Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: BrandtMichaels

Nope, lets assume we have periods that are 10 times that amount and periods that are 1/10th that amount, hell even 100 times that amount.. you still don’t get to 6000 years, its laughable. My statements didn’t require absolute uniformity, they pointed out that if you had averaged movements of the highest amounts ever seen, its still 14+ MILLION YEARS.. some years you might get many times this amount of movement and other years likely fractions of it... but if you use the higest ever recorded to date as the average, you still get 14 Million+ years. Even by a factor of 10 you are at 1.4 Million years, hell a factor of 100, is still 140,000 years.. there is no way you get to the foolish earth is 6000 years old nonsense.

I’m using the largest movement recorded to date and extrapolating it out.. if you want to talk uniformity, you’d have to average that 2.25 inches per month against all the months over the last 100+ years of directly observable data, and millions of years of extrapolated data, we have data on the rift valley movements of micrometers per year of exact and estimates. None show any sort of plate movement anywhere on the earth that measures anywhwere close to 100 miles + per month.

Hell even if we have movements 10 or 100 times the largest amount recorded for periods of time, you still can’t get plates moving from rift to subduction over thousands of miles in MONTHS.. its laughable.

I’m actually given your argument the benefit of the doubt by using this first observed highest ever recording the average over time. When in reality the movement over time on average has been much much smaller than this when averaged out.

Plates don’t move thousands of miles in months, lets imagine if we will the forces along the subduction zone if a plate was SUBDUCTING at a rate of 100 miles per month.. which is the rate the theory you are trying to defend would require to move from rift to subduction in MONTHS even over the shortest distances between undersea rifts and continental plates.

Sorry, but there is no way you get to a few thousand year old earth by any reasonable analysis of any known observable facts.


33 posted on 11/18/2009 10:54:37 AM PST by HamiltonJay
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies ]


To: HamiltonJay
Sorry, but there is no way you get to a few thousand year old earth by any reasonable analysis of any known observable facts. That won't stop them. Who says they analyze or even know how to analyze anything? Their answer: God did it! The bible told me so!
36 posted on 11/18/2009 11:00:32 AM PST by Wacka
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies ]

To: HamiltonJay
Sorry, but there is no way you get to a few thousand year old earth by any reasonable analysis of any known observable facts. That won't stop them. Who says they analyze or even know how to analyze anything? Their answer: God did it! The bible told me so!
37 posted on 11/18/2009 11:00:50 AM PST by Wacka
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies ]

To: HamiltonJay; goodusername; ElectricStrawberry; metmom; GodGunsGuts

Well from the hydroplate theory [see link provided in post #19 earlier] Dr. Walt Brown Ph.D. extrapolates that the tectonic plates would have moved as fast as 45mph initially after the flood waters began to recede significantly. This will allow you to travel your 6,000 ‘Pacific Ocean’ miles in less than a week. ymmv. :’)


45 posted on 11/18/2009 11:40:45 AM PST by BrandtMichaels
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson