So the magnetic field is weakening after all....

[Ark Guy]

Score another point for the YEC literalist.


http://edition.cnn.com/2003/TECH/science/12/12/magnetic.poles.ap/index.html

 

[Chi_Cygni]

I beat you to it on the science forum. I knew some YEC would be wetting their pants on this one.

Course, why was it weaker than this several hundred years ago and then got stronger?

How do you explain it increasing in recorded history since you need it to decay continuously.

Also what about other components of the field.

 

[wblastyn]

Score another point for the YEC literalist.


http://edition.cnn.com/2003/TECH/science/12/12/magnetic.poles.ap/index.html

Did you even read the article or just the headline?

"SAN FRANCISCO (AP) -- The strength of the Earth's magnetic field has decreased 10 percent over the past 150 years, raising the remote possibility that it may collapse and later reverse, flipping the planet's poles for the first time in nearly a million years, scientists said."

"Hundreds of years could pass before a flip-flopped field returned to where it was 780,000 years ago. But scientists at a meeting of the American Geophysical Union cautioned that scenario is an unlikely one."

IOW the magnetic field is weakening and may flip and return to normal just like it has done in the past. It's not as if the field has been decaying constantly from it was first zapped in my God (or whatever you believe) and will eventually disappear completely, it's just fluctuating.

The fact you think this is somehow evidence for a young earth shows us what you actually know (or rather, don't know).

 

[Late_Cretaceous]

I am going to apply your logic to the weather.

Lets see.

The temperature has been dropping steadily in the last four months. August was hot , September was warm, October was mild, November was cool and now December is cold. Wow by next July it is going to be absolute zero!

 

[Buck72]

I beat you to it on the science forum. I knew some YEC would be wetting their pants on this one.

Course, why was it weaker than this several hundred years ago and then got stronger?

How do you explain it increasing in recorded history since you need it to decay continuously.

Also what about other components of the field.

My question to you Dr. Chi, is how do YOU explain it increasing, since you need it to NOT decrease in order for billion-year evolution to stay afloat.

I'm stumped. I haven't a clue as to how the earth, as big as it is, just "grows" stronger magnetism when the just opposite is observed.

I would propose that supposed increases in magnetism is based from inconsistent observation points with irregular magnetic fluctuations that APPEAR to be strengthening; plus lots of notional conclusion-drawing.

Are these observation points on the Atlantic floor by chance?

It may warm your heart to know that this morning at 5am (EST) I figured you'd post this article quickly to avoid Ark Guy beating you to it.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=624&e=11&u=/ap/pole_flip

 

[Chi_Cygni]

No the data is archeological. Measurements of residual magnetism in pottery have shown the field to have oscillated over the last few thousand years.

Also why do no creationists seem to realise the measured dipole component of the field is not the only component.

Also another point YEC's fail to mention - is that the extrapolation they perform (exponential decay of the field) is only valid for a model of the Earth's core that is ruled out by seismology. In fact that model was discarded over 50 years ago.

Also why are you puzzled by "growing" as you put it.

Many dynamo mechanisms are theoretically feasible and the computer models in the last few years have become very good at showing the salient features of the Earth's field and even perform variations like historically seen and flips in polarity in a stochastic manner, again as seen in geological data.

As for Ark Guy, well he seems about as ignorant and uneducated as it gets on here.

 

[Ark Guy]

extrapolation....hmmmmmmmm, now there's something the evos NEVER do.

 

[wblastyn]

extrapolation....hmmmmmmmm, now there's something the evos NEVER do.

Big surprise, he makes some rejected comment without addressing the refutations.

 

[TruthTraveler]

Well if the core of the earth were to STOP spinning then HOW would it then reverse?

Think of a top once it stops it stops it doesn't magically reverse.

I saw something on PBS that said "Millions of years ago" and wow soon after more lies.
They used pottery to show that the magnetic field was stronger and has been getting weaker. I Agree with this.
Then they used rock/lava to show that the magnetic field was reversed "Millions/Billions years ago". This I'm sure there is a Creationist explanation.

 

[Chi_Cygni]

Well if the core of the earth were to STOP spinning then HOW would it then reverse?

Think of a top once it stops it stops it doesn't magically reverse.

I saw something on PBS that said "Millions of years ago" and wow soon after more lies.
They used pottery to show that the magnetic field was stronger and has been getting weaker. I Agree with this.
Then they used rock/lava to show that the magnetic field was reversed "Millions/Billions years ago". This I'm sure there is a Creationist explanation.

I mean no offence TruthTraveler but ths is why people who think like you really have no business debating these topics.

NO ONE says that the Earth's core reverses direction. I agree that would be impossible. What the heck gave you that idea?

The pottery also shows that the field was weaker in the past at certain times. That is the problem for the silly creationist claims of continuous decay.

Oh I am sure there is a creationist explanation. Of course it will be invented pseudo-scientific claptrap that ignores basic high-school level physics, lies about the facts but that wont stop them. It never does, does it?

PS

I believe the flips are accepted even by the Creationists, they just argue they occurred rapidly after the flood. Now it is hard to come up with a physical mechanism for such rapid flips. But somehow the geophysical computer models are now sophisticated enough they do a good job of mimicking what has been historically observed. That is not like the post-Flood nonsense but like the accepted geophysical data.

 

[TruthTraveler]

NO ONE says that the Earth's core reverses direction. I agree that would be impossible. What the heck gave you that idea?

The pottery also shows that the field was weaker in the past at certain times. That is the problem for the silly creationist claims of continuous decay.

Where did I say that?
Have you ever put a magnet in some wire connetced to light(I think I did this in 2nd grade)? When you spin the magnet it makes a magnetic field which then sends electricity throught the wire to the light buld and LIGHT. And with this example the core of the earth is liquid metal SPINING(with the earth at X speed) thus creating the magnetic field.

Show some proof for that statment.

 

[Chi_Cygni]

That is what you implied at the start of post #9.

It reads like you are implying a field reversal needs a reversal of the cores spin.

 

[TruthTraveler]

O PLEASE, share your "Knowledge"



How does a magnetic field reverse?

 

[Chi_Cygni]

Here is a link with a cursory description.

An detailed explanation would need a lot of explanation of magnetohydrodynamics, convection etc etc.

Check out the journal papers on this.

http://ees5-www.lanl.gov/IGPP/EarthsMagneticField.html