Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   How do scientists explain the cause of the Ice Age(s)?
Jeff Davis
Junior Member (Idle past 4918 days)
Posts: 29
Joined: 09-05-2010


Message 46 of 96 (581377)
09-15-2010 11:24 AM
Reply to: Message 45 by Dr Adequate
09-14-2010 10:55 PM


Now, that's a bet I'd love to lose. From a pilsner to a stout. It's on me!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 45 by Dr Adequate, posted 09-14-2010 10:55 PM Dr Adequate has not replied

  
Wojciech
Junior Member (Idle past 4899 days)
Posts: 6
From: Россия
Joined: 10-06-2010


Message 47 of 96 (585143)
10-06-2010 4:05 AM


Milankovitch cycles
Oribital forcing or climate change due to shifts in the Earths elliptical orbit around the sun every 100 000 year (eccentricity), from an elliptical orbital to almost circular. There is also precession where the Earth wobbles like a top. One cycle takes approx 26ka. Finally there is obliquity which involves the tilt of the earth. The Earth currently has an axial tilt of about 23.4 and does vary from 22.1 and 24.5. As you probably know it is the tilt of the Earth which provides us with the seasons by varying the insolation or solar radiation (sunlight) striking the Earth because of the angle it comes in at. This cycle is about 43ka. These 3 cycles put together are called the Milankovitch cycles and correspond extremely with with the major glacial and warming periods. It does not explain all climate change such as in the Younger Dryas where a warm period about 12 000 years ago (between 10,800 and 9,500 BC) was interupted by a cold snap which lasted
about 1300 years. An asteroid impact was believed responsible for this. Other cooling periods have been caused by volcanic activity such as the Siberian Traps where volcanic activity lasted over a million years flooding most of what we call Siberia in basalt a volcanic rock.
Edited by VenomFangX, : Part badly written, seemed I was only talking about one of the cycles and not all of them.

  
Eye-Squared-R
Member (Idle past 2616 days)
Posts: 68
Joined: 12-08-2009


Message 48 of 96 (600715)
01-16-2011 5:00 PM
Reply to: Message 36 by Bikerman
08-01-2010 5:16 PM


Re: Professional Publishable Debate Opportunity
Hello Bikerman.
Bikerman writes:
RE : Thread on the honesty (or otherwise) of creationists
Did you start this thread? I would be very interested in joining in - 15 years debating creationists, sometimes in public arenas as well as on the internet, has given me some knowledge and experience which I'll share.....
Yes, Zenmonkey started that thread Ignorant, stupid or insane? (Or maybe wicked?)!
And here is your opportunity for debating a creationist: Professional Debate: Scientific Evidence for/against Evolution Any Takers?!
Please read the OP first.
There are specific disciplines available for your commitment as detailed in Message 77 through Message 80
All the Best,
Eye-Squared-R

This message is a reply to:
 Message 36 by Bikerman, posted 08-01-2010 5:16 PM Bikerman has not replied

  
Robert Byers
Member (Idle past 4368 days)
Posts: 640
From: Toronto,canada
Joined: 02-06-2004


Message 49 of 96 (605761)
02-22-2011 12:07 AM


This YEC creationist says the ice ages should more accurately be seen as a freezing rain age.
I see this age as coming about the years 2100 BC to 1900 BC and lasting till about 1700 BC or so.
i speculate there was a great upheaval some centuries after the flood , these dates, and part of it was a great volcanic outporing up and down the spine of North/South America and elsewhere.
This changed the climate, like a nuclear winter, and brought about the cool and rainy climate that we now call the ice age.
I believe ice cores and the general ice depth in northern parts was rather quickly done by endless rain cycles as opposed to annual snow cycles.
So there was not a movement from migrating ice but simply frozen water covering everywhere.
Then the ice melted rapidly in great floods and all was over and nothing happened since.
Its just been wrong interpretations about basic facts and processes from those not first accepting biblical boundaries.

Replies to this message:
 Message 50 by Coyote, posted 02-22-2011 12:13 AM Robert Byers has not replied
 Message 51 by Dr Adequate, posted 02-22-2011 12:26 AM Robert Byers has replied
 Message 52 by jar, posted 02-22-2011 10:17 AM Robert Byers has not replied
 Message 53 by Taq, posted 02-22-2011 12:42 PM Robert Byers has replied
 Message 54 by bluescat48, posted 02-22-2011 1:22 PM Robert Byers has replied

  
Coyote
Member (Idle past 2106 days)
Posts: 6117
Joined: 01-12-2008


Message 50 of 96 (605767)
02-22-2011 12:13 AM
Reply to: Message 49 by Robert Byers
02-22-2011 12:07 AM


Its just been wrong interpretations about basic facts and processes from those not first accepting biblical boundaries.
And when "basic facts and processes" show the bible to be horribly wrong?
What then?
For example, your comments:
I see this age as coming about the years 2100 BC to 1900 BC and lasting till about 1700 BC or so.
i speculate there was a great upheaval some centuries after the flood , these dates, and part of it was a great volcanic outporing up and down the spine of North/South America and elsewhere.
This changed the climate, like a nuclear winter, and brought about the cool and rainy climate that we now call the ice age.
...are hopelessly wrong.
Now what do you do? Just ignore facts and pretend the bible is accurate?
Or is this where the "interpretation" comes into play?
Edited by Coyote, : Add missing word

