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 39) Message-ID: <546@psivax.UUCP> Date: Wed, 10-Jul-85 17:28:16 EDT Article-I.D.: psivax.546 Posted: Wed Jul 10 17:28:16 1985 Date-Received: Wed, 17-Jul-85 07:40:34 EDT References: <397@iham1.UUCP> Reply-To: friesen@psivax.UUCP (Stanley Friesen) Distribution: net Organization: Pacesetter Systems Inc., Sylmar, CA Lines: 54 Summary: In article <397@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. > > 74. Meteorites are falling at a fairly steady rate onto the > earth. If this rate of influx has not been constant, it > has probably been decreasing as this meteoritic material > is purged from our solar system. Experts have therefore > expressed surprise that meteorites are only found in > relatively young sediments very near the earth's surface > [a-d]. Even the meteoritic particles in ocean sediments > are also concentrated in the top most layers [e]. If > these sediments, which average about a mile in thickness > on the continents, were deposited over hundreds of > millions of years, as evolutionists believe, many > meteorites should be well below the earth's surface. > Therefore, the sediments appear to have been deposited > rapidly. Furthermore, since no meteorites are found > immediately above the basement rocks on which these > sediments rest, these basement rocks could not have been > exposed to meteoritic bombardment for any great length of > time. > > > 75. The rate at which meteoritic dust is accumulating on the > earth is such that after five billion years, the > equivalent of over 16 feet of this dust should have > accumulated. Because this dust is high in nickel, there > should be an abundance of nickel in the crustal rocks of > the earth. No such concentration has been found--on land > or in the oceans. Consequently, the earth appears to be > young [a-c]. > Both of the above ignore various forms of recycling. Old meteorites would be eroded to produce undifferentiated sediment, and thus be unrecognizable, and much of this nickel-rich sediment would either get mixed in with other sediments, reducing the nickel concentration, or eventually be washed to the sea, where it would by finally subducted down into the mantle, beyond our ken.(certainly 16 ft of nickel dust mixed in with a mile of other sediment would be a very small proportion(aprox 1/30), exactly as observed!! - and this is based on YOUR figures above) -- Sarima (Stanley Friesen) {trwrb|allegra|cbosgd|hplabs|ihnp4|aero!uscvax!akgua}!sdcrdcf!psivax!friesen or {ttdica|quad1|bellcore|scgvaxd}!psivax!friesen