Decaying Magnetic Earth: A 6,000 year old Earth

[Willowolf]

Hey guys, give me some feedback on this.
Seebs, lucaspa, and seesaw, give me some of your stuff on this. Hey Warrior FC, I believe you are a Christian from what I read. See if you can give me some backup on this. These three are tough!

Here is a quote from a Christian book:
"There is a powerful magnetism surrounding the Earth which is fading with age. This magnetic field enables man to navigate with the help of a magnetic compass, which always points to the magnetic North Pole. The source of this field is the electric currents which run from pole to pole in the Earth’s core.
The Earth’s magnetic field is a clock; it can tell us something about the Earth’s age. As with everything else in the universe, the second law of thermodynamics, better known as the law of decay, is in operation in the magnetic field.
Physicist Dr. Thomas Barnes, Professor of Physics at the University of Texas and a consultant to Globe Universal Scientists Inc., points out that the Earth’s magnetic field has been decaying since it was first measured in 1835. Dr. Barnes reveals that the magnetic field has an estimated half-life of 1,400 years. In other words, every 1,400 years it loses half of its strength. According to observation and predictions, the magnetic field will virtually vanish as early as 3,180 A.D.9 The magnetic field’s strength is weakening as a result of resistance from friction and heat loss.
What is more important to our study is Dr. Barnes’ findings regarding the strength of the field in the past:
1. 1,400 years ago it would have been twice as strong as now.
2. In 825 B.C., or 2,800 years ago, it would have been four times greater than it is today.
3. In 2,225 B.C. it would have been 8 times greater.
4. 10,000 years ago the magnetic field would have been so strong that life could not have existed.
5. 20,000 years ago the field would have been 8,000 times as strong as it is today, so strong that the mantle and core of the Earth could not have held together.
6. One million years ago the Earth would have been a vapor as a result of the enormous heat generated from the magnetic field.

If the half-life of the magnetic field is truly what Dr. Barnes has calculated from his careful measurements, the Earth’s magnetic field would have been equal to that of a magnetic star as little as 10,000 years ago. The magnetic power generated by a magnetic star is so great that life would be an impossibility. According to Dr. Barnes, to be consistent with the laws of physics, and assuming the magnetic field has continually weakened, we can only conclude that life on Earth would not have been possible 10,000 years ago. The decay rate of the magnetic field reveals the Earth to be very young.
Testimony 9: The Core of the Earth.
Associated with the decaying magnetic field is the heat within the Earth’s core. (see fig. 31.) This heat is escaping through the planet’s surface. Calculating what the temperature would have been 10,000 years ago, life could not have existed on Earth as the heat would have been too extreme.

Lindsay, D. G. (1999, c1993). The birth of the planet earth : And the age of the universe. Dallas, TX: Christ for the Nations.

Well, I see alot of facts here guys what do you think?
God Bless, Willowolf : )

 

[Nathan Poe]

Originally posted by Willowolf
Hey guys, give me some feedback on this.

You're new here, so you probably don't know that the "magnetic field" theory is a dead horse around these parts. I don't have all the info offhand, but you could probably surf over to the talk.origins archive, www.talkorigins.org, to see the list of refuted creationist arguments.

Talkorigins is a pretty well-stocked and well-organized archive, dedicated to the Creationism/Evolution debate. It leans towards the evolutionist side because they believe that's where the evidence points, and not because of any personal or political agenda. Most people on the board consider them to be pretty reliable.

AiG, Answers in Genesis, www.answersingenesis.org, is the Creationist counterpart. Most of the debates flying around here quote heavily from one or both of these sources. They also have a list of Creationist arguments to avoid.

 

[kaotic]

It's funny that a creationist site would have a list of Creationist arguments to avoid.

 

[clue]

Originally posted by Willowolf
Hey guys, give me some feedback on this.
...
Here is a quote from a Christian book:
"There is a powerful magnetism surrounding the Earth which is fading with age....

Contrary to what might have been implied, this is NOT on the list of arguments that Creationists should avoid.

Earth's magnetic field

 

[LiveFreeOrDie]

Originally posted by Willowolf
Here is a quote from a Christian book:
"There is a powerful magnetism surrounding the Earth which is fading with age. This magnetic field enables man to navigate with the help of a magnetic compass, which always points to the magnetic North Pole. The source of this field is the electric currents which run from pole to pole in the Earth’s core.
The Earth’s magnetic field is a clock; it can tell us something about the Earth’s age. As with everything else in the universe, the second law of thermodynamics, better known as the law of decay, is in operation in the magnetic field.
Physicist Dr. Thomas Barnes, Professor of Physics at the University of Texas and a consultant to Globe Universal Scientists Inc., points out that the Earth’s magnetic field has been decaying since it was first measured in 1835. Dr. Barnes reveals that the magnetic field has an estimated half-life of 1,400 years. In other words, every 1,400 years it loses half of its strength. According to observation and predictions, the magnetic field will virtually vanish as early as 3,180 A.D.9 The magnetic field’s strength is weakening as a result of resistance from friction and heat loss.

Welcome to the wonderful world of creationist lies and deception. There is no evidence that the Earth's magnetic field has decayed uniformly since it was first formed. In fact, the actual evidence shows the opposite. Magnetic measurements taken from mid-ocean ridges (places where the Earth's crust is slowly spreading apart as new rock is formed) show that the strength and orientation of the Earth's magnetic field has fluctuated wildly in the past. The current decay trend is simply part of a larger cycle in which the Earth's magnetic field flips between north-south and south-north.

