Author Topic: Moon craters FTW  (Read 3002 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Ambassador Pony

  • You keep what you kill.
  • Administrator
  • *******
  • Posts: 6858
  • Darwins +71/-4
  • Gender: Male
  • illuminatus
Moon craters FTW
« on: December 29, 2011, 10:33:12 PM »
Creationists, I read about an interesting approach to helping you understand that the earth is older than 10 thousand years. Please post in this thread if you will allow me to talk to you about it.
You believe evolution and there is no evidence for that. Where is the fossil record of a half man half ape. I've only ever heard about it in reading.

Offline jtp56

  • Graduate
  • ****
  • Posts: 406
  • Darwins +4/-66
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
  • User is on moderator watch listWatched
Re: Moon craters FTW
« Reply #1 on: December 30, 2011, 07:51:34 PM »
Hmmmm?  The moon has no atmosphere, agree?.  Please explain?  Albeit when we were about to land on the moon, scientists were worried that the amount of dust accumulation over billions of years would swallow up the Eagle; that the explanation was that, (whatever) the solar system just recently, say about 6000 years ago, entered into this amount of space dust......

Impacts on the moon wouldn't happen on a planet with a atmosphere.... Do you agree?
Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools.

For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God.

Online wright

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1798
  • Darwins +77/-1
  • Gender: Male
  • "Sleep like a log, snore like a chainsaw."
Re: Moon craters FTW
« Reply #2 on: December 30, 2011, 08:52:46 PM »
Hmmmm?  The moon has no atmosphere, agree?.  Please explain?  Albeit when we were about to land on the moon, scientists were worried that the amount of dust accumulation over billions of years would swallow up the Eagle; that the explanation was that, (whatever) the solar system just recently, say about 6000 years ago, entered into this amount of space dust......

Impacts on the moon wouldn't happen on a planet with a atmosphere.... Do you agree?

This isn't a lead in for the claim that the amount of moon dust disproves an old universe is it? Actually, that "worry" is itself a myth; check this out... http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CE/CE101.html

And of course impacts happen on bodies with atmospheres; what a silly thing to say. Ever hear of Meteor Crater in Arizona? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meteor_Crater

Here's a link to a site that keeps track of recent reports. Please note that the site itself cautions that not all of these supposed impacts are confirmed as actual meteorites... http://www.jensenmeteorites.com/New%20meteorites.htm
Live a good life... If there are no gods, then you will be gone, but will have lived a noble life that will live on in the memories of your loved ones. I am not afraid.
--Marcus Aurelius

Offline Cyberia

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 907
  • Darwins +35/-0
Re: Moon craters FTW
« Reply #3 on: December 31, 2011, 04:27:09 PM »
Ever hear of Meteor Crater in Arizona? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meteor_Crater

I've been there. I've touched the meteorite. :)
Soon we will judge angels.

Offline Ambassador Pony

  • You keep what you kill.
  • Administrator
  • *******
  • Posts: 6858
  • Darwins +71/-4
  • Gender: Male
  • illuminatus
Re: Moon craters FTW
« Reply #4 on: January 01, 2012, 04:23:25 PM »
Hmmmm?  The moon has no atmosphere, agree?.  Please explain?  Albeit when we were about to land on the moon, scientists were worried that the amount of dust accumulation over billions of years would swallow up the Eagle; that the explanation was that, (whatever) the solar system just recently, say about 6000 years ago, entered into this amount of space dust......

Impacts on the moon wouldn't happen on a planet with a atmosphere.... Do you agree?

Is this your way of expressing that you are interested in the point of my thread? I know I wrote, "post in this thread" if you'd like to hear about the approach, but your post seemed to lack any of the hallmarks of an interested person that I expected.

So, I am unsure whether to proceed with you or not.



You believe evolution and there is no evidence for that. Where is the fossil record of a half man half ape. I've only ever heard about it in reading.

Offline kaziglu bey

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 772
  • Darwins +121/-1
  • Gender: Male
  • There is no Big Brother in the sky.
Re: Moon craters FTW
« Reply #5 on: January 01, 2012, 06:17:14 PM »
Hmmmm?  The moon has no atmosphere, agree?.
Disagree. A very insubstantial atmosphere is NOT the same as no atmosphere.
Quote
Albeit when we were about to land on the moon, scientists were worried that the amount of dust accumulation over billions of years would swallow up the Eagle; that the explanation was that, (whatever) the solar system just recently, say about 6000 years ago, entered into this amount of space dust......
Huh??

