Seafloor Nodules and Faulty Deep Time Reasoning

By -
Way down where it is mighty damp, the seafloor, are some things called nodules or pellets. Secular scientists insist through radiometric dating that the things take millions of years to form. Like so many other attempts to make the earth seem old, bad logic is necessary.
Nodules are thought by secularists to form over millions of years, but the narrative is more important than observed data.
Credit: NOAA Office of Ocean Exploration and Research
(Usage does not imply endorsement of site contents)
These nuggets — millions of them — are formed when exposed to seawater, but stop when covered by a certain amount of sediment. This raises questions about some of the larger nodules, because according to secularist reckoning, they shouldn't be there. Since they are there and a potential source of materials that humans need, forms of deep-sea mining are being developed. Once again, the narrative supersedes observed evidence and interferes with actual scientific research.
Pellets (or nodules) composed of various metals, such as manganese and iron, often litter the ocean floor. These nodules form when chemicals dissolved in seawater precipitate onto a small object lying on the ocean floor. Because these nodules are a potentially valuable natural resource, scientists are interested in discerning the factors that affect nodule growth rates. To that end, scientists have used computers and a method called machine learning to analyze global data regarding nodule locations. This research has recently been described in both popular-level and technical sources.
You can read the rest by clicking on "Manganese Nodules Inconsistent with Radiometric Dating".

Popular posts from this blog

Evolution and the New Atheo-Fascism

By -
Image
by Cowboy Bob Sorensen A large difficulty in researching and writing this article is that of definitions. It is important to have precise definitions when people can understand words and concepts in different ways 1 , and this article involves words with various meanings and connotations. There has been a noticeable increase in vitriol from the so-called "new" atheists (often followers of Dawkins, Harris, Dennett, Hitchens, Shermer, Nye, Krauss and others) and from evolutionists toward Christians and creationists. (I am making distinctions here because not all evolutionists are atheists, and not all Christians are creationists.) Some of us speculate that adherents of the religion of atheism 2 ,which has evolution as one of its cornerstones, feel threatened because evolution's flaws are exposed by Intelligent Design and creation science. This battle is not simply intellectual, but also spiritual. From a biblical Christian perspective, atheists realize that God e
Read more

Discerning Fake Science

By -
Image
Unfortunately, I have to keep gnawing on this bone: scientists are people, too. They make mistakes and have biases. As such, they are not the impartial arbiters of truth and science that many people believe. Many want to do science, others manipulate data for their own agendas. Since nobody is a blank slate and everyone has some kind of bias, it follows that nobody is completely impartial. Try to present creation science materials to atheists and other evolutionists, they often cry, "But that's biased! Those liars for Jesus are trying to convince us of their views!" Brilliant, Sherlock! Doesn't everyone want to present an argument to convince others of their point of view? Also, the ad hominem  is entirely irrational — not only from it being a logical fallacy, but also because biblical creationists serve a holy God who requires righteousness and hates lying. To say that we are lying to get others to believe in God is utterly vacuous. As mentioned several times before,
Read more

Misotheists Dehumanizing Christians and Creationists

By -
Image
by Cowboy Bob Sorensen  Making fun of an institution through satire and parody can be found throughout millennia to illustrate perceived absurdities of belief systems. These are used for various targets, but the most common seem to be political or religious.  C. Richard Dawkins ridiculing Ray Comfort, image credits: Flickr / David Shankbone ( public domain ), modified with FotoSketcher So why attack individuals instead of ideas ? It seems like practically everyone does it. Just ask the uncool kids in school. This is far beyond satire or persuasion . A quote commonly (but probably erroneously) attributed to Socrates is, "When the debate is over, slander becomes the tool of the loser". This child sees a useful principle in that statement. Although it is common to encounter proponents of atheistic naturalism ridiculing biblical creationists in rallies, books, videos, and so on, it is greatly intensified on social(ist) media. With the option of anonymity, attacks increase with
Read more