Again Science Moves Towards Biblical Account

[jbander]

The book that was wrote thousands of years ago was made up shit on the fly by men that had no clue about basic science. There's no real scientific basis to argue here.

\

To be perfectly honestly,,,

Most modern first graders understand more science than probably all the authors of the bible combine. I aint joking.

You're not even human, you low life piece of rat shit, fuck off.

Poor thing did someone take your bullets away for shooting before looking. You'll get them back and then you can kill something , Bang Bang!!!!!!!!

 

[guno]

This time science says there is strong evidence of a young earth.

What sustains Earth’s magnetic field? Creationists and secularists disagree on the answer, but a recent update from Physics Today seems to lend support to the creationists’ hypothesis that the magnetic field is both recent and decaying.

Magnetic fields naturally decay with time. If Earth were billions of years old, its magnetic field should be gone by now. But it isn’t. This has forced secular scientists to propose a recharging mechanism called a dynamo that supposedly sustained Earth’s magnetic field over billions of years.

The dynamo model for Earth’s magnetic field—and that of other celestial bodies such as the sun—has been zealously guarded and nourished within the secular scientific community. In 1919 Joseph Larmor proposed that Earth’s magnetic field was caused by the permanent magnetization of materials in the earth. However, this hypothesis required modification since it could not account for the polarity reversals that Walter Elsasser observed in rock layers.4Elsasser based his model on magnetic fields produced by hot, rotating, ionized fluid rather than by permanently magnetized material. He hypothesized that the magnetic field was a self-sustaining dynamo powered by convection in Earth’s liquid outer core. His model promoted the hypothetical presence of unusually long-lived magnetic fields in astrophysical bodies and their observed polarity reversals. At least five different equations from electromagnetic, fluid transport, and heat transport theory are necessary to simulate such dynamos. But recent experiments challenge the assigned value of a key parameter in these equations.

Within the dynamo theory, the thermal conductivity of Earth’s liquid outer core is a critical factor in estimating the age of the inner core and therefore estimating how long Earth’s interior has existed in its current state. If the inner core conducts heat to the core-mantle boundary too rapidly, then the dynamo hypothesis—which depends on convective-driven heat transfer—becomes much less probable.

With our current technology, we are unable to directly measure the conductivity of Earth’s liquid core. So we are limited to models (hypotheses) of how we believe the inner core’s heat is transported through the outer core to the mantle. The heat transport equation (the rate of heat transfer) is directly proportional to the thermal conductivity of the outer core. This proportionality constant can be measured in the laboratory by experiments that seek to approximate the conditions in Earth’s outer core.

Researchers recently conducted two of these experiments. One indirectly measured the thermal conductivity of iron by measuring its electrical conductivity, and the other directly measured the thermal conductivity of iron. The former experiment measured the thermal conductivity to be 90 watts/meter-°K and the latter measured it to be 30 watts/meter-°K. If the former measurement is accurate, which geophysicist David Dobson noted is less dependent on the measurement methodology, then that would set an upper bound of 700 million years on the age of Earth’s inner core and thus Earth itself. This would pose a serious problem for belief in a 4.5-billion-year-old Earth. The efficacy of the dynamo theory when applied to our sun has also been questioned.

Perhaps a Bible-based model of a 6,000-year-old Earth with a magnetic field that experienced extreme upheaval during a worldwide flood better explains not only Earth’s magnetic field but also the others in our solar system.

https://courses.seas.harvard.edu/cl...es/Earth-dynamo/1-Wikipedia-Dynamo-theory.pdf

so much for any intellegence from the resident bible kook

 

[CrusaderFrank]

The book that was wrote thousands of years ago was made up shit on the fly by men that had no clue about basic science. There's no real scientific basis to argue here.

Kabbalah and astrophysics have more in common than you can imagine

 

[Syriusly]

The book that was wrote thousands of years ago was made up shit on the fly by men that had no clue about basic science. There's no real scientific basis to argue here.

Funny how that made up shit has been more accurate than science for the past 6,000 years.

