Re: RATE

From: pbrunt@xtra.co.nz
Date: Sun Oct 05 2003 - 21:10:40 EDT

  • Next message: Glenn Morton: "RE: RATE"

    Michael
    Was Christ "Christian" to walk away from those who would not understand him?
    Sometimes that is the only action to take.
    Peter Brunt

    >
    > From: "Michael Roberts" <michael.andrea.r@ukonline.co.uk>
    > Date: 2003/10/06 Mon AM 10:52:53 GMT+13:00
    > To: "allenroy" <allenroy@peoplepc.com>,
    > "Glenn Morton" <glennmorton@entouch.net>
    > CC: <asa@calvin.edu>
    > Subject: Re: RATE
    >
    > As McEnroe said on the tennis courts in Wimbledon, every time he did not
    > like the umpire's decision, "You can't be serious!"
    >
    > Glenn's sound argument is simply met with made up nonsense and fairy tales
    > to evade the force of his argument of a progression in age away from
    > Kilaeua. Change in chemical composition my foot.
    >
    > I simply do not have the time to spend hours or days producing the argument
    > needed when we all know that Allen simply will deny it, on some totally
    > incoherent argument.
    >
    > Please Allen God gave you a brain, it ought to be used to his glory and not
    > defending a fairy tale of plates whizzing round the earth like lumps of
    > sodium in water. This is no better than von Danniken.
    >
    > I suppose someone will tell me how horrible I am and that my attitudes are
    > not Christian!
    >
    > Michael.
    > ----- Original Message -----
    > From: "allenroy" <allenroy@peoplepc.com>
    > To: "Glenn Morton" <glennmorton@entouch.net>
    > Cc: <asa@calvin.edu>
    > Sent: Sunday, October 05, 2003 8:46 PM
    > Subject: Re: RATE
    >
    >
    > > Glenn Morton wrote:
    > >
    > > > >I simply asked for the evidence you said you had found and all I get is
    > > > assertions and pontification.
    > > >
    > > > I am not sure what evidence you want,
    > >
    > > In the case being discussed, Roberts claimed that he had found 100
    > misquotes by
    > > Woodmorappe. I simply asked him to back up his claim. And he cannot or
    > will
    > > not supply it.
    > >
    > > You know, as well as I, that if I had made any such claim as Roberts made,
    > that
    > > you, and over a half-a-dozen others on this list, would jump on me with
    > both
    > > feet demanding my evidence. Yet, Roberts makes an unsupported assertion
    > and no
    > > one but me asks for his evidence. And when I do, I'm treated like I'm
    > > questioning the Almighty.
    > >
    > > > The two models of the world, young-earth and old earth have differing
    > > > predictions when it comes to the Hawaiian islands. The young-earth view
    > has
    > > > the islands forming about the same time--in the global flood. This model
    > > > would predict that the islands should all look about the same.
    > >
    > > A Flood Cataclysmist view is that the Pacific plate moved NW across the
    > volcanic
    > > source/hot spot (or vice verse) during the Flood Cataclysm creating the
    > islands.
    > >
    > > > As one goes further from Kilauea the elevation of the volcanoes gets
    > lower and
    > > > there is more evidence of erosion. All indicators agree that the farther
    > north
    > > > one goes along the chain the older are the volcanic islands.
    > >
    > > The oldest islands would would be the ones to the North. They would also
    > be the
    > > most eroded because they would have come up during the cataclysm, where as
    > those
    > > to the south came up during the latter, less catastrophic, stages of the
    > flood
    > > and finally the Hawaiian Islands may have come up afterward.
    > >
    > > > Why is there a systematic increase in age in the direction that
    > continental
    > > > drift is moving the ocean floor?
    > >
    > > The "increase in age" simply reflects the change in the chemical
    > composition of
    > > the volcanic source/hot spot as the Pacific plate moved across it (or vice
    > > verse). There may have been a depletion of certain elements from the
    > source
    > > over a short time which gives the false impression of long time when
    > interpreted
    > > within isometric dating methodology.
    > >
    > > Allen
    > >
    > > >
    > > >
    > > > The old-earth view has the islands forming slowly over millions of years
    > > > from a hotspot on the ocean floor. As drift moves the seafloor crust
    > past
    > > > the volcanic hotspot, the Hawaiian islands are carried northward. This
    > model
    > > > would predict that as one goes north, the radioactive dates should get
    > > > older, the islands should be more highly eroded and thus topographically
