Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: iridium layer

Expand Messages
  • Nathan Gundlach
    ... iridium ... out ... Volcanism, huh? You mean like when the Earth s plates moved, and as a result of the pressure and friction there were a lot of
    Message 1 of 13 , Feb 17, 2001
    • 0 Attachment
      --- In creation_evolution_debate@y..., "Brian Montefusco"
      <monteb27@y...> wrote:
      > --- In creation_evolution_debate@egroups.com, "stevevalinote"
      > <3x7@b...> wrote:
      > > I've been debating on another web site and the evolutionists have
      > asked me how I can refute the fossil layers when there is an
      iridium
      > layer,below which,dinosaurs are found,and all other fossils above.I
      > can't find any referance to this in creation literature.Any help
      out
      > there? SteveV
      >
      > you can't refute this. A meteroid smashed down ~65 million years
      > ago, showering irridium globally. There also was a large period of
      > vocanism around the same time, near India (decaan traps), which is
      > also an irridium source.

      Volcanism, huh? You mean like when the Earth's plates moved, and as a
      result of the pressure and friction there were a lot of volcanoes?

      > Instead of looking in creationist sources,
      > why don't you look up the actuall facts, and this is the tricky
      part
      > for ya creationists, and make your own judgement. I know this is a
      > bigf step, but i'm assuming you are an adult, so try it you might
      > just find that you can make an intelligent decision on your own.
      brian
    • Brian
      ... have ... above.I ... of ... is ... a ... It is thought that there was a large impact around India as well as the one near Mexico. The impact was right in
      Message 2 of 13 , Feb 18, 2001
      • 0 Attachment
        --- In creation_evolution_debate@y..., "Nathan Gundlach"
        <nathan_gundlach@H...> wrote:
        > --- In creation_evolution_debate@y..., "Brian Montefusco"
        > <monteb27@y...> wrote:
        > > --- In creation_evolution_debate@egroups.com, "stevevalinote"
        > > <3x7@b...> wrote:
        > > > I've been debating on another web site and the evolutionists
        have
        > > asked me how I can refute the fossil layers when there is an
        > iridium
        > > layer,below which,dinosaurs are found,and all other fossils
        above.I
        > > can't find any referance to this in creation literature.Any help
        > out
        > > there? SteveV
        > >
        > > you can't refute this. A meteroid smashed down ~65 million years
        > > ago, showering irridium globally. There also was a large period
        of
        > > vocanism around the same time, near India (decaan traps), which
        is
        > > also an irridium source.
        >
        > Volcanism, huh? You mean like when the Earth's plates moved, and as
        a
        > result of the pressure and friction there were a lot of volcanoes?

        It is thought that there was a large impact around India as well as
        the one near Mexico. The impact was right in the middle of a
        spreading center and may have lead to the decaan traps. The decaan
        traps are absolutely massive. There is enough lava in those flows to
        cover Alaska and Texas with a depth of 2000FT. So kinda is the answer
        i would give you.
        brian
        >
        > > Instead of looking in creationist sources,
        > > why don't you look up the actuall facts, and this is the tricky
        > part
        > > for ya creationists, and make your own judgement. I know this is
        a
        > > bigf step, but i'm assuming you are an adult, so try it you might
        > > just find that you can make an intelligent decision on your own.
        > brian
      • Nathan Gundlach
        ... In fact, you have completely refuted your own notion. At present, therefore, we know that either iridium or osmium is the densest known element, but the
        Message 3 of 13 , Feb 18, 2001
        • 0 Attachment
          At 08:57 PM 2/18/2001 +0000, you wrote:
          --- In creation_evolution_debate@y..., "Nathan Gundlach"
          <nathan_gundlach@H...> wrote:
          > --- In creation_evolution_debate@y..., "Brian Montefusco"
          > <monteb27@y...> wrote:
          > > --- In creation_evolution_debate@egroups.com, "stevevalinote"
          > > <3x7@b...> wrote:
          > > > I've been debating on another web site and the evolutionists
          have
          > > asked me how I can refute the fossil layers when there is an
          > iridium
          > > layer,below which,dinosaurs are found,and all other fossils
          above.I
          > > can't find any referance to this in creation literature.Any help
          > out
          > > there? SteveV
          > >
          > > you can't refute this.  A meteroid smashed down ~65 million years
          > > ago, showering irridium globally.  There also was a large period
          of
          > > vocanism around the same time, near India (decaan traps), which
          is
          > > also an irridium source.
          >
          > Volcanism, huh? You mean like when the Earth's plates moved, and as
          a
          > result of the pressure and friction there were a lot of volcanoes?