They still can't explain where life came from, and evolution is still a theory, while divine intervention is a much more viable explanation,\.

LOL.......

 

[Syriusly]

This time science says there is strong evidence of a young earth.

What sustains Earth’s magnetic field? Creationists and secularists disagree on the answer, but a recent update from Physics Today seems to lend support to the creationists’ hypothesis that the magnetic field is both recent and decaying.

Magnetic fields naturally decay with time. If Earth were billions of years old, its magnetic field should be gone by now. But it isn’t. This has forced secular scientists to propose a recharging mechanism called a dynamo that supposedly sustained Earth’s magnetic field over billions of years.

The dynamo model for Earth’s magnetic field—and that of other celestial bodies such as the sun—has been zealously guarded and nourished within the secular scientific community. In 1919 Joseph Larmor proposed that Earth’s magnetic field was caused by the permanent magnetization of materials in the earth. However, this hypothesis required modification since it could not account for the polarity reversals that Walter Elsasser observed in rock layers.4Elsasser based his model on magnetic fields produced by hot, rotating, ionized fluid rather than by permanently magnetized material. He hypothesized that the magnetic field was a self-sustaining dynamo powered by convection in Earth’s liquid outer core. His model promoted the hypothetical presence of unusually long-lived magnetic fields in astrophysical bodies and their observed polarity reversals. At least five different equations from electromagnetic, fluid transport, and heat transport theory are necessary to simulate such dynamos. But recent experiments challenge the assigned value of a key parameter in these equations.

Within the dynamo theory, the thermal conductivity of Earth’s liquid outer core is a critical factor in estimating the age of the inner core and therefore estimating how long Earth’s interior has existed in its current state. If the inner core conducts heat to the core-mantle boundary too rapidly, then the dynamo hypothesis—which depends on convective-driven heat transfer—becomes much less probable.

With our current technology, we are unable to directly measure the conductivity of Earth’s liquid core. So we are limited to models (hypotheses) of how we believe the inner core’s heat is transported through the outer core to the mantle. The heat transport equation (the rate of heat transfer) is directly proportional to the thermal conductivity of the outer core. This proportionality constant can be measured in the laboratory by experiments that seek to approximate the conditions in Earth’s outer core.

Researchers recently conducted two of these experiments. One indirectly measured the thermal conductivity of iron by measuring its electrical conductivity, and the other directly measured the thermal conductivity of iron. The former experiment measured the thermal conductivity to be 90 watts/meter-°K and the latter measured it to be 30 watts/meter-°K. If the former measurement is accurate, which geophysicist David Dobson noted is less dependent on the measurement methodology, then that would set an upper bound of 700 million years on the age of Earth’s inner core and thus Earth itself. This would pose a serious problem for belief in a 4.5-billion-year-old Earth. The efficacy of the dynamo theory when applied to our sun has also been questioned.

Perhaps a Bible-based model of a 6,000-year-old Earth with a magnetic field that experienced extreme upheaval during a worldwide flood better explains not only Earth’s magnetic field but also the others in our solar system.

https://courses.seas.harvard.edu/cl...es/Earth-dynamo/1-Wikipedia-Dynamo-theory.pdf

Just pointing out that there is absolutely nothing in your citation which supports you 'theory'.

Oh why would that be? Oh because you are actually cutting and pasting from a Creationist website

Earth's Young Magnetic Field Revisited | The Institute for Creation Research

Why did you cut and paste and not cite the actual author?

Funny isn't it how Creationist reject science when it comes to evolution and planet formation- but love to quote(or misquote) science to support their fairy tales?

Nothing in this theory in anyway support a 6,000 year old planet.

Here is a quote from the actual scientist- whose article your uncited author misquotes:

The low electrical resistivity of iron indicates the high thermal conductivity of Earth’s core, suggesting rapid core cooling and a young inner core less than 0.7 billion years old10. Therefore, an abrupt increase in palaeomagnetic field intensity around 1.3 billion years ago11 may not be related to the birth of the inner core.

1.3 billion years ago- or 6,000 years ago.

That I believe- is about a 2,000,000 times difference.