Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
Current time: May 15, 2024, 8:57 am

Thread Rating:
  • 1 Vote(s) - 1 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
creationist tried to tell me embrology doesn't support evolution.
#39
RE: creationist tried to tell me embrology doesn't support evolution.
(April 15, 2013 at 7:38 pm)Statler Waldorf Wrote:
(April 15, 2013 at 10:12 am)Brian37 Wrote: What did you expect from Creationists? Those morons think the earth is 10 thousand years old and that the earth was created in 6 days.

Morons? Are you really suggesting that everyone who disagrees with you about the age of the Earth is a moron? Why?

The age of the earth is confirmed by so many pieces of evidence that you would have to be a blinkered moron to still believe in a young earth if you have any science knowledge at all.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_of_the_Earth

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Evidence_ag...t_creation

http://www.amnh.org/education/resources/...nolgy.html

My favorite has to be zircon crystals that form deep in the earth mantle, then are raised by mountain forming, eroded down by weathering then by subduction at plate boundries taken back into the earth mantle where each time this happens leaving a new layer of zircon is added, like a very slow growing onion. Some of them have a lot of layers.

Quote:Originally formed by crystallization from a magma or in metamorphic rocks, zircons are so durable and resistant to chemical attack that they rarely go away. They may survive many geologic events, which can be recorded in rings of additional zircon that grow around the original crystal like tree rings. Like a tiny time capsule, the zircon records these events, each one of which may last hundreds of millions of years. Meanwhile, the core of the zircon itself remains unchanged, and preserves the chemical characteristics of the rock in which it originally crystallized.
Zircon contains the radioactive element uranium, which Dr. Mueller calls “the clock within the zircon” because it converts to the element lead at a specific rate over a long span of time. According to Mueller, this makes zircons “the most reliable natural chronometer that we have when we want to look at the earliest part of Earth history.” He goes on to explain that there are two ways to tell time in geology. “One is a relative time, meaning if there’s a mineral of one kind, and growing around it is a mineral of a second kind, you know the inner mineral formed first, but you don’t know how much time elapsed between the two.” Henry evaluates these kinds of mineral relations in rocks. From the types of minerals and their distributions in the rocks he reconstructs a relative sequence of events that reflects the change over time of parameters like pressure, temperature, and deformation. “If I have a metamorphic rock,” elaborates Dr. Henry, “I can use the types of minerals and their chemistry to determine the conditions that the rock had experienced at some point in its history. For example, a temperature of 700°C and high pressure of several thousand times atmospheric pressure imply that it had been deep in the crust at some time during its geologic history.” He infers what has happened to the rocks, but not how long ago it happened. That’s where the second kind of time comes in: absolute as compared to relative. “We try to supply the when,” explains Mueller. “My job is to look at the chemistry of the rock, including its isotopes, and try to derive the absolute times for events that are recorded in the rock and its zircons.”
How precise are those actual numbers? “Depending on the history of the rock, we can date things nowadays down to something on the order of a few hundredths of a percent of its age,” answers Mueller. That translates, for example, to plus or minus a million years out of three billion. Carbon-14 dating can go no further back than about 70,000 years, because the half-life of carbon-14 is only 5,730 years. (The half-life is the time it takes for half of the original radioactive isotope to change to another element.) In comparison, the half-life of the radioactive uranium 238 isotope is 4.5 billion years, which makes it useful for dating extremely old materials.



You can fix ignorance, you can't fix stupid.

Tinkety Tonk and down with the Nazis.




 








Reply



Messages In This Thread
RE: creationist tried to tell me embrology doesn't support evolution. - by downbeatplumb - April 16, 2013 at 1:54 pm

Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Some people believe that gravity doesn't exist notimportant1234 75 10139 October 19, 2017 at 11:04 am
Last Post: Gawdzilla Sama
  Another one flying in the faces of creationist - Neanderthal and Homo Sapiens had sex abaris 8 1585 June 23, 2015 at 4:39 am
Last Post: Cyberman
  Tell Us Something We Didn't Know Minimalist 23 5104 September 10, 2014 at 1:05 pm
Last Post: vorlon13
  Creationist Vs Scientist On Why Human Intelligence Is Declining Gooders1002 0 1173 March 29, 2014 at 1:08 pm
Last Post: Gooders1002
  It doesn’t matter what neuroscience has to say Mudhammam 11 3604 February 9, 2014 at 2:26 pm
Last Post: Chad32
  Understanding the Creationist Propaganda Model Michael Schubert 33 10122 July 20, 2013 at 2:27 pm
Last Post: Minimalist
  interviewing a creationist (painful) jackman 26 11862 June 21, 2012 at 2:52 pm
Last Post: liam
  Time lapse video from the ISS - It doesn't get any better than this! orogenicman 2 1595 November 15, 2011 at 3:03 am
Last Post: KichigaiNeko



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)