          It is thought that there was a large impact around India as well as
          the one near Mexico.  The impact was right in the middle of a
          spreading center and may have lead to the decaan traps.  The decaan
          traps are absolutely massive.  There is enough lava in those flows to
          cover Alaska and Texas with a depth of 2000FT. So kinda is the answer
          i would give you.
          brian

          In fact, you have completely refuted your own notion. "At present, therefore, we know that
          either iridium or osmium is the densest known element, but
          the data do not yet allow selection between the two." appears in the web site http://pte.8k.com/EL077.html. Have you considered the destructive effects of any body from space composed of iridium? In any case, I don't see why lots of volcanoes don't explain the evidence quite well.

          > > Instead of looking in creationist sources,
          > > why don't you look up the actuall facts, and this is the tricky
          > part
          > > for ya creationists, and make your own judgement.  I know this is
          a
          > > bigf step, but i'm assuming you are an adult, so try it you might
          > > just find that you can make an intelligent decision on your own.
          > brian


          Yahoo! Groups Sponsor

          To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
          creation_evolution_debate-unsubscribe@egroups.com

          ****Invite your friends to join the group!****
          This group is open to all and anyone can join this group by sending a blank email to:
          creation_evolution_debate-subscribe@...
          and then respondng to the email sent to them from egroups.



          Nathan Gundlach
          email: nathan_gundlach@...
          AOL Instant Messenger: NathanGundlach
          MSN Instant Messenger: nathan_gundlach@...
          Yahoo! Instant Messenger: jarjarbinksjedi
          ICQ nickname: NDG
          ICQ number: 102965545

        • steve
          ... From: Nathan Gundlach To: Sent: Saturday, February 17, 2001 5:04 PM Subject:
          Message 4 of 13 , Feb 18, 2001
          • 0 Attachment
            ----- Original Message -----
            From: "Nathan Gundlach" <nathan_gundlach@...>
            To: <creation_evolution_debate@yahoogroups.com>
            Sent: Saturday, February 17, 2001 5:04 PM
            Subject: [creation_evolution_debate] Re: iridium layer