Quote
Impacts on the moon wouldn't happen on a planet with a atmosphere.... Do you agree?

Wow. That is just pitiful. A: The Earth has an atmosphere. B: The Earth is subject to impacts from celestial objects. C: A very large consensus of scientists and rational people believe that a MAJOR IMPACT (as in equivalent to 100,000,000,000,000 tons of TNT) was the catalyst for the KT extinction.

Did you have a lobotomy for breakfast???
Seriously though... What would happen if the Great Green Arkleseizure didn't fram up the rammastam before the hermite curve achieved maximum nurdfurdle velocity? Now THAT would be something. AmIrite?

Offline jaimehlers

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 4845
  • Darwins +557/-17
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Moon craters FTW
« Reply #6 on: January 02, 2012, 10:08:24 AM »
I think he meant that meteors that would impact the Moon wouldn't necessarily impact a planet with a substantial atmosphere, like Earth's.  He certainly should have done a better job of actually saying that, though.

His point about the amount of dust on the moon is, unfortunately as usual, incoherent.  And also wrong.  There simply aren't that many meteors that impact either the Earth or the Moon.  The Earth gets an influx of around 25,000 tons per year; the Moon undoubtedly gets substantially less due to its smaller area and gravity, not to mention lack of an atmosphere to burn meteors into dust to begin with.  Even considering the Moon's smaller diameter, there'd still be less than a foot of dust on the Moon, even after billions of years of accumulation.

Offline kaziglu bey

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 772
  • Darwins +121/-1
  • Gender: Male
  • There is no Big Brother in the sky.
Re: Moon craters FTW
« Reply #7 on: January 02, 2012, 10:34:42 AM »
I think he meant that meteors that would impact the Moon wouldn't necessarily impact a planet with a substantial atmosphere, like Earth's.  He certainly should have done a better job of actually saying that, though.
  Nice job clarifying that. I think that if he had said it in such a way, I would agree to an extent. Certainly some of the objects that impact the moon would be burned up during entry into earth's atmosphere, and this is certainly not the case for most objects impacting the moon. However, since the moon has many substantial craters, many of the impacts that occurred on the  moon could in fact have impacted on earth. It's not quite an all or nothing situation.

Quote
His point about the amount of dust on the moon is, unfortunately as usual, incoherent.  And also wrong.  There simply aren't that many meteors that impact either the Earth or the Moon.  The Earth gets an influx of around 25,000 tons per year; the Moon undoubtedly gets substantially less due to its smaller area and gravity, not to mention lack of an atmosphere to burn meteors into dust to begin with.  Even considering the Moon's smaller diameter, there'd still be less than a foot of dust on the Moon, even after billions of years of accumulation.

I am afraid that it is unclear to me exactly what he is suggesting by the amount of dust on the moon.
Seriously though... What would happen if the Great Green Arkleseizure didn't fram up the rammastam before the hermite curve achieved maximum nurdfurdle velocity? Now THAT would be something. AmIrite?

Offline jaimehlers

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 4845
  • Darwins +557/-17
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Moon craters FTW
« Reply #8 on: January 03, 2012, 09:33:01 AM »
I am afraid that it is unclear to me exactly what he is suggesting by the amount of dust on the moon.
I agree, it was a completely incoherent point.  My guess is he hasn't read that creationists have disowned the "Moon dust" argument.

Offline Anfauglir

  • Global Moderator
  • ******
  • Posts: 6198
  • Darwins +408/-5
  • Gender: Male
Re: Moon craters FTW
« Reply #9 on: January 03, 2012, 10:29:19 AM »
Creationists, I read about an interesting approach to helping you understand that the earth is older than 10 thousand years. Please post in this thread if you will allow me to talk to you about it.

Bookmarked on the small offchance that any creationist is actually open to being challenged on their beliefs.....
Just because you've always done it that way doesn't mean it's not incredibly stupid.
Why is it so hard for believers to answer a direct question?