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 49 by Robert Byers, posted 02-22-2011 12:07 AM Robert Byers has not replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 284 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 51 of 96 (605772)
02-22-2011 12:26 AM
Reply to: Message 49 by Robert Byers
02-22-2011 12:07 AM


This YEC creationist says the ice ages should more accurately be seen as a freezing rain age.
I see this age as coming about the years 2100 BC to 1900 BC and lasting till about 1700 BC or so.
i speculate there was a great upheaval some centuries after the flood , these dates, and part of it was a great volcanic outporing up and down the spine of North/South America and elsewhere.
This changed the climate, like a nuclear winter, and brought about the cool and rainy climate that we now call the ice age.
I believe ice cores and the general ice depth in northern parts was rather quickly done by endless rain cycles as opposed to annual snow cycles.
So there was not a movement from migrating ice but simply frozen water covering everywhere.
Then the ice melted rapidly in great floods and all was over and nothing happened since.
Its just been wrong interpretations about basic facts and processes from those not first accepting biblical boundaries.
But how do you explain the glacial striations, the moraines, the drumlins, the erratic boulders, the cirques, the roches moutonnes? Their existence, I think, falls under the heading of "basic facts".

This message is a reply to:
 Message 49 by Robert Byers, posted 02-22-2011 12:07 AM Robert Byers has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 55 by Robert Byers, posted 02-22-2011 7:36 PM Dr Adequate has replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 52 of 96 (605811)
02-22-2011 10:17 AM
Reply to: Message 49 by Robert Byers
02-22-2011 12:07 AM


Robert Byers writes:
This YEC creationist says the ice ages should more accurately be seen as a freezing rain age.
I see this age as coming about the years 2100 BC to 1900 BC and lasting till about 1700 BC or so.
i speculate there was a great upheaval some centuries after the flood , these dates, and part of it was a great volcanic outporing up and down the spine of North/South America and elsewhere.
This changed the climate, like a nuclear winter, and brought about the cool and rainy climate that we now call the ice age.
I believe ice cores and the general ice depth in northern parts was rather quickly done by endless rain cycles as opposed to annual snow cycles.
So there was not a movement from migrating ice but simply frozen water covering everywhere.
Then the ice melted rapidly in great floods and all was over and nothing happened since.
Its just been wrong interpretations about basic facts and processes from those not first accepting biblical boundaries.
Where is your supporting evidence?

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 49 by Robert Byers, posted 02-22-2011 12:07 AM Robert Byers has not replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 9972
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.5


Message 53 of 96 (605844)
02-22-2011 12:42 PM
Reply to: Message 49 by Robert Byers
02-22-2011 12:07 AM


Its just been wrong interpretations about basic facts and processes from those not first accepting biblical boundaries.
It would really help if you would present evidence which would demonstrate that these interpretations are wrong. Simply making up a story is not a valid way to falsify scientific interpretations that are based on literal mountains of evidence.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 49 by Robert Byers, posted 02-22-2011 12:07 AM Robert Byers has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 56 by Robert Byers, posted 02-22-2011 7:47 PM Taq has replied

  
bluescat48
Member (Idle past 4189 days)
Posts: 2347
From: United States
Joined: 10-06-2007


Message 54 of 96 (605850)
02-22-2011 1:22 PM
Reply to: Message 49 by Robert Byers
02-22-2011 12:07 AM


This YEC creationist says the ice ages should more accurately be seen as a freezing rain age.
I see this age as coming about the years 2100 BC to 1900 BC and lasting till about 1700 BC or so.
i speculate there was a great upheaval some centuries after the flood , these dates, and part of it was a great volcanic outporing up and down the spine of North/South America and elsewhere.
This changed the climate, like a nuclear winter, and brought about the cool and rainy climate that we now call the ice age.
I believe ice cores and the general ice depth in northern parts was rather quickly done by endless rain cycles as opposed to annual snow cycles.
So there was not a movement from migrating ice but simply frozen water covering everywhere.
Then the ice melted rapidly in great floods and all was over and nothing happened since.
Its just been wrong interpretations about basic facts and processes from those not first accepting biblical boundaries.
If this had occurred, why doesn't your book mention these floods which would have occurred in such places as Egypt, Canaan & Mesopotamia, where the Biblical stories take place.