            > --- In creation_evolution_debate@y..., "Brian Montefusco"
            > <monteb27@y...> wrote:
            > > --- In creation_evolution_debate@egroups.com, "stevevalinote"
            > > <3x7@b...> wrote:
            > > > I've been debating on another web site and the evolutionists have
            > > asked me how I can refute the fossil layers when there is an
            > iridium
            > > layer,below which,dinosaurs are found,and all other fossils above.I
            > > can't find any referance to this in creation literature.Any help
            > out
            > > there? SteveV
            > >
            > > you can't refute this. A meteroid smashed down ~65 million years
            > > ago, showering irridium globally. There also was a large period of
            > > vocanism around the same time, near India (decaan traps), which is
            > > also an irridium source.
            >
            > Volcanism, huh? You mean like when the Earth's plates moved, and as a
            > result of the pressure and friction there were a lot of volcanoes?
            >
            > > Instead of looking in creationist sources,
            > > why don't you look up the actuall facts, and this is the tricky
            > part
            > > for ya creationists, and make your own judgement. I know this is a
            > > bigf step, but i'm assuming you are an adult, so try it you might
            > > just find that you can make an intelligent decision on your own.
            > brian
            > I've checked them'and found the same unsubstantiated drivel that makes up
            most of the evolutionist theory.Just unfounded speculation and conjecture,no
            science!Since that post,Ive found debating evolution with Darwinesque types
            is like beating you're head into a wall!Unless the debate stays within their
            narrow boundries it's dismissed outright!It seems mostly to be a forum to
            prove there is no God!Nothing more!
            >
            >
            > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
            > creation_evolution_debate-unsubscribe@egroups.com
            >
            > ****Invite your friends to join the group!****
            > This group is open to all and anyone can join this group by sending a
            blank email to:
            > creation_evolution_debate-subscribe@...
            > and then respondng to the email sent to them from egroups.
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
          • Brian
            ... have ... above.I ... years ... period of ... is ... as a ... is a ... might ... makes up ... Such as? Just unfounded speculation and conjecture,no ... And
            Message 5 of 13 , Feb 18, 2001
            • 0 Attachment
              --- In creation_evolution_debate@y..., "steve" <3x7@b...> wrote:
              >
              > ----- Original Message -----
              > From: "Nathan Gundlach" <nathan_gundlach@H...>
              > To: <creation_evolution_debate@y...>
              > Sent: Saturday, February 17, 2001 5:04 PM
              > Subject: [creation_evolution_debate] Re: iridium layer
              >
              >
              > > --- In creation_evolution_debate@y..., "Brian Montefusco"
              > > <monteb27@y...> wrote:
              > > > --- In creation_evolution_debate@egroups.com, "stevevalinote"
              > > > <3x7@b...> wrote:
              > > > > I've been debating on another web site and the evolutionists
              have
              > > > asked me how I can refute the fossil layers when there is an
              > > iridium
              > > > layer,below which,dinosaurs are found,and all other fossils
              above.I
              > > > can't find any referance to this in creation literature.Any help
              > > out
              > > > there? SteveV
              > > >
              > > > you can't refute this. A meteroid smashed down ~65 million
              years
              > > > ago, showering irridium globally. There also was a large
              period of
              > > > vocanism around the same time, near India (decaan traps), which
              is
              > > > also an irridium source.
              > >
              > > Volcanism, huh? You mean like when the Earth's plates moved, and
              as a
              > > result of the pressure and friction there were a lot of volcanoes?
              > >
              > > > Instead of looking in creationist sources,
              > > > why don't you look up the actuall facts, and this is the tricky
              > > part
              > > > for ya creationists, and make your own judgement. I know this
              is a
              > > > bigf step, but i'm assuming you are an adult, so try it you
              might
              > > > just find that you can make an intelligent decision on your own.
              > > brian
              > > I've checked them'and found the same unsubstantiated drivel that
              makes up
              > most of the evolutionist theory.

              Such as?

              Just unfounded speculation and conjecture,no
              > science!

              And this is not science because?

              Since that post,Ive found debating evolution with Darwinesque types
              > is like beating you're head into a wall!Unless the debate stays
              within their
              > narrow boundries it's dismissed outright!

              Like in the realm of science.

              It seems mostly to be a forum to
              > prove there is no God!


              No wrong again. Naturalisn says absolutely nothing about there being
              no god. This is a common ploy by creationist to scare school
              boards. Naturalism mearly states that from what is observed that god
              is not neccessary to explain observed phenomanon. If god put in
              place every law, and the universe operates by god's laws, fine, there
              is no conflict at all between religion and science. But your
              standard god of the gaps and godidit is not science. That is church
              talk. Science is not anti-religion, it is the opposite end, it
              doesn't give a crap either way.


              Brian


              Nothing more!
              > >
              > >
              > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
              > > creation_evolution_debate-unsubscribe@egroups.com
              > >
              > > ****Invite your friends to join the group!****
              > > This group is open to all and anyone can join this group by
              sending a
              > blank email to:
              > > creation_evolution_debate-subscribe@e...
              > > and then respondng to the email sent to them from egroups.
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > >
            • wukwuk@aol.com
              Can we clarify the issue here? I think I hear one person saying that many moons ago giant meteorite(s) left an iridium layer below which the dinos lay. The
              Message 6 of 13 , Feb 19, 2001
              • 0 Attachment
                Can we clarify the issue here? I think I hear one person saying that many
                moons ago giant meteorite(s) left an iridium layer below which the dinos lay.
                The other side is saying that volcanoes erupting (as a result, perhaps, of
                being triggered by these meteorites) spewed this iridium layer which killed
                off the dinos.

                Either way, I don't see what difference this makes. We can't prove one or
                the other, ultimately. All we can prove is that there is an iridium layer,
                below which the dinos lay. We can paint senarios, but that's all we should
                do- and not be dogmatic about specifics we can't prove absolutely here.

                I'd also love to see this group hit the brakes now on the ad hominem attacks-
                from both sides of the fence. I'm not the moderator here, so do as you
                please, but if I wanted to hear creationists and evolutionists go for each
                other's throats, I'd join one of those useless chat rooms on AOL. Let's
                stick to the issues, not get caught up in our feelings about the other camp.
                I'm here to learn, not attack or be attacked.