Offline Ambassador Pony

  • You keep what you kill.
  • Administrator
  • *******
  • Posts: 6858
  • Darwins +71/-4
  • Gender: Male
  • illuminatus
Re: Moon craters FTW
« Reply #10 on: January 03, 2012, 12:15:27 PM »
I think he meant that meteors that would impact the Moon wouldn't necessarily impact a planet with a substantial atmosphere, like Earth's.  He certainly should have done a better job of actually saying that, though.

His point about the amount of dust on the moon is, unfortunately as usual, incoherent.  And also wrong.  There simply aren't that many meteors that impact either the Earth or the Moon.  The Earth gets an influx of around 25,000 tons per year; the Moon undoubtedly gets substantially less due to its smaller area and gravity, not to mention lack of an atmosphere to burn meteors into dust to begin with.  Even considering the Moon's smaller diameter, there'd still be less than a foot of dust on the Moon, even after billions of years of accumulation.

The specific craters I would mention are the 250km or more wide ones. There are lots of them on the moon.
You believe evolution and there is no evidence for that. Where is the fossil record of a half man half ape. I've only ever heard about it in reading.

Offline Mr. Blackwell

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 2668
  • Darwins +76/-23
  • Gender: Male
Re: Moon craters FTW
« Reply #11 on: February 28, 2012, 01:18:56 PM »
I am not a creationist but I do have difficulty understanding carbon dating and other methods used to determine the amount of radioactive decay and how that explains the age of matter. At one point I was a borderline conspiracy theorist about the "tools" scientists created to validate the narrative of their world view.

I can easily slip back into that mode of thinking.

Can you help me Mr. Ambassador?
I show affection for my pets by holding them against me and whispering, "I love you" repeatedly as they struggle to break free.

Offline One Above All

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 10947
  • Darwins +284/-37
  • Gender: Male
  • Supreme ruler of the multiverse; All In One
Re: Moon craters FTW
« Reply #12 on: February 28, 2012, 01:24:58 PM »
I am not a creationist but I do have difficulty understanding carbon dating and other methods used to determine the amount of radioactive decay and how that explains the age of matter. At one point I was a borderline conspiracy theorist about the "tools" scientists created to validate the narrative of their world view.

I can easily slip back into that mode of thinking.

Can you help me Mr. Ambassador?

I'm going to try to explain it, but note that my level of understanding is not perfect either.

A radioactive substance decays at a constant rate. Each radioactive substance, once it decays, "turns into" a specific element. The latter is then measured against the total sum of the radioactive element and said byproduct. Since we know the decay rate of every radioactive substance known to man (AFAIK), we can calculate how long ago it started to decay.
The truth is absolute. Life forms are specks of specks (...) of specks of dust in the universe.
Why settle for normal, when you can be so much more? Why settle for something, when you can have everything?
We choose our own gods.

A.K.A.: Blaziken_rjcf/Lucifer/All In One.

Offline Mr. Blackwell

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 2668
  • Darwins +76/-23
  • Gender: Male
Re: Moon craters FTW
« Reply #13 on: February 28, 2012, 01:42:52 PM »
I'm going to try to explain it, but note that my level of understanding is not perfect either.

Thank you.

Quote
Since we know the decay rate of every radioactive substance known to man (AFAIK), we can calculate how long ago it started to decay.

And this is where my understanding falters specifically. Some of these things have half lives of thousands of years. We have only been privy to the scientific methods and tools to measure these things for about a century. How did we determine the half life of all this stuff in the first place?
I show affection for my pets by holding them against me and whispering, "I love you" repeatedly as they struggle to break free.

Offline One Above All

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 10947
  • Darwins +284/-37
  • Gender: Male
  • Supreme ruler of the multiverse; All In One
Re: Moon craters FTW
« Reply #14 on: February 28, 2012, 01:44:42 PM »
And this is where my understanding falters specifically. Some of these things have half lives of thousands of years. We have only been privy to the scientific methods and tools to measure these things for about a century. How did we determine the half life of all this stuff in the first place?

Extrapolation. Since it's constant, if in T seconds X amount of material decayed, then in T+A seconds, X+B amount of material will have decayed.
The truth is absolute. Life forms are specks of specks (...) of specks of dust in the universe.
Why settle for normal, when you can be so much more? Why settle for something, when you can have everything?
We choose our own gods.

