Re: Just a few small questions I hope.


"Ernest Major" <{$to$}@meden.demon.co.uk> skrev i melding
news:2lz6BRK182DGFwf+@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In message <460f64b1$0$17049$bf4948fe@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
"Zuca@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <Zuca@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes
I've been reading through what creationists call "the evolution
cruncher" which is found on here : http://tinyurl.com/2mnsdc

Now most things are so easily refuted that even I can do it.. But I
have a few I really dont know anything about and couldnt really find
any answer to either.. I'm going to post those here and I hope that
someone here can give me a good explenation as to why the assumptions
made on that site are false.
Thank you in advance.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


5 - HYDROGEN IN UNIVERSE-According to one theory of solar energy,
hydrogen is constantly being converted into helium as stars shine. But
hydrogen cannot be made by converting other elements into it. *Fred
Hoyle, a leading astronomer, maintains that, if the universe were as
old as Big Bang theorists contend, there should be little hydrogen in
it. It would all have been transformed into helium by now. Yet stellar
spectra reveal an abundance of hydrogen in the stars, therefore the
universe must be youthful.

A citation for Fred Hoyle claiming this would be desirable. This claim
effectively claims that our knowledge of stellar astrophysics is
completely wrong - we've got 12 billion year old stars still ticking
away, so it seems rather obvious that the rate of conversion of hydrogen
to helium isn't a great as claimed.


It might perhaps be worth mentioning that Fred Hoyle did not accept the
Big-Bang theory.
He advocated a steady-state model of the universe, attributing the expansion
of the universe to continous creation of matter
He also actully claimed that the famous Solnhofen Archeopteryx fossil was a
hoax even before he had seen it, and extensive work was done afterwards to
veryfy beyond any reasonable doubt that it really was what palaeontogists
alread had determined that it was.

He claimed that Archeopteryx was a dinosaur, and that the extinction of the
dinosaurs was caused by massive, lethal infections initiated from space. A
little Googling probably will yield more about the ideas presented by the
companions Hoyle and Wickramasinghe. The steady-state theory seems not to be
viable, and we need to see the rather bizarre ideas they propagated in light
of their fascination with that theory.


9 - COMET WATER-It has only been in recent years that scientists have
discovered that comets are primarily composed of water, and that many
small comets are continually striking the earth. Yet each strike adds
more water to our planet. Scientific evidence indicates that, if the
earth was billions of years old, our oceans would be filled several
times over with water.

Find out the numbers, and do the calculations. Note that the hypothesis
of a high flux of microcomets striking the atmosphere does not command
wide acceptance.

(5) If any change occurred in past ages in the blanket of atmosphere
surrounding our planet, this would greatly affect the clocks in
radioactive minerals.

Cosmic rays, high-energy mesons, neutrons, electrons, protons, and
photons enter our atmosphere continually. These are atomic particles
traveling at speeds close to that of the speed of light. Some of these
rays go several hundred feet underground and 1400 meters [1530 yards]
into the ocean depths. The blanket of air covering our world is
equivalent to 34 feet [104 dm] of water, or 1 meter [1.093 yd]
thickness of lead. If at some earlier time this blanket of air was more
heavily water-saturated, it would produce a major change-from the
present rate,-in the atomic clocks within radioactive minerals. Prior
to the time of the Flood, there was a much greater amount of water in the
air.


1) There wasn't a Noachian Flood.
2) We have observations of past climates; from this we can deduce that
there wasn't a much greater amount of water vapour in the air (water
would be eliminated rapidly by gravity). This takes us back at least a
billion years; before the vast majority of dates from radiodating.
3) This much greater amount of water would have made the Earth lethally
hot.
4) To the degree that the flux of high energy particles interferes with
decay chains (if it was significant do you think physicists would have
neglected it) the extra atmospheric shielding would increase the
accuracy of dating.
5) There's a bait-and-switch in the argument; of the list of particles
they give, essentially none go several hundred feet underground; they
omitted from the list the one class - neutrinos - which do penetrate the
Earth, but neutrinos interact so weakly that you'd need, finger in the
air, a supernova close enough to sterilize the Earth to get a sufficient
flux to matter.


Thats it really for now.
I'm also discussing with a creationists who keeps repeating that there
was never enough time to evolve from single celled organism to a full
human.. (I managed to convince here that apes are humans, and humans
are apes, and that there are positive mutations that add data, so she
doesnt seem to be a lost case)

Hereditable morphological change has been observed occurring in the wild
and in the laboratory at rates considerable in excess of those required
by the fossil record. The diversity of dogs and Brassicas would seem to
preclude the argument that the rate stalls when the variation present in
the population is exhausted.

How could I best explain that evolution can explain the whole path that
leads up to the human life, I want to be as clear as possible and at
the same time as simple as possible, she's not stupid and knows some
scientific words and the meaning of a lot of terms..

Any help would be humongously appreciated.

Thanks in advance.

Zuca


--
Alias Ernest Major



.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Celebrate Evolution! today
    ... hanging the earth upon nothing." ... the vapor condenses to form water ... led scientists to theorize that the material universe did indeed have ... I thought God created it in six days? ...
    (misc.news.internet.discuss)
  • Re: Just a few small questions I hope.
    ... Yet each strike adds more water to our planet. ... Scientific evidence indicates that, if the earth was billions of years old, our oceans would be filled several times over with water. ... The blanket of air covering our world is ... Hereditable morphological change has been observed occurring in the wild and in the laboratory at rates considerable in excess of those required by the fossil record. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Just a few small questions I hope.
    ... Yet each strike adds more water to our planet. ... Scientific evidence indicates that, if the earth was billions of years old, our oceans would be filled several times over with water. ... The blanket of air covering our world is ... We have observations of past climates; from this we can deduce that there wasn't a much greater amount of water vapour in the air. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: BC, 21 Jan 08 - You know things have really changed when...
    ... universe had a beginning, it began ex nihilo. ... earth" or "the skies and the earth". ... at least water already existed. ... is that water already existed at the beginning of creation; ...
    (rec.arts.comics.strips)
  • Alchemy
    ... In alchemy all things are thought to be composed of either Fire, Water, ... Earth, or Air... ... Gasses are obviously air. ...
    (sci.physics)