                Dig
              • pumpatua@hotmail.com
                ... wrote: It is thought that there was a large impact around India as well as the one near Mexico. The impact was right in the middle
                Message 7 of 13 , May 14, 2001
                • 0 Attachment
                  --- In creation_evolution_debate@y..., Nathan Gundlach
                  <nathan_gundlach@H...> wrote:
                  It is thought that there was a large impact around India as well as
                  the one near Mexico. The impact was right in the middle of a
                  spreading center and may have lead to the decaan traps. The decaan
                  traps are absolutely massive. There is enough lava in those flows to
                  cover Alaska and Texas with a depth of 2000FT. So kinda is the answer
                  i would give you.
                  brian

                  Sorry Charlie I mean brian.

                  The Deccan trapps were depositied over millions of years when India
                  first ran into Asia. There are quite extensive deposits of dinosaur
                  fossils between ash/lava layers.

                  The K-T Boundary was due to the singular event of a 10KM sized
                  asteroid hitting the Yucatan centered on Puerto Chicxulub. 70% of all
                  life on Earth was destroyed in this one hit.

                  There are albosulely NO fossils of dinosaurs above the the K-T
                  boundary (unless you except birds).
                • orvalharmon@rocketmail.com
                  ... REPLY: Yes, you have to look at sources and evidence. Keeping your research to one side of the fence is bite you back and keep you from actually learning
                  Message 8 of 13 , Jun 1, 2009
                  • 0 Attachment
                    --- In creation_evolution_debate@yahoogroups.com, "Brian Montefusco" <monteb27@...> wrote:
                    >
                    > --- In creation_evolution_debate@egroups.com, "stevevalinote"
                    > <3x7@b...> wrote:
                    > > I've been debating on another web site and the evolutionists have
                    > asked me how I can refute the fossil layers when there is an iridium
                    > layer,below which,dinosaurs are found,and all other fossils above.I
                    > can't find any referance to this in creation literature.Any help out
                    > there? SteveV
                    >
                    > you can't refute this. A meteroid smashed down ~65 million years
                    > ago, showering irridium globally. There also was a large period of
                    > vocanism around the same time, near India (decaan traps), which is
                    > also an irridium source. Instead of looking in creationist sources,
                    > why don't you look up the actuall facts, and this is the tricky part
                    > for ya creationists, and make your own judgement. I know this is a
                    > bigf step, but i'm assuming you are an adult, so try it you might
                    > just find that you can make an intelligent decision on your own. brian
                    >
                    REPLY:

                    Yes, you have to look at sources and evidence. Keeping your research to one side of the fence is bite you back and keep you from actually learning some real and new. This is hardly respectable. I myself at least read the other sides view.

                    Orval
                  • orvalharmon@rocketmail.com
                    ... REPLY: Yes, you have to look at sources and evidence. Keeping your research to one side of the fence is bite you back and keep you from actually learning
                    Message 9 of 13 , Jun 1, 2009
                    • 0 Attachment
                      --- In creation_evolution_debate@yahoogroups.com, "Brian Montefusco" <monteb27@...> wrote:
                      >
                      > --- In creation_evolution_debate@egroups.com, "stevevalinote"
                      > <3x7@b...> wrote:
                      > > I've been debating on another web site and the evolutionists have
                      > asked me how I can refute the fossil layers when there is an iridium
                      > layer,below which,dinosaurs are found,and all other fossils above.I
                      > can't find any referance to this in creation literature.Any help out
                      > there? SteveV
                      >
                      > you can't refute this. A meteroid smashed down ~65 million years
                      > ago, showering irridium globally. There also was a large period of
                      > vocanism around the same time, near India (decaan traps), which is
                      > also an irridium source. Instead of looking in creationist sources,
                      > why don't you look up the actuall facts, and this is the tricky part
                      > for ya creationists, and make your own judgement. I know this is a
                      > bigf step, but i'm assuming you are an adult, so try it you might
                      > just find that you can make an intelligent decision on your own. brian
                      >
                      REPLY:

                      Yes, you have to look at sources and evidence. Keeping your research to one side of the fence is bite you back and keep you from actually learning some real and new. This is hardly respectable. I myself at least read the other sides view.

                      Orval
                    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.