A.K.A.: Blaziken_rjcf/Lucifer/All In One.

Offline Ambassador Pony

  • You keep what you kill.
  • Administrator
  • *******
  • Posts: 6858
  • Darwins +71/-4
  • Gender: Male
  • illuminatus
Re: Moon craters FTW
« Reply #15 on: February 28, 2012, 01:58:35 PM »
Jay, look at a big detailed map of the moon, specifically an area with a lot of impact craters at or above 250 km in diameter.

Lots of them eh?

Now, how many of those are there on earth? If the moon and the earth are the same age, wouldn't you expect more impacts on the larger celestial body?

Crazy as Fuckballs McGee, who posted a few months back, thinks the atmosphere burns up meteors that make such big craters. It don't, and he's stuck with evidence of an old earth.

So don't worry about egghead dating methods. Just carry a big map of the moon around with you at all times, and when some creatard gets going, slam it down and let the grade 7 science do the talking.
You believe evolution and there is no evidence for that. Where is the fossil record of a half man half ape. I've only ever heard about it in reading.

Offline Mr. Blackwell

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 2668
  • Darwins +76/-23
  • Gender: Male
Re: Moon craters FTW
« Reply #16 on: February 28, 2012, 02:14:42 PM »
Jay, look at a big detailed map of the moon, specifically an area with a lot of impact craters at or above 250 km in diameter.

Lots of them eh?

Now, how many of those are there on earth? If the moon and the earth are the same age, wouldn't you expect more impacts on the larger celestial body?

Crazy as Fuckballs McGee, who posted a few months back, thinks the atmosphere burns up meteors that make such big craters. It don't, and he's stuck with evidence of an old earth.

So don't worry about egghead dating methods. Just carry a big map of the moon around with you at all times, and when some creatard gets going, slam it down and let the grade 7 science do the talking.

[devil's advocate mode engaged]

There very well could be as many or more 250 km sized craters on earth, how would we know? What with all the weather, biomass and water moving around resettling and shifting all the time. Oh and don't forget about the earthquakes and plate tectonics.

[/devil's advocate mode disengage]

That technique might be fool proof when use against literal creationists but it's not full proof against uneducated skeptics like me ;)
I show affection for my pets by holding them against me and whispering, "I love you" repeatedly as they struggle to break free.

Offline Historicity

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 2350
  • Darwins +80/-2
  • Gender: Male
  • (Rama, avatar of Vishnu)
Re: Moon craters FTW
« Reply #17 on: February 28, 2012, 02:47:36 PM »
Jtp56's allegations have not been directly addressed.

DUST:  Some early satellites had a microphone attached to the hull to count the pings of meteor dust impacts.  This proved worthless because heating and cooling of the satellite produced creaks and pops.

An astronomer named Petterson tried another experiment in 1960.  The most dust free place on Earth must be Mt. Mona Kea, one of the extinct volcanoes of Hawaii above the snow line.  The prevailing winds have to come all the way across the Pacific.  Petterson simply put out sheets of sticky paper and later counted the dust particles.  He knew that what was there was not only meteoric dust but an unknown amount of atmospheric dust.  Anyway as he announced it there couldn't be more meteoric dust than that.  His measurement was the upper limit.

The ICR took 95% of Petterson's value and applied that to the moon.  Why 95%?  Why not 100%?  I discussed that on FidoNet and my speculation was that when (not if) they were caught they would have plausible deniability. 

Of course, we have had a lot better measurements.  One of the most reliable was when the astronauts brought back a piece of solar panel from an old lander so the dust on it could be measured.

Look, that claim is still being made: http://www.biblestudymanuals.net/k61.htm

My retelling above is just from memory.  Here are some other sources by which you can check my memory:

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/moon-dust.html
http://ncse.com/cej/4/3/space-dust-moons-surface-age-cosmos
http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/dave_matson/young-earth/specific_arguments/moon_dust.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Micrometeoroid

Petterson's upper limit was 14,000,000 tons of dust hitting the Earth every year.  Measurements made in space show real number is about 15,000.

