Regarding teaching evolution / creation in the schools.

[AirPo]

Making up stories to understand evidence is stupidity...

Actually, it's mythology.

Faith grows with experiance, understanding, and devotion...

So does scientific knowledge.

 

[LittleNipper]

Although it has been fun trading insults we seem to have degenerated from my original purpose of determining if there could be common ground for a catastrophic and non-catastrophic theory presented in schools.

Post #5 made up for a lot of unsults and gave in my opnion a good summary of information that would be acceptable to reasonable scientific minds.
Thank you Randall McNally

I did not get any input from the YEC side but it may be that I picked the wrong location for this particular discussion.

Thank you all for your partisipation.

Purhaps I will start some threads on some catastrophic theories in some new threads as it seem to be what is really of interest here, judging but the direction the conversations drift.


Duane

Duane:

Why do you not simply go to Institure for Creation Reasearch at <www.icr.org> if you are sincerely interested. They can provide you with a wonderful weath of information over the Internet. That is if you are really interested...

 

[LittleNipper]

Although it has been fun trading insults we seem to have degenerated from my original purpose of determining if there could be common ground for a catastrophic and non-catastrophic theory presented in schools.

Post #5 made up for a lot of unsults and gave in my opnion a good summary of information that would be acceptable to reasonable scientific minds.
Thank you Randall McNally

I did not get any input from the YEC side but it may be that I picked the wrong location for this particular discussion.

Thank you all for your partisipation.

Purhaps I will start some threads on some catastrophic theories in some new threads as it seem to be what is really of interest here, judging but the direction the conversations drift.


Duane

Duane:

Why do you not simply go to Institure for Creation Reasearch at <www.icr.org> if you are sincerely interested? They can provide you with a wonderful weath of information over the Internet. That is if you are really interested...

 

[mikeynov]

Duane:

Why do you not simply go to Institure for Creation Reasearch at <www.icr.org> if you are sincerely interested? They can provide you with a wonderful weath of information over the Internet. That is if you are really interested...

Alternately, he could seek information from real scientists.

 

[duordi]

Oh, good. How about providing some evidence to support your claims, then?


Wait...that's not normal for you, is it?

I did, I gave proof that castrophic events happened in Earths history.
The web referance in the first post.

If you are going to say that meteors don't exist or that they don't hit the planets surface, I am willing to listen but I think it is a debate you will not win.

The list of megatons released is determined by scientific research and holds much more credibility then your generalized posts.

Your last statement is so generalized that it could be talking about little green men and no one would be able to tell.


Duane

 

[Valkhorn]

Making up stories to understand evidence is stupidity

Then why do you do it?

 

[Valkhorn]

I did, I gave proof that castrophic events happened in Earths history.
The web referance in the first post.

Yeah but for the Earth to be 6,000 years old these events would have had to have happened in a VERY short time frame. In fact, with all the meteor impacts alone to have occured in 6,000 years we probably would have had all life to die out and the seas to boil away.

The fact is, Duane, you have no idea what you're talking about. There is no conflict with catastrophism and uniformitarianism. What has happened what has happened. The Earth is 4.6 billion years old, and there have been major disasters such as the Chuxulub impact 65 million years ago, and as recent as the Yellowstone caldera eruption 1.2 and 600,000 years ago.

No one is saying they don't happen. However the evidence points differently than what you are suggesting duane.

There never was a global flood, the Earth is 4.6 billion years old, and Genesis is by all means not a literal account of Earth's history.

Get over it. Look at the evidence, then draw up a conclusion. Don't look at a conclusion - namely the Bible - and try to draw up evidence to somehow rationalize what obviously didn't happen.

Do you need a pot of coffee to wake up yet?

 

[duordi]

Alternately, he could seek information from real scientists.

Yes as I said "maybe this is not the best place" but I wanted to get some opnions from "real" people and not an organization.

Duane

 

[LittleNipper]

Yeah but for the Earth to be 6,000 years old these events would have had to have happened in a VERY short time frame. In fact, with all the meteor impacts alone to have occured in 6,000 years we probably would have had all life to die out and the seas to boil away.

The fact is, Duane, you have no idea what you're talking about. There is no conflict with catastrophism and uniformitarianism. What has happened what has happened. The Earth is 4.6 billion years old, and there have been major disasters such as the Chuxulub impact 65 million years ago, and as recent as the Yellowstone caldera eruption 1.2 and 600,000 years ago.

No one is saying they don't happen. However the evidence points differently than what you are suggesting duane.

There never was a global flood, the Earth is 4.6 billion years old, and Genesis is by all means not a literal account of Earth's history.

Get over it. Look at the evidence, then draw up a conclusion. Don't look at a conclusion - namely the Bible - and try to draw up evidence to somehow rationalize what obviously didn't happen.

Do you need a pot of coffee to wake up yet?