    > > > lower eventually disappearing beneath the waves as one goes north.
    > > > What do we see? The table below shows a list of islands, their distance
    > from
    > > > Kilauea (the present site of the volcanic hotspot(Kilauea has been
    > erupting
    > > > nearly continuously from 1983). Kilauea is the tallest of the islands
    > and
    > > > the heights drop as one goes north. Volcanism also decreases as one goes
    > > > north along the chain. Here is the table.
    > > > Ages of some of the Hawaiian Islands and outer seamounts
    > > >
    > > > (see note at table bottom)
    > > > Volcano Volcano Distance from Best K-Ar Data Source
    > > > Number Name Kilauea along age (Ma) (tabulated below)
    > > > trend of chain
    > > > (km)
    > > >
    > > > 1 Kilauea 0
    > -0.4 --
    > > > 3 Mauna Kea 54 0.375 + 0.05
    > 1
    > > > 5 Kohala 100 0.43 + 0.02
    > 2
    > > > 6 Haleakala 182 0.75 + 0.04
    > 3
    > > > 7 Kahoolawe 185 > 1.03 + 0.18
    > 3
    > > > 8 West Maui 221 1.32 + 0.04
    > 4
    > > > 9 Lanai 226 1.28 + 0.04
    > 5
    > > > 10 East Molokai 256 1.76 + 0.04
    > 3
    > > > 11 West Molokai 280 1.90 + 0.06
    > 3
    > > > 12 Koolau 339 2.6 + 0.1
    > 4,6
    > > > 13 Waianae 374 3.7 + 0.1
    > 6
    > > > 14 Kauai 519 5.1 + 0.20
    > 7
    > > > 15 Niihau 565 4.89 + 0.11
    > 8
    > > > 15A Kaula 600 4.0 + 0.2
    > 21
    > > > 17 Nihoa 780 7.2 + 0.3
    > 9
    > > > 20 Unnamed 913 9.2 + 0.8
    > > > Unnamed 930 9.6 + 0.8
    > 22
    > > > 23 Necker 1,058 10.3 + 0.4
    > 9
    > > > 26 La Perouse
    > > > Pinnacles 1,209 12.0 + 0.4
    > 9
    > > > 27 Brooks Bank 1,256 13.0 + 0.6
    > 20
    > > > 1,330 13.0 + 0.6
    > 22
    > > > 30 Gardner
    > > > Pinnacles 1,435 12.3 + 1.0
    > 20
    > > > 1,460 12.3 + 1.0
    > 22
    > > > 36 Laysan 1,818 19.9 + 0.3
    > 10
    > > > 37 Northampton
    > > > Bank 1,841 26.6 + 2.7
    > 10
    > > > 50 Pearl and
    > > > Hermes Reef 2,281 20.6 + 2.7
    > 11
    > > > 52 Midway 2,432 27.7 + 0.6
    > 12
    > > > 57 Unnamed 2,600 28.0 + 0.4
    > 11
    > > > 63 Unnamed 2,825 27.4 + 0.5
    > 11
    > > > 65 Colohan 3,128 38.6 + 0.3
    > 13
    > > > 65A Abbott 3,280 38.7 + 0.9
    > 13
    > > > 67 Daikakuji 3,493 42.4 + 2.3
    > 14
    > > > 69 Yuryaku 3,520 43.4 + 1.6
    > 11
    > > > 72 Kimmei 3,668 39.9 + 1.2
    > 14
    > > > 74 Koko
    > > > southern) 3,758 48.1 + 0.8
    > 14,15
    > > > 81 Ojin 4,102 55.2 + 0.7
    > 16
    > > > 83 Jingu 4,175 55.4 + 0.9
    > 17
    > > > 86 Nintoku 4,452 56.2 + 0.6
    > 16
    > > > 90 Suiko
    > > > (southern) 4,794 59.6 + 0.6
    > 18,19
    > > > 91 Suiko
    > > > (central) 4,860 64.7 + 1.1
    > 16
    > > > Data Sources:
    > > >
    > > > 1. Porter and others (1977) 12. Dalrymple and others (1977)
    > > >
    > > > 2. McDougall and Swanson (1972) 13. Duncan and Clague (1984)
    > > >
    > > > 3. Naughton and others (1980) 14. Dalrymple and Clague (1976)
    > > >
    > > > 4. Mcdougall (1964) 15. Clague and Dalrymple (1973)
    > > >
    > > > 5. Bonhommet and others (1977) 16. Dalrymple and others (1980a)
    > > >
    > > > 6. Doel and Dalrymple (1973) 17. Dalrymple and Garcia (1980)
    > > >
    > > > 7. McDougall (1979) 18. Saito and Ozima (1975)
    > > >
    > > > 8. G.B. Dalrymple 19. Saito and Ozima (1977)
    > > > (unpub. Data, 1982)
    > > >
    > > > 9. Dalrymple and others (1974) 20. Garcia and others (1986b)
    > > >
    > > > 10. Dalrymple and others(1981) 21.Garcia and others (1986a)
    > > >
    > > > 11. Clague and others (1975) 22. Garcia and Others (1987)
    > > >
    > > > Other Notes:
    > > >
    > > > "Volcano Number" refers to the number in sequence along the Hawaiian
    > Chain.
    > > > Loihi, the youngest expression of the Hawaiian hot spot is number 0,
    > Kilauea
    > > > is number 1, etc.. Note that not all volcanoes are listed in the table
    > > > (e.g., number 2 = Mauna Loa and number 4 = Hualalai); also note that
    > further
    > > > up the chain, the numbering scheme becomes more subjective.
    > > > http://www.soest.hawaii.edu/GG/HCV/haw_formation.html
    > > > accessed 10-3-03
    > > >
    > > >
    > > >
    > > > Why is there a systematic increase
    > > > in age in the direction that continental drift is moving the ocean
    > floor?
    > > >
    > > >
    > > > Can anyone, without discussing my spiritual condition, explain this data
    > > > within a global flood perspective?
    > > > **
    > > >
    > > > [note] On theology web everytime I post scientific data, they cluck
    > their
    > > > tongues about my spiritual condition.
    > >
    > >
    > >
    >
    >



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sun Oct 05 2003 - 21:11:01 EDT