Offline Historicity

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 2350
  • Darwins +80/-2
  • Gender: Male
  • (Rama, avatar of Vishnu)
Re: Moon craters FTW
« Reply #18 on: February 28, 2012, 03:13:43 PM »
Meteor craters on the Earth?  When I was a boy they said they had all eroded away.

Now that we've come back from the Moon and know what kind of rocks they produce we keep finding more and more.   A lot are not eroded, it's just that if they didn't fall in a desert they have trees and farms and towns making them less distinct.  One of the Apollo astronauts, Eugene Shoemaker,  when touring Germany recognized that a local cathedral was made of meteor impact rock.  (Hmmm.  Acc to Wikipedia he made the discovery in 1960 but that was the year he got his PhD for a paper on the Barringer Crater of Arizona. My source is listening to him on TV.)

That's the town of Nordlingen which everyone thought curious because it sits in a circular valley.  It's in Schwabia which the Romans called Suevia and geologists duly noted and recorded that it had an unusual kind of rock which was called suevite.

The meteor struck about 14,000,000 years ago.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/N%C3%B6rdlinger_Ries
http://www.amusingplanet.com/2008/08/nordlingen-town-inside-meteorite-crater.html
http://revolutionaryparadigm.blogspot.com/2005/04/nordlingen-germany-village-in-crater.html


There have been 178 impact craters found on the Earth so far.  Read the list at the Earth Impact Database.  The database says the Wikipedia is wrong and Nordlingen-Ries crater is 15 myo.

I just checked.   Shoemaker did discover Nordlingen-Ries crater before he went to the moon.  That's why he was the geologist most qualified to go.  Ironically the only scientist to go to the moon, only went on the last voyage.  There is now a street in Nordlingen called Eugene-Shoemaker-Platz.

He is also the Shoemaker in the name of the Shoemaker-Levy Comet that hit Jupiter.


Offline Ambassador Pony

  • You keep what you kill.
  • Administrator
  • *******
  • Posts: 6858
  • Darwins +71/-4
  • Gender: Male
  • illuminatus
Re: Moon craters FTW
« Reply #19 on: February 28, 2012, 04:07:40 PM »
Jay, look at a big detailed map of the moon, specifically an area with a lot of impact craters at or above 250 km in diameter.

Lots of them eh?

Now, how many of those are there on earth? If the moon and the earth are the same age, wouldn't you expect more impacts on the larger celestial body?

Crazy as Fuckballs McGee, who posted a few months back, thinks the atmosphere burns up meteors that make such big craters. It don't, and he's stuck with evidence of an old earth.

So don't worry about egghead dating methods. Just carry a big map of the moon around with you at all times, and when some creatard gets going, slam it down and let the grade 7 science do the talking.

[devil's advocate mode engaged]

There very well could be as many or more 250 km sized craters on earth, how would we know? What with all the weather, biomass and water moving around resettling and shifting all the time. Oh and don't forget about the earthquakes and plate tectonics.

[/devil's advocate mode disengage]

That technique might be fool proof when use against literal creationists but it's not full proof against uneducated skeptics like me ;)

Ye creatrds don't believe in plate tectonics and likewise the time constraints of that stupidity don't allow for craters to be swept away by any of the above mentioned factors.
You believe evolution and there is no evidence for that. Where is the fossil record of a half man half ape. I've only ever heard about it in reading.

Offline Cyberia

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 907
  • Darwins +35/-0
Re: Moon craters FTW
« Reply #20 on: February 28, 2012, 08:43:21 PM »
And this is where my understanding falters specifically. Some of these things have half lives of thousands of years. We have only been privy to the scientific methods and tools to measure these things for about a century. How did we determine the half life of all this stuff in the first place?

You don't have to drive your car for an hour and go 60 miles to know you're moving at 60mph.  The same is true here.  We can measure the rate and then say that in 10 hours you'll be 600 miles away.
Soon we will judge angels.

Offline Grogs

  • Undergraduate
  • ***
  • Posts: 168
  • Darwins +9/-0
Re: Moon craters FTW
« Reply #21 on: February 28, 2012, 09:11:30 PM »
Now that we've come back from the Moon and know what kind of rocks they produce we keep finding more and more.   A lot are not eroded, it's just that if they didn't fall in a desert they have trees and farms and towns making them less distinct.  One of the Apollo astronauts, Eugene Shoemaker,  when touring Germany recognized that a local cathedral was made of meteor impact rock.  (Hmmm.  Acc to Wikipedia he made the discovery in 1960 but that was the year he got his PhD for a paper on the Barringer Crater of Arizona. My source is listening to him on TV.)