Your first statement is absurd. Asteroids and meteorites heat up only as they enter the earth's atmosphere. Heat a stone and drop it in a bucket of cold water. See how much the temperature will change. You will find that evaporation will speed the cooling process and the creation of steam leads to vapor. The vapor condenses into rain...

 

[duordi]

It would appear that you wish to argue with a YEC.
Thats OK, now that I am done with the post intension, I don't mind arguing the orther side of the fence once.

Yeah but for the Earth to be 6,000 years old these events would have had to have happened in a VERY short time frame. In fact, with all the meteor impacts alone to have occured in 6,000 years we probably would have had all life to die out and the seas to boil away.

Good point, then the water would of course have to rain back down.
How do you suppose the introduction of events (similar) to the detenation of nuclear weapons (A large meteor strike) would have on the radioactive dating methods we use?

The fact is, Duane, you have no idea what you're talking about.

Of course not, that is why we do scientific research.

There is no conflict with catastrophism and uniformitarianism.

Um.. I think I'm lousing you.

What has happened what has happened.

Agreed

The Earth is 4.6 billion years old, and there have been major disasters such as the Chuxulub impact 65 million years ago, and as recent as the Yellowstone caldera eruption 1.2 and 600,000 years ago.

Good, I agree, the only question I have is did the event messed up your dating criteria assumptions.

No one is saying they don't happen. However the evidence points differently than what you are suggesting duane.

I assume you are referring to the dating estimates based on uniformitarianism assumptions again.

There never was a global flood,

You just suggested there was one in the first sentence.

the Earth is 4.6 billion years old,

Probably, but again its based on you non-catastrophic dating assumptions.

and Genesis is by all means not a literal account of Earth's history.

Ooo.. You have much faith, to be so sure of your opnion.

Get over it. Look at the evidence, then draw up a conclusion.

I did.

Don't look at a conclusion - namely the Bible - and try to draw up evidence to somehow rationalize what obviously didn't happen.

You seem to have a thing about the Bible.
I figured that sooner or later this would surface.
Have you ever considered that you may have developed a reversed biest.
Just a thought.

Do you need a pot of coffee to wake up yet?

And of course the insult closing.

That was fun.

It would seem that your entire belief system is based on a dating criteria derived from uniformitarianism assumptions.

If they hold true you are fine but if they don't....

I can see why you would defend this with a passion.

Duane

 

[Physics_guy]

Your first statement is absurd. Asteroids and meteorites heat up only as they enter the earth's atmosphere. Heat a stone and drop it in a bucket of cold water. See how much the temperature will change. You will find that evaporation will speed the cooling process and the creation of steam leads to vapor. The vapor condenses into rain...

Try doing the math some time for how much heat is released during meteor strikes. Then try to add up all the known impact sites and their estimated collision energies. Then try to fit all those impacts into a young earth time frame. I bet you will have problems.

Furthermore, your initial assumption is wrong. Though collision with air molecules do heat a meteor before it hits the Earth, the real heat is released at impact when the total kinetic (or most) energy of the meteor is transfered into thermal energy. Hitting the atmosphere is doing the same thing by siphon some kinetic energy off as thermal energy through friction but it is only a very small amount of the total.

Additionally, your belief that the vaporizing and later raining of the water back to Earth would get rid of this heat is wrong as well. The heat can be dispersed through the water cycle, but it is not removed from the Earth. As water vaporizes heat is taken out of the system as the vapor expands from its liquid state. That heat however comes back in during condensation and the eventual friction caused by rain hitting the surface. The only way that the heat added by meteors hitting the Earth would leave the Earth is through radiation. Now, can you tell me how much heat the Earth radiates into space per second?

 

[Physics_guy]

Probably, but again its based on you non-catastrophic dating assumptions.

Are you interested in learning why scientists believe that these methods are reliable over billions of years?

 

[duordi]

Your first statement is absurd. Asteroids and meteorites heat up only as they enter the earth's atmosphere. Heat a stone and drop it in a bucket of cold water. See how much the temperature will change. You will find that evaporation will speed the cooling process and the creation of steam leads to vapor. The vapor condenses into rain...

Unfortunitly Valkhorn is correct.
The amount of energy given off is rated in megatons just as nuclear weapons are and the effects are so similar that some consider them to be indistinguisable.

The landing of a large meteor would not be a good thing.

Duane

 

[Frumious Bandersnatch]

Your first statement is absurd. Asteroids and meteorites heat up only as they enter the earth's atmosphere. Heat a stone and drop it in a bucket of cold water. See how much the temperature will change. You will find that evaporation will speed the cooling process and the creation of steam leads to vapor. The vapor condenses into rain...

