Gradualism Versus Catastrophism Part Two

[Eaol]

http://www.thunderbolts.info/tpod/2011/ ... alism2.htm

Really?
In the recent TPotD, for some reason Stephen Smith thinks that the dinosaurs died out 135 million years ago during the Jurassic, but he should have said that they died out 65 million years agon during the Cretaceous.
Anyway, away from that point, here's what I have to say/ask:

1) Your chart is missing the Cretaceous.
2) Thus, the extinction of the dinosaurs is said to have taken place over 135 million years ago.
Already addressed this. Conduct better research.
3) His "principle of superposition" influences geologists to this day, even though it was formulated in the late 1600s.
It's the evidence that counts, not age.
4) In many ways it seems to be completely straight forward, but only now is it recognized that it was not based on experiments but on field observation.
It's been known all this time that it was based on field observation. It still works even with the Electric Universe theory because we think we know the relations of these organisms through genetics and physical similarities, and estimate when they lived based on the ages of the majority of rocks found around them (though I admit there is a LOT of room for error when you do that, the different dating methods are pretty consistent and make a logical timeline). I assure you that not all of life on Earth existed within the past couple thousand years. The problem I am seeing here is not a scientific problem, but your problem. It feels to me as if you are trying to force Creationism on reality. As can be seen with the Big Bang hypothesis, it simply doesn't work. Please support your argument with more than just a few words from a so-called 'expert'.
5) A foundation of Electric Universe theory is the flow of electricity through space and the catastrophic influence it had on planets and moons in the recent past. Whatever phenomenon it was, within the recorded history of humanity a great cataclysm engulfed the Earth. Canyons were blasted out, mountains raised, ocean basins shifted, and great swathes of plants, animals, and people obliterated in the blink of an eye.
I agree with that, but I disagree with you. I personally do NOT think that we should completely throw all of our knowledge on the history of life on Earth away, out of hand, just because you feel like jumping to the conclusion that just because there have been major planetary catastrophes in the history of life on Earth, that it MUST mean that all life on Earth existed at the same time and somehow coexisted in an environment in which they scientifically COULD NOT have coexisted (such as too-heavy dinosaurs, dragonflies with 3-foot wingspans, etcetera.). We can look at paleontological timelines and easily tell where planetary catastrophes could have taken place, and changes in gravity, oxygen concentration, and the like are all obvious to the keen observer.
6) Another problem with the superposed strata theory is speed of erosion. The current weathering rate for the continental shelves is thought to be six centimeters per thousand years. Therefore, in less than 10 million years today's continental shelves will erode away. The difficulty with that assessment is that sediments hundreds of millions of years old are on top of all the continental shelves. How can this be when that material should have all washed away in the Cenozoic era?
Don't forget that some of the material that composes the terrain is lifted to the surface through volacanic processes. Also, ask yourself where the rock and material all goes. It ends up in other places.

Points
1 - The creatures that you say lived at the same time as early man are in no way able to survive in an environment compatible with human life.
2 - Our timelines work with Electric Universe theory. We can see where planetary catastrophe probably occurred, leading to mass extinctions, whether it were electrical or otherwise (and many would appear to be electrical in nature).
3 - The Grand Canyon was electrically excavated, but that doesn't mean all the sedimentary layers were just piled-on at once. It was EXCAVATED, meaning that material was removed. This in no way contradicts the mainstream interpretation on sedimantary layers and fossil ages.
4 - The rate of erosion of continental shelves is a non-issue. The matter composing the shelves goes to other places on Earth, gradually building up in other locations, like on the sea floor or on other continental shelves. Some matter is brought to the surface at tectonic faults and volcanic eruptions.

My first post. Note that my seemingly rude behavior is really not an attempt to incite anger. If you can, please ignore it where it may be percieved. Stephen Smith, please do some better research and don't let your personal opinions get in the way.

[nick c]

http://www.thunderbolts.info/tpod/2011/ ... alism2.htm

Just a little nitpicking. But, though it does not affect the thesis, it probably needs to be corrected for the sake of accuracy.
The tpod states:

Thus, the extinction of the dinosaurs is said to have taken place over 135 million years ago.

This is incorrect. The conventional wisdom assigns the extinctions of the dinosaurs to the end of the Cretaceous period, usually at around 65 million years ago.
The problem originates in the chart of the mainstream version of the geological column at the top of the tpod. It omits the labels for the Mesozoic era, and the Cretaceous period. Leaving only the Triassic and Jurassic periods for the age of the dinosaurs.

Nick

[mathew]

Nice Catch Nick,

here is a related article-
Mass extinction comes every 62 million years, UC physicists discover

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.c ... BN6PO1.DTL

[Eaol]

That's interesting, Mathew, but can we be certain that it really means anything? They are irregular intervals, only averaged around 62 as far as I can tell.

[mathew]

Hello Eaol,

No, we cannot be certain what it means.
I think that we must take in account that
these are rough figures or averages.
other articles I have read put the cycles
at roughly, 70 million years, 140 million years
and 225 million years. There is some insight
to be had in this thread I think- cheers!

http://www.thunderbolts.info/forum/phpB ... =10&t=3883

[The Great Dog]

The Great Dog received the following from Mr. Smith:

Dear XXXX,

Thanks for pointing out the interest that the forum members are giving my latest paper. It's gratifying to see that people read the Picture of the Day.

Since there is no way to accurately date rock strata or fossils (as was the point of my article) the date assigned to the extinction of the dinosaurs was random -- as is the conventional thinking that it was 60 some odd million years ago. When I was in marketing, I would often put something in sales presentations that would provoke my audience and get them to respond. As far as I'm concerned, the dinosaurs (or any other extinct organism) could have lived up until yesterday. No one knows and any attempt to assign a date arises from ignorance.

The question of dating has been debated among the larger group of participants in this project. Everyone agrees that radiometric dating is completely unreliable.

Steve
P.S. The reference to "creationism" made me laugh out loud.

TGD

[nick c]

hi Eaol,
You really cannot have it both ways...catastrophism and uniformitarianism just do not mix.
The conventional view is based on the assumption that the geological column was created by the same processes that are observed to be in operation today. It just stands to reason that any scenario that involves planet wide catastrophes is going to wreak havoc on this interpretation.

The problem I am seeing here is not a scientific problem, but your problem. It feels to me as if you are trying to force Creationism on reality.

This is a complete misinterpetation of what Steve Smith wrote. There is absolutely nothing here in support of creationism of any sort, nor is there any implication of such. There is big difference between advocating a young Earth or creationism and presenting evidence of a recent resurfacing of the planet.

Nick