Shoemaker was never an astronaut, although he apparently help train them on what kind of lunar rocks to look for. The only Apollo astronaut / geologist was Harrison Schmidt.

Offline Mr. Blackwell

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 2668
  • Darwins +76/-23
  • Gender: Male
Re: Moon craters FTW
« Reply #22 on: February 28, 2012, 11:09:05 PM »
We can measure the rate and then say that in 10 hours you'll be 600 miles away.

That assumes that traffic is moving smoothly and you are not driving through a town somewhere along the way. Are you suggesting that the rate of decay is completely isolated and unaffected by any other factors in their environment?
« Last Edit: February 28, 2012, 11:10:42 PM by jaybwell32 »
I show affection for my pets by holding them against me and whispering, "I love you" repeatedly as they struggle to break free.

Offline Cyberia

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 907
  • Darwins +35/-0
Re: Moon craters FTW
« Reply #23 on: February 28, 2012, 11:47:56 PM »
We can measure the rate and then say that in 10 hours you'll be 600 miles away.

That assumes that traffic is moving smoothly and you are not driving through a town somewhere along the way. Are you suggesting that the rate of decay is completely isolated and unaffected by any other factors in their environment?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radioactive_decay
Quote
A number of experiments have found that decay rates of other modes of artificial and naturally-occurring radioisotopes are, to a high degree of precision, unaffected by external conditions such as temperature, pressure, the chemical environment, and electric, magnetic, or gravitational fields.[citation needed] Comparison of laboratory experiments over the last century, studies of the Oklo natural nuclear reactor (which exemplified the effects of thermal neutrons on nuclear decay), and astrophysical observations of the luminosity decays of distant supernovae (which occurred far away so the light has taken a great deal of time to reach us), for example, strongly indicate that decay rates have been constant (at least to within the limitations of small experimental errors) as a function of time as well.

Recent results suggest the possibility that decay rates might have a weak dependence (0.5% or less) on environmental factors. It has been suggested that measurements of decay rates of silicon-32, manganese-54, and radium-226 exhibit small seasonal variations (of the order of 0.1%), proposed to be related to either solar flare activity or distance from the sun.[10][11][12] However, such measurements are highly susceptible to systematic errors, and a subsequent paper[13] has found no evidence for such correlations in six other isotopes, and sets upper limits on the size of any such effects.
Soon we will judge angels.

Offline Mr. Blackwell

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 2668
  • Darwins +76/-23
  • Gender: Male
Re: Moon craters FTW
« Reply #24 on: February 29, 2012, 01:08:30 AM »
Thanks for just throwing a link at me. It says "high degree of precision" which tells me that there is some wiggle room. Whoever submitted this article to wikipedia didn't even bother to offer a citation to back up his assertion. For all I know you could be the articles author.

Quote
A number of experiments have found that decay rates of other modes of artificial and naturally-occurring radioisotopes are, to a high degree of precision, unaffected by external conditions such as temperature, pressure, the chemical environment, and electric, magnetic, or gravitational fields.[citation needed]

It also says that there is a possibility that decay rates might be affected by either solar flare activity or distance from the sun. What about dark matter or something else?

This article only helps support my incredulousness. Was this your intent?

I show affection for my pets by holding them against me and whispering, "I love you" repeatedly as they struggle to break free.

Offline Cyberia

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 907
  • Darwins +35/-0
Re: Moon craters FTW
« Reply #25 on: February 29, 2012, 05:39:59 AM »
Thanks for just throwing a link at me. It says "high degree of precision" which tells me that there is some wiggle room.

This reminds me of the line from Dumb and Dumber:

Whats the odds of a guy like me and a girl like you?

I'd say 1 in a million.

So you're sayin I got a chance!


For all I know you could be the articles author.

Or GOD.     