And the heat of vaporization from the condensing water heats the atmosphere. In addition to all the craters we know about on earth there were almost certainly many, many more impacts large and small during the late heavy bombardment (LHB) that put all those craters on the moon. We no longer see their craters on the surface of the earth because of geologic processes. Any meteor or asteroid that hits earth will impact at at least 25,000 mph. (earth's escape velocity) and probably much faster. The kinetic energy (1/2)MV^2 is essentially all converted to heat as the object and some of the earth's crust and/or ocean water vaporize. I think I'll open a thread on the LHB sometime soon.

FB

 

[Frumious Bandersnatch]

Unfortunitly Valkhorn is correct.
The amount of energy given off is rated in megatons just as nuclear weapons are and the effects are so similar that some consider them to be indistinguisable.

The landing of a large meteor would not be a good thing.

Duane

A 10 mile diameter asteroid travling 20 km/sec would hit with an explosive force of about 300 million megatons of TNT. This is about 10,000 times the power of the first Atomic bomb IIRC.

You can play with some impact parameters on this site.

http://www.lpl.arizona.edu/impacteffects/

FB

 

[duordi]

Are you interested in learning why scientists believe that these methods are reliable over billions of years?

The assumptions are as follows ( except for carbon 14 dating of course).

1. You start with certain concentrations of unstable elements.

2. The unstable elements degrade according to half life time which have been verified by experimental research are correct at the present time.

3. No radiation, or (extreem) temperature and pressure occured.

4. No contamination from dilution or addition of volcanic or meteor materials.

5. And of course the normal assumptions about the speed of light and decay rates being constant.

In my opnion assumptions 1, 3 and 4 must be questioned because there is no way to prove the assumptions are true.

If you are already sure of the age of something you can calibrate the dating criteria to fit the outcome.

But of course you can calibrate the dating criteria to match any outcome with only item 1.

Duane

 

[Valkhorn]

Duane, I don't think you've researched much.

Please research why we know the speed of light is constant, and how we know radioactive decay is constant.

Please also research why we know the Earth is indeed ancient.

You go on and on about why its bad to assume... well stop assuming the Bible is a literal account of the beginning of the world.

 

[Loudmouth]

The assumptions are as follows ( except for carbon 14 dating of course).

1. You start with certain concentrations of unstable elements.

Firstly, it is the RATIO of parent isotope to daughter product that is measured. You don't need to know the AMOUNT, only that there was not contamination by daughter product. The systems that are used for dating assay chrystals that exclude the daughter product when they form, such as the exclusion of Ar in the Ar/Ar dating methodology. Therefore, if one were to assume that the laws of CHEMISTRY have been the same since the formation of the earth, then the chrystals will not contain contamination at closure.

2. The unstable elements degrade according to half life time which have been verified by experimental research are correct at the present time.

And have been verified as being the same in the past by observations made in astronomy, such as Supernova 1987a.

3. No radiation, or (extreem) temperature and pressure occured.

The amount of radiation, temperature, and pressure needed to change the half-lives of these elements only exists in stars. I think it is a safe assumption that the Earth has never been a star.

4. No contamination from dilution or addition of volcanic or meteor materials.

All detectable through by assaying the chemistry of the rock. Also, volcanic and meteor materials can not penetrate into a crystal without completely changing it.

5. And of course the normal assumptions about the speed of light and decay rates being constant.

Which, again, have been checked through astronomy and also the presence of natural nuclear reactors dating back as far as 1.5 billion years ago. It is not assumed that these rates have been the same, it is a well supported theory with strong evidence.

If you are already sure of the age of something you can calibrate the dating criteria to fit the outcome.

No you can't. You would have to fake the experimentally derived half lives, fake the data from distant stars that is available to anyone with the right equipment, and fake the actual isotopic content of the rock. This would take a world wide conspiracy that would be easy to expose by simply dating the same rocks from the same structures as found in the geologic journals. This would be a simple task, it makes me wonder why creationist organizations don't do this simple test.

 

[Ishmael Borg]

Your first statement is absurd. Asteroids and meteorites heat up only as they enter the earth's atmosphere.

I'm no scientist, but I'll bet that when their orbits bring them closer to the sun, these objects "heat up". Nothing absurd about it.

 

[Ishmael Borg]

No you can't. You would have to fake the experimentally derived half lives, fake the data from distant stars that is available to anyone with the right equipment, and fake the actual isotopic content of the rock. This would take a world wide conspiracy that would be easy to expose by simply dating the same rocks from the same structures as found in the geologic journals. This would be a simple task, it makes me wonder why creationist organizations don't do this simple test.

(Emphasis mine)

Because they're parasites. They do no scientific research of their own. I've seen dozens of threads asking for examples of original crea-science/ID research. I haven't seen any real replies.

And to the OP: In science class, stick to scientific pursuits that are based on scientific method. If you want other classes that would discuss my people's Mother Earth creation stories, along with your god's, I don't have a problem... so long as it they aren't science classes, and are not required courses. There's not enough time to require every student to adequately learn and respect all mythologies.