Re: Baugardner paper

Glenn Morton (grmorton@waymark.net)
Thu, 05 Mar 1998 18:39:27 -0600

At 01:08 PM 3/5/98 -0500, Jim Bell wrote:
>
>Message text written by Glenn Morton:
>
><<Jim, did you read anything I wrote a few weeks ago? The statement is in
>the
>last of Baumgardner's papers in the 1994. It is in
>
>S. A. Austin, J. R. Baumgardner, et al, "Catastrophic Plate Tectonics: A
>Global Flood Model of Earth History," Proc. 3rd Int Conf. on Creationism,
>1994, pp 609-621. That is where they write
>
>"Gravitational potential energy released by the subduction of this
>lithosphere is on the order of 10^28 J." p. 612>>
>
>I tried to follow this punctuationless answer,

Sorry, I am punctuationally challenged. :-(

but there is still no
>reference to the paper I mentioned, which you've not read. And it is
>readily apparent that Baumgardner DOES have the numbers available for "all
>to see," your protestations to the contrary notwithstanding.

No, the paper you cited is in the same book,
Third International Conference on Creationism, July, 1994, as the paper I
cited. I own the book and have read both papers. Maybe you need to get
both papers.

If Austin Baumgarder et al, had at their disposal a 1994 paper which solved
the heat problem and which was given at the same conference and published
in the same book, why wouldn't they reference that instead of the earlier
1986 paper? They didn't reference the paper you cited because is doesn't
solve the problem that they are referring to. In fact the problem (heat
generated by gravitational POTENTIAL energy) cannot change. This energy is
determined by the configuation of the continents and the densities. This
problem will always be with a rapid subduction model.

>
><<Oh, since you were counting my references in the first paper, make a note
>
>that the Austin, Baumgardner et al, cite 6 of my articles and a book I
>wrote as a YEC. Even after I changed my perspective, they are still citing
>my papers. What does that tell you about their flexibility?>>
>
>The citation I saw (which you have not) was merely to an article you wrote
>that had a proposed theory.

No, I saw that paper. The first paper does not say "There are serious
difficulties with each of these ideas."[Runaway Subduction as the Driving
Mechanism.." p. 63] which is what you referred to. Baumgardner has two other
papers in the same volume. The keywords at the start of that paper are
Runaway subduction, Genesis flood, power-lwa creep, thermal runaway,
catastrophic plate tectonics." the last word on page 63 is "in".

I really am getting weary of people making charges that they don't believe
me. Jim, after all that has gone on lately, I would appreciate it if you
would avoid that type of charge. I am a little sensitive to it just now.

You've moved on, but the mention was there
>because it was one of a series of proposals by others that have been made
>at one time or another. You can run from your past, Glenn, but you can't
>hide. At one time you held a certain view, and that's all the reference was
>for. Baumgardner is not saying you still hold this view, and I suspect it's
>the same for Austin.

Actually for Austin, Baumgarder et al, they reference my works because those
papers of mine raised problems for the YEC position which they are trying to
solve. Unsuccessfully I might add.

Get the other two Baumgardner papers in that volume, Jim.

glenn

Adam, Apes, and Anthropology: Finding the Soul of Fossil Man

and

Foundation, Fall and Flood
http://www.isource.net/~grmorton/dmd.htm