Replies

'Concentration of dissolved solids in rivers x flow of rivers x billions of years - salt deposits = saturation' I'm not sure what you're trying to say.

It's easy to measure the dissolved salt content of rivers. It's easy to calculate the total flow of rivers into the ocean. It's easy to calculate the amount of salt in salt deposits. The math proves that the earth can't be 4.5 billion years old. The oceans should be worse than the Dead Sea by now.

'No way. NASA was shocked to find rings around Jupiter, Uranus, and Neptune, because they were not thought to be stable.' And they've since modified theories of ring stability to fit the available evidence. That's the way science works.

They were right the first time. With every little collision the particles in the rings lose momentum, and they have yet to come up with an expalnation of how they could be stable for thousands of years. In fact, Jupiter's rings are nearly gone.

'Come on. It doesn't exist. Neither does the Oort Cloud. They were both theorized to try to explain where comets come from, but there's no evidence they exist. Deus ex machina. Right, Physicist?'I'm not a physicist. [I was referring to the Freeper known as Physicist. Sorry. I got confused.] I'm a political philosopher and a lawyer, by training. But I do know that the Kuiper Belt exists. Many Kuiper belt objects, including 1992 QB1, 1993 SC and 1998 WWB1 have been photographed.

Can you provide a reference?

'Name one.'Clepsydrops. Ok, you happy?

Which is a ...what.

Just don't try to impose your cults on others.

Your definition of cult must be very interesting.

The math proves that the earth can't be 4.5 billion years old.

Show me the math.

With every little collision the particles in the rings lose momentum, and they have yet to come up with an expalnation of how they could be stable for thousands of years

The gravitational pull of Shephard Satelites keep the rings relatively stable, at least in the short run (billions of years).

Can you provide a reference?

I'll provide photographs, if you want.
Here's an article about the Kuiper Belt, written for laymen. The Oort Cloud is still somewhat controversial, but over 400 Kuiper Belt objects have been detected. Here are a few pictures of them:

Which is a ...what.

Clepsydrops is an example of a transitional genus between reptiles and mammals, which I just picked out of a hat. I could list many others if you want.

It's easy to measure the dissolved salt content of rivers. It's easy to calculate the total flow of rivers into the ocean. It's easy to calculate the amount of salt in salt deposits. The math proves that the earth can't be 4.5 billion years old. The oceans should be worse than the Dead Sea by now.

So what you are saying is that even today, the salinity of the oceans continues to increase, as more and more salt is deposited. That should be a fairly simple thing to prove with empirical data. Is there any such data?

While it is true that scientists have yet to come up with satisfactory mechanisms to account for all of the removal processes of salt from the oceans, it is also true that they are fairly confident that the salinity of the oceans has remained unchanged for approximately 1.5 billion years (based on the salinity tolerance of photosynthetic bacteria found in fossils).

If true, that would be enough to discredit your theory. We might not know how the salt is being removed from the oceans, but the fact that salinity has remained stable for so long means it is in fact being removed. Therefore salinity levels couldn't plausibly be used as a method to estimate the earth's age.

It's easy to measure the dissolved salt content of rivers. It's easy to calculate the total flow of rivers into the ocean. It's easy to calculate the amount of salt in salt deposits. The math proves that the earth can't be 4.5 billion years old. The oceans should be worse than the Dead Sea by now.

This recalls a Mark Twain essay, which I excerpt here:

"In the space of one hundred and seventy-six years the Mississippi has shortened itself two hundred and forty-two miles. Therefore ... in the Old Silurian Period the Mississippi River was upward of one million three hundred thousand miles long ... seven hundred and forty-two years from now the Mississippi will be only a mile and three-quarters long. ... There is something fascinating about science. One gets such wholesome returns of conjecture out of such a trifling investment of fact."

My goodness! If the earth really were 4.5 billion years old, the Mississippi had to start out over 6 billion miles long! It would have wrapped around the earth nearly a quarter million times!!!! Nobody but a fool could believe such nonsense.