is worth the visit BTW). It</p><p>is still fairly clear. It is actually one of smallest craters </p><p>known on Earth. Over the last few decades geologists have found</p><p>many other craters, sometimes over a hundred miles across.</p><p></p><p>Now it would seem reasonable that if the biggest craters are</p><p>going to remain obvious for far longer than the "small" ones</p><p>like the one in Arizona.</p><p></p><p>Now lets look at Ganymede:</p><p></p><p></p><p><img src="http://photojournal-b.jpl.nasa.gov/catalog/PIA01610.jpg" alt="" class="fr-fic fr-dii fr-draggable " style="" /></p><p><a href="http://photojournal.jpl.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/PIAGenCatalogPage.pl?PIA01610" target="_blank">Source</a></p><p></p><p>Notice we have a history here. An old surface that has been</p><p>hit by impacting objects many times. One section got</p><p>reworked geologically and then started getting hit also.</p><p>Finally an train of meteors hit it. This is not</p><p>unlike what happened to Jupiter a few years back when a comet</p><p>that was ripped into many pieces by Jupiter's gravity impacted</p><p>on Jupiter.</p><p></p><p>It also happened on Earth. A few years back it was noticed</p><p>that several craters on Earth had about the same age. These</p><p>craters were plotted on a map of what the Earth looked like</p><p>214 million years ago (i.e. where the continents were at </p><p>according to models using data from radiometric dating). The</p><p>results were extremely consistent with chain of meteors forming</p><p>a series of craters on Earth. The ages of the craters was </p><p>determined by several different dating methods.</p><p></p><p>You can find out more about this amazing bit of science at:</p><p><a href="http://www.cs.colorado.edu/~lindsay/creation/crater_chain.html" target="_blank"></a></p><p><a href="http://www.cs.colorado.edu/~lindsay/creation/crater_chain.html" target="_blank">Are Radioactive Dating Methods Consistent With Each Other?</a></p><p></p><p>Lets quote the conclusion:</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>The K/T is what geologists call the boundary</p><p>between the Mesozoic and the Cenozoic. It is when a mass extinction</p><p>took place. No dinosaurs (non-avian dinosaurs) are found after this</p><p>event. A crater that dates back to this time has been found showing</p><p>that an extremely large impact occured at this time. Whether this</p><p>killed the dinosaurs is still under debate. In any event, this</p><p>event through up a large amount of debris into the atmosphere. </p><p>This included a large amounts of the element iridium which is rare</p><p>on Earth but common in meteors. This resulted in an iridium-rich</p><p>layer found at the K/T all around the world. Now if the geological</p><p>column was some fantasy invented by Charles Lyell in the 19th</p><p>Century, as most YECs would have us believe. Why is there a</p><p>consistent feature about it that is world-wide in extent? </p><p>The reason is simple, the K/T represents a real place in time.</p><p></p><p>And the dating of the layer and things formed by the impact like tektites</p><p>give very consistent results from radiometric dating:</p><p>[code]</p><p>Table 2. 40Ar/39Ar ages for K-T tektites and related K-T boundary deposits </p><p>Location Material Method #tests Age (Ma) </p><p>Haiti (Beloc Formation) tektites 40Ar/39Ar total fusion 52 64.4 +/- 0.1 </p><p>Haiti (Beloc Formation) tektites 40Ar/39Ar age spectrum 4 64.4 +/- 0.4 </p><p>Haiti (Beloc Formation) tektites 40Ar/39Ar age spectrum 2 64.5 +/- 0.2 </p><p>Haiti (Beloc Formation) tektites 40Ar/39Ar age spectrum 4 64.8 +/- 0.2 </p><p>Haiti (Beloc Formation) tektites 40Ar/39Ar total fusion 18 64.9 +/- 0.1 </p><p>Haiti (Beloc Formation) tektites 40Ar/39Ar total fusion 3 65.1 +/- 0.2 </p><p>Haiti (Beloc Formation) tektites 40Ar/39Ar age spectrum 9 65.0 +/- 0.2 </p><p>Mexico tektites 40Ar/39Ar total fusion 2 65.1 +/- 0.5 </p><p>Hell Creek (Z-coal) tektites 40Ar/39Ar total fusion 28 64.8 +/- 0.1 </p><p>Hell Creek (Z-coal) tektites 40Ar/39Ar age spectrum 1 66.0 +/- 0.5 </p><p>Hell Creek (Z-coal) tektites 40Ar/39Ar age spectrum 1 64.7 +/- 0.1 </p><p>Hell Creek (Z-coal) tektites 40Ar/39Ar total fussion 17 64.8 +/- 0.2 </p><p>Hell Creek (Z-coal) b,s K-Ar 12 64.6 +/- 1.0 </p><p>Hell Creek (Z-coal) b,s Rb-Sr isochron (26 data) 1 63.7 +/- 0.6 </p><p>Hell Creek (Z-coal) zircon U-Pb concordia (16 data) 1 63.9 +/- 0.8 </p><p>Saskatchewan (Ferris Coal) sanidine 40Ar/39Ar total fussion 6 64.7 +/- 0.1 </p><p>Saskatchewan (Ferris Coal) sanidine 40Ar/39Ar age spectrum 1 64.6 +/- 0.2 </p><p>Saskatchewan (Ferris Coal) b,s K-Ar 7 65.8 +/- 1.2 </p><p>Saskatchewan (Ferris Coal) various Rb-Sr isochron (10 data) 1 64.5 +/- 0.4 </p><p>Saskatchewan (Ferris Coal) zircon U-Pb concordia (16 data) 1 64.4 +/- 0.8 </p><p>Saskatchewan (Ferris Coal) sanidine 40Ar/39Ar total fussion 11 64.8 +/- 0.2 </p><p>Saskatchewan (Nevis coal) sanidine 40Ar/39Ar age spectrum 1 64.7 +/- 0.2 </p><p>Saskatchewan (Nevis coal) biotite K-Ar 2 64.8 +/- 1.4 </p><p>Saskatchewan (Nevis coal) various Rb-Sr (7 data) 1 63.9 +/- 0.6 </p><p>Saskatchewan (Nevis coal) zircon U-pb concordia (12 data) 1 64.3 +/- 0.8 </p><p>[/code]</p><p><a href="http://www.ncseweb.org/resources/rncse_content/vol20/8906_radiometeric_dating_does_work_12_30_1899.asp" target="_blank"></a></p><p><a href="http://www.ncseweb.org/resources/rncse_content/vol20/8906_radiometeric_dating_does_work_12_30_1899.asp" target="_blank">The source is from an article by one the top researchers in the field</a></p><p><a href="http://www.ncseweb.org/resources/rncse_content/vol20/8906_radiometeric_dating_does_work_12_30_1899.asp" target="_blank">of radiometric dating.</a></p><p></p><p>Note that I shortened a few things: b=biotite, s=sanidine, Hell Creek</p><p>is in Montana, etc. If you can't figure it out check the original</p><p>article. If you want to know what an isochron is see</p><p><a href="http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/isochron-dating.html" target="_blank">this</a>.</p><p></p><p></p><p>The odds of such such consistent results if radiometric dating was</p><p>wrong is pretty much zero.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="ardipithecus, post: 216357, member: 2305"] Craters are the result of impacts. They are something that is completely at odds with YEC timescales. With the exception of were geologic activity is obvious (i.e. erosion, volcanism, etc.) every planetary body with a solid observable surface is just plain litered with craters. Callisto: [img]http://photojournal.jpl.nasa.gov/catalog/PIA00745.jpg[/img] [url=http://photojournal.jpl.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/PIAGenCatalogPage.pl?PIA00745]Source[/url] Mercury: [img]http://photojournal-b.jpl.nasa.gov//catalog/PIA02943.jpg[/img] [url=http://photojournal.jpl.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/PIAGenCatalogPage.pl?PIA02943]Source[/url] Tethys (a moon of Saturn): [img]http://photojournal-b.jpl.nasa.gov/catalog/PIA01397.jpg[/img] [url=http://photojournal.jpl.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/PIAGenCatalogPage.pl?PIA01397]Source[/url] Think of the Moon. It is just plain loaded with them including some that are hundreds of miles wide. The Moon is extremely close to the Earth (in astronomical terms). Earth, because it has 81 times the mass of the Moon, has 81 times the gravity. Hense one would expect that Earth has been hit even more often. If all those hits had happened in the last 10,000 years it would have been very noticable to anyone living at the time to say the least. And we should be surounded by many very obvious craters since there has not been enough time for them to be eroded away, subducted, etc. One of the few obvious craters is in Arizona (and it is worth the visit BTW). It is still fairly clear. It is actually one of smallest craters known on Earth. Over the last few decades geologists have found many other craters, sometimes over a hundred miles across. Now it would seem reasonable that if the biggest craters are going to remain obvious for far longer than the "small" ones like the one in Arizona. Now lets look at Ganymede: [img]http://photojournal-b.jpl.nasa.gov/catalog/PIA01610.jpg[/img] [url=http://photojournal.jpl.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/PIAGenCatalogPage.pl?PIA01610]Source[/url] Notice we have a history here. An old surface that has been hit by impacting objects many times. One section got reworked geologically and then started getting hit also. Finally an train of meteors hit it. This is not unlike what happened to Jupiter a few years back when a comet that was ripped into many pieces by Jupiter's gravity impacted on Jupiter. It also happened on Earth. A few years back it was noticed that several craters on Earth had about the same age. These craters were plotted on a map of what the Earth looked like 214 million years ago (i.e. where the continents were at according to models using data from radiometric dating). The results were extremely consistent with chain of meteors forming a series of craters on Earth. The ages of the craters was determined by several different dating methods. You can find out more about this amazing bit of science at: [url=http://www.cs.colorado.edu/~lindsay/creation/crater_chain.html] Are Radioactive Dating Methods Consistent With Each Other?[/url] Lets quote the conclusion: The K/T is what geologists call the boundary between the Mesozoic and the Cenozoic. It is when a mass extinction took place. No dinosaurs (non-avian dinosaurs) are found after this event. A crater that dates back to this time has been found showing that an extremely large impact occured at this time. Whether this killed the dinosaurs is still under debate. In any event, this event through up a large amount of debris into the atmosphere. This included a large amounts of the element iridium which is rare on Earth but common in meteors. This resulted in an iridium-rich layer found at the K/T all around the world. Now if the geological column was some fantasy invented by Charles Lyell in the 19th Century, as most YECs would have us believe. Why is there a consistent feature about it that is world-wide in extent? The reason is simple, the K/T represents a real place in time. And the dating of the layer and things formed by the impact like tektites give very consistent results from radiometric dating: [code] Table 2. 40Ar/39Ar ages for K-T tektites and related K-T boundary deposits Location Material Method #tests Age (Ma) Haiti (Beloc Formation) tektites 40Ar/39Ar total fusion 52 64.4 +/- 0.1 Haiti (Beloc Formation) tektites 40Ar/39Ar age spectrum 4 64.4 +/- 0.4 Haiti (Beloc Formation) tektites 40Ar/39Ar age spectrum 2 64.5 +/- 0.2 Haiti (Beloc Formation) tektites 40Ar/39Ar age spectrum 4 64.8 +/- 0.2 Haiti (Beloc Formation) tektites 40Ar/39Ar total fusion 18 64.9 +/- 0.1 Haiti (Beloc Formation) tektites 40Ar/39Ar total fusion 3 65.1 +/- 0.2 Haiti (Beloc Formation) tektites 40Ar/39Ar age spectrum 9 65.0 +/- 0.2 Mexico tektites 40Ar/39Ar total fusion 2 65.1 +/- 0.5 Hell Creek (Z-coal) tektites 40Ar/39Ar total fusion 28 64.8 +/- 0.1 Hell Creek (Z-coal) tektites 40Ar/39Ar age spectrum 1 66.0 +/- 0.5 Hell Creek (Z-coal) tektites 40Ar/39Ar age spectrum 1 64.7 +/- 0.1 Hell Creek (Z-coal) tektites 40Ar/39Ar total fussion 17 64.8 +/- 0.2 Hell Creek (Z-coal) b,s K-Ar 12 64.6 +/- 1.0 Hell Creek (Z-coal) b,s Rb-Sr isochron (26 data) 1 63.7 +/- 0.6 Hell Creek (Z-coal) zircon U-Pb concordia (16 data) 1 63.9 +/- 0.8 Saskatchewan (Ferris Coal) sanidine 40Ar/39Ar total fussion 6 64.7 +/- 0.1 Saskatchewan (Ferris Coal) sanidine 40Ar/39Ar age spectrum 1 64.6 +/- 0.2 Saskatchewan (Ferris Coal) b,s K-Ar 7 65.8 +/- 1.2 Saskatchewan (Ferris Coal) various Rb-Sr isochron (10 data) 1 64.5 +/- 0.4 Saskatchewan (Ferris Coal) zircon U-Pb concordia (16 data) 1 64.4 +/- 0.8 Saskatchewan (Ferris Coal) sanidine 40Ar/39Ar total fussion 11 64.8 +/- 0.2 Saskatchewan (Nevis coal) sanidine 40Ar/39Ar age spectrum 1 64.7 +/- 0.2 Saskatchewan (Nevis coal) biotite K-Ar 2 64.8 +/- 1.4 Saskatchewan (Nevis coal) various Rb-Sr (7 data) 1 63.9 +/- 0.6 Saskatchewan (Nevis coal) zircon U-pb concordia (12 data) 1 64.3 +/- 0.8 [/code] [url=http://www.ncseweb.org/resources/rncse_content/vol20/8906_radiometeric_dating_does_work_12_30_1899.asp] The source is from an article by one the top researchers in the field of radiometric dating.[/url] Note that I shortened a few things: b=biotite, s=sanidine, Hell Creek is in Montana, etc. If you can't figure it out check the original article. If you want to know what an isochron is see [url=http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/isochron-dating.html]this[/url]. The odds of such such consistent results if radiometric dating was wrong is pretty much zero. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Physical & Life Sciences
Creation & Evolution
Craters
Top
Bottom