Quote
A number of experiments have found that decay rates of other modes of artificial and naturally-occurring radioisotopes are, to a high degree of precision, unaffected by external conditions such as temperature, pressure, the chemical environment, and electric, magnetic, or gravitational fields.[citation needed]

You're afraid of links, aren't you?   Click the very next link after [citation needed].  Here it is and I'll quote it:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_nuclear_fission_reactor#Relation_to_the_atomic_fine-structure_constant
Quote
The natural reactor of Oklo has been used to check if the atomic fine-structure constant ? might have changed over the past 2 billion years. That is because ? influences the rate of various nuclear reactions. For example, 149 Sm captures a neutron to become 150 Sm, and since the rate of neutron capture depends on the value of ?, the ratio of the two samarium isotopes in samples from Oklo can be used to calculate the value of ? from 2 billion years ago.

Several studies have analysed the relative concentrations of radioactive isotopes left behind at Oklo, and most (but not all) have concluded that nuclear reactions then were much the same as they are today, which implies ? was the same too.[7][8]



It also says that there is a possibility that decay rates might be affected by either solar flare activity or distance from the sun.

And again, you missed the very next item:

Quote
However, such measurements are highly susceptible to systematic errors, and a subsequent paper[13] has found no evidence for such correlations in six other isotopes, and sets upper limits on the size of any such effects.

Here's a link to that paper: http://donuts.berkeley.edu/papers/EarthSun.pdf

Nor did you highlight the small size of variation detected: 0.5% and .1%


What about dark matter or something else?

Now you're just trying to throw down roadblocks.  You need an actual demonstrable effect before you start suggesting causes.


This article only helps support my incredulousness. Was this your intent?

You saw what you wanted to see and tried to discredit or ignore the rest.  Blatantly.
Soon we will judge angels.

Offline Quesi

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1986
  • Darwins +371/-4
  • Gender: Female
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Moon craters FTW
« Reply #26 on: February 29, 2012, 09:18:28 AM »
I like to worship the little penguins, who chew away at the side of the moon each month, as evidenced by the fact that it gets smaller and smaller each night.  I then like to worship the little dust fairies who painstakingly replace the parts that were eaten by the penguins with malleable cookie dough. 

It is clear that those of you who deny the existence of the little penguins and the blessed dust fairies are failing to acknowledge the evidence of the monthly waxing and waning of the moon.

Furthermore, I KNOW that this is all true because I have a sacred book that says it is true. 

Offline velkyn

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 15420
  • Darwins +169/-6
  • Gender: Female
  • You're wearing the juice, aren't you?"
Re: Moon craters FTW
« Reply #27 on: February 29, 2012, 10:32:36 AM »
^^^^ Heretic!  Everyone knows it's a dragon that eats away the moon.  ;D


It's pretty funny watching Jay be so intent about disbelieving radioactive dating. 
"There is no use in arguing with a man who can multiply anything by the square root of minus 1" - Pirates of Venus, ERB

http://clubschadenfreude.wordpress.com/

Offline Mr. Blackwell

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 2668
  • Darwins +76/-23
  • Gender: Male
Re: Moon craters FTW
« Reply #28 on: February 29, 2012, 12:03:36 PM »
It's pretty funny watching Jay be so intent about disbelieving radioactive dating.

You know me, always good for a laugh :)

The really funny part is that Lucifer's explanation in reply #14 was enough to answer my main question about the process. Further, after reading that reply I was already prepared to drop the whole thing when Pony told me to not ...worry about egghead dating methods.

All I said was that I did not fully understand how the process of carbon dating worked or how they came up with the rates of decay. This does not equal disbelief. I also do not understand how micro-processors work.

I know I started off in this thread saying that At one point I was a borderline conspiracy theorist about the "tools" scientists created to validate the narrative of their world view. Perhaps the current view that I actually disbelieve in the scientific method and the tools used to validate the scientific narrative springs from me saying that I can easily slip back into that mode of thinking. None of this changes the fact that Cyberia used a horrible[1] analogy to reiterate what Lucifer said about extrapolation.

Now, The thing that I find very curious is Cyberia's apparent indignation towards my questions. 




 1. Horrible only in the sense that his analogy did not represent his assurances that the rate of decay is constant. The analogy is actually quite good if you want to illustrate that there are variables that might affect the rate of decay
I show affection for my pets by holding them against me and whispering, "I love you" repeatedly as they struggle to break free.