Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site psivax.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxt!houxm!mtuxo!mtunh!mtung!mtunf!ariel!vax135!cornell!uw-beaver!tektronix!hplabs!sdcrdcf!psivax!friesen From: friesen@psivax.UUCP (Stanley Friesen) Newsgroups: net.origins Subject: Re: The Scientific Case for Creation: (Part 38) Message-ID: <545@psivax.UUCP> Date: Wed, 10-Jul-85 17:20:45 EDT Article-I.D.: psivax.545 Posted: Wed Jul 10 17:20:45 1985 Date-Received: Wed, 17-Jul-85 07:42:54 EDT References: <396@iham1.UUCP> Reply-To: friesen@psivax.UUCP (Stanley Friesen) Distribution: net Organization: Pacesetter Systems Inc., Sylmar, CA Lines: 61 Summary: In article <396@iham1.UUCP> rck@iham1.UUCP (Ron Kukuk) writes: > > THE SCIENTIFIC CASE FOR CREATION: 116 CATEGORIES OF EVIDENCE > >II. (Astronomical Sciences): THE UNIVERSE, THE SOLAR SYSTEM, AND LIFE > WERE RECENTLY CREATED. > > C. MOST DATING TECHNIQUES INDICATE THAT THE EARTH AND SOLAR > SYSTEM ARE YOUNG. > > 70. The occurrence of abnormally high gas and oil pressures > within relatively permeable rock implies that these fluids > were formed or encased less than 10,000 years ago. If > these hydrocarbons had been trapped OVER 10,000 years ago, > leakage would have dropped the pressure to a level far > below what it is today [a]. > What? Leakage? Where? Why? I see no reason why a geological formation in situ must necessarily leak contained fluids! Why don't you read the article on "fossil" natural reactors in Scientific American for a discussion of just how stable some formations can be! > > 71. Over twenty-seven billion tons of river sediments are > entering the oceans each year. Probably, this rate of > sediment transport was even greater in the past as the > looser top soil was removed and as erosion reduced the > earth's relief. But even if erosion has been constant, the > sediments that are now on the ocean floor would have > accumulated in only 30 million years. Therefore, the > continents and oceans cannot be one billion years old [a]. > As has been pointed out, this ignores various forms of recycling, such as subduction and orogony. It is also an example of the extrapolation fallacy. The error is this, the further a trend is extrapolated beyond its basis in measurement, the less reliable it is. Thus current rates of sedimentation are a poor estimate of such rates more than a few thousand years ago. And the current rates may be either higher *or* lower than past rates. > > 72. The continents are being eroded at a rate that would level > them in much less than twenty-five million years [a,b]. > However, evolutionists believe that the fossils of land > animals and plants that are at high elevations have been > there for over 300 million years. > > > 73. The rate at which elements such as copper, gold, tin, > lead, silicon, mercury, uranium, and nickel are entering > the oceans is very rapid when compared with the small > quantities of these elements already in the oceans. There > is no known means by which large amounts of these elements > can precipitate out of the oceans. Therefore, the oceans > must be very much younger than a million years. > Recycling and invalid extrapolation again! -- Sarima (Stanley Friesen) {trwrb|allegra|cbosgd|hplabs|ihnp4|aero!uscvax!akgua}!sdcrdcf!psivax!friesen or {ttdica|quad1|bellcore|scgvaxd}!psivax!friesen