The following web site is from a researcher who has used a supercomputer to accurately simulate the Earth's magnetic field over the last 300,000 years. He writes:

Paleomagnetic records indicate that the geomagnetic field has existed for at least three billion years. However, based on the size and electrical conductivity of the Earth's core, the field, if it were not continually being generated, would decay away in only about 20,000 years since the temperature of the core is too high to sustain permanent magnetism. In addition, paleomagnetic records show that the dipole polarity of the geomagnetic field has reversed many times in the past, the mean time between reversals being roughly 200,000 years with individual reversal events taking only a couple thousand years.

The article then goes on to discuss a hyothesis for the mechanism that generates the field and the results of the simulation developed to test it.

 

[Late_Cretaceous]

The earth's magnetic field is caused by electric currents deep within the earth's nickel-iron outer interior (the molten metal flows as a result of the earth's spin and generates electricity - when you have an electric current you also have a magnetic field). Venus also has a molten metal interior, but since it's spin is so slow, the magnetic field is negligible. As long as the earth's interior remains hot enough for - essencially - molten steel, there will be a magnetic field. THe strength of the field occilates and periodically flips (magnetic poles reverse). We are currently living in a period when the magnetic field is diminishing. To assume that the field diminishes in a linear fashion is a faullty assumption that goes against a lot of scientific knowledge.

 

[clue]

Originally posted by LiveFreeOrDie
There is no evidence that the Earth's magnetic field has decayed uniformly since it was first formed.

I agree.

Originally posted by LiveFreeOrDie
Magnetic measurements taken from mid-ocean ridges (places where the Earth's crust is slowly spreading apart as new rock is formed) show that the strength and orientation of the Earth's magnetic field has fluctuated wildly in the past.

I agree minus the 'wildly' part.

Originally posted by Late_Cretaceous
THe strength of the field occilates and periodically flips (magnetic poles reverse).

I agree.

Originally posted by Late_Cretaceous
To assume that the field diminishes in a linear fashion is a faullty assumption that goes against a lot of scientific knowledge.

I agree.

The article I linked to takes all of this into consideration and still came up with a young age for the Earth.  Here's a quote from that article:

But the reversals and fluctuations could not halt the overall decay pattern — rather, the total field energy would decay even faster....

 

[rage]

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/magfields.html

enjoy.

 

[rage]

P.S. - I know just posting a link like this is discouraged, but another board I was on had a similar discussion on this issue...it has me all pooped out.

 

[seebs]

My answer would be "I do not see convincing evidence that this is a consistent, stable, one-way change in strength". Indeed, there's a lot of evidence to support the belief that the field changes both ways, changes direction, and otherwise wobbles around.

(BTW, not sure if you're intentionally not listing me in the "list of Christians", but I'm one of the token Christians who actually reads science books.)

 

[fragmentsofdreams]

Originally posted by seesaw
It's funny that a creationist site would have a list of Creationist arguments to avoid.

No one wants people on their side using faulty arguments because it reflects badly on themselves. If someone used 1+1=3 as an arguement for the existence of Iggy (as opposed to the existence of bad math skills), all those who believe in Iggy would look somewhat foolish.

 

[Willowolf]

Hey guys, thanks for the answers and cites you listed. Pretty Interesting!
Your right about one thing, I do need to update my books and info on the subject, they are a bit old.

Hey fragmentsofdreams, I don't mean to make you look stupid or to use faulty aurguments. I never said that this is the truth, nor am I saying that I don't believe it. If you have proof that this in fact false, please share it with me. Don't list a cite, tell me what you know in your own words.
If your a Christian, then we should be edifying each other, not tearing down. Please share your thoughts.
God Bless, Willowolf : )

 

[seebs]

Well, mostly, I have a lot of different sources of information that all seem to suggest a fairly old world. Really, the only other option I can come up with is that God is lying to us, and I don't think He does that.

 

[fragmentsofdreams]

Originally posted by Willowolf
Hey guys, thanks for the answers and cites you listed. Pretty Interesting!
Your right about one thing, I do need to update my books and info on the subject, they are a bit old.

Hey fragmentsofdreams, I don't mean to make you look stupid or to use faulty aurguments. I never said that this is the truth, nor am I saying that I don't believe it. If you have proof that this in fact false, please share it with me. Don't list a cite, tell me what you know in your own words.
If your a Christian, then we should be edifying each other, not tearing down. Please share your thoughts.
God Bless, Willowolf : )

I had no intention of complaining about you or anyone else here. I was merely trying to show seasaw why someone would try to preventing their allies from using faulty arguments. Besides, it is not wrong to say something that is incorrect, only to refuse correction.


The magnetic field is declining, but this has happened many times in the history of the earth. After a declining for a while, it switches directions with its strength is renewed. This does not hasten the death of the magnetic field because fission reactions in the core of the earth provide a source of energy. The extrapolations used to prove a young earth are faulty because they extrapolate far beyond the scope of their measurements and they ignore the possiblity that events will disrupt the pattern. To see the flaw in this argument, measure the rate that a child is growing. You cannot predict their height a thousand years from now by simply extending the trend. First, the growth rate will change over time in a way that the model won't predict. The child's growth will stabalize, begin again during puberty, and stabalize again. No extrapolation can predict that. Second, the child will die long before the thousand years end. This event cannot be predicted by the model.

 

[Willowolf]

Hey fragmentsofdreams, sorry, I guess I misunderstood what you posted.
Anyway, thanks for the reply on the issue. Now that is a good way to answer, thanks for communicating so clearly and using a good example. It's true, the sun does go through stages of activity and "rest"

God Bless, Willowolf : )