There is no better love between 2 people than mutual respect for each other WT Young, 2002
Who gave anyone the authority to call me an authority on anything. WT Young, 1969
Since Evolution is only ~90% correct it should be thrown out and replaced by Creation which has even a lower % of correctness. W T Young, 2008

This message is a reply to:
 Message 49 by Robert Byers, posted 02-22-2011 12:07 AM Robert Byers has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 57 by Robert Byers, posted 02-22-2011 7:48 PM bluescat48 has replied

  
Robert Byers
Member (Idle past 4368 days)
Posts: 640
From: Toronto,canada
Joined: 02-06-2004


Message 55 of 96 (605924)
02-22-2011 7:36 PM
Reply to: Message 51 by Dr Adequate
02-22-2011 12:26 AM


Dr Adequate writes:
This YEC creationist says the ice ages should more accurately be seen as a freezing rain age.
I see this age as coming about the years 2100 BC to 1900 BC and lasting till about 1700 BC or so.
i speculate there was a great upheaval some centuries after the flood , these dates, and part of it was a great volcanic outporing up and down the spine of North/South America and elsewhere.
This changed the climate, like a nuclear winter, and brought about the cool and rainy climate that we now call the ice age.
I believe ice cores and the general ice depth in northern parts was rather quickly done by endless rain cycles as opposed to annual snow cycles.
So there was not a movement from migrating ice but simply frozen water covering everywhere.
Then the ice melted rapidly in great floods and all was over and nothing happened since.
Its just been wrong interpretations about basic facts and processes from those not first accepting biblical boundaries.
But how do you explain the glacial striations, the moraines, the drumlins, the erratic boulders, the cirques, the roches moutonnes? Their existence, I think, falls under the heading of "basic facts".
No problem and in fact these days they are used to demonstrate that it was all from mega floods and not slow moving glaciers.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 51 by Dr Adequate, posted 02-22-2011 12:26 AM Dr Adequate has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 59 by Taq, posted 02-22-2011 7:49 PM Robert Byers has replied
 Message 60 by Dr Adequate, posted 02-22-2011 8:24 PM Robert Byers has not replied

  
Robert Byers
Member (Idle past 4368 days)
Posts: 640
From: Toronto,canada
Joined: 02-06-2004


Message 56 of 96 (605928)
02-22-2011 7:47 PM
Reply to: Message 53 by Taq
02-22-2011 12:42 PM


Taq writes:
Its just been wrong interpretations about basic facts and processes from those not first accepting biblical boundaries.
It would really help if you would present evidence which would demonstrate that these interpretations are wrong. Simply making up a story is not a valid way to falsify scientific interpretations that are based on literal mountains of evidence.
The evidence is the same evidence as used now to draw conclusions. Just a better interpretation is given here.
There are only basic pieces of evidence in these things actually.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 53 by Taq, posted 02-22-2011 12:42 PM Taq has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 58 by Taq, posted 02-22-2011 7:48 PM Robert Byers has not replied

  
Robert Byers
Member (Idle past 4368 days)
Posts: 640
From: Toronto,canada
Joined: 02-06-2004


Message 57 of 96 (605929)
02-22-2011 7:48 PM
Reply to: Message 54 by bluescat48
02-22-2011 1:22 PM


bluescat48 writes:
This YEC creationist says the ice ages should more accurately be seen as a freezing rain age.
I see this age as coming about the years 2100 BC to 1900 BC and lasting till about 1700 BC or so.
i speculate there was a great upheaval some centuries after the flood , these dates, and part of it was a great volcanic outporing up and down the spine of North/South America and elsewhere.
This changed the climate, like a nuclear winter, and brought about the cool and rainy climate that we now call the ice age.
I believe ice cores and the general ice depth in northern parts was rather quickly done by endless rain cycles as opposed to annual snow cycles.
So there was not a movement from migrating ice but simply frozen water covering everywhere.
Then the ice melted rapidly in great floods and all was over and nothing happened since.
Its just been wrong interpretations about basic facts and processes from those not first accepting biblical boundaries.
If this had occurred, why doesn't your book mention these floods which would have occurred in such places as Egypt, Canaan & Mesopotamia, where the Biblical stories take place.
The bible deals only with basic info for its agenda.
Those lands would not be close to the action here.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 54 by bluescat48, posted 02-22-2011 1:22 PM bluescat48 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 62 by bluescat48, posted 02-23-2011 1:01 AM Robert Byers has replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 9972
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.5


Message 58 of 96 (605930)
02-22-2011 7:48 PM
Reply to: Message 56 by Robert Byers
02-22-2011 7:47 PM


The evidence is the same evidence as used now to draw conclusions. Just a better interpretation is given here.
And this evidence is . . .? And your interpretation is better because . . .?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 56 by Robert Byers, posted 02-22-2011 7:47 PM Robert Byers has not replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 9972
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.5


Message 59 of 96 (605932)
02-22-2011 7:49 PM
Reply to: Message 55 by Robert Byers
02-22-2011 7:36 PM


No problem and in fact these days they are used to demonstrate that it was all from mega floods and not slow moving glaciers.
How do mega floods produce these features?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 55 by Robert Byers, posted 02-22-2011 7:36 PM Robert Byers has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 64 by Robert Byers, posted 02-23-2011 10:51 PM Taq has replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 284 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 60 of 96 (605945)
02-22-2011 8:24 PM
Reply to: Message 55 by Robert Byers
02-22-2011 7:36 PM


No problem and in fact these days they are used to demonstrate that it was all from mega floods and not slow moving glaciers.
Well go on then.
Please "demonstrate" how these effects, which are never produced by floods and are always produced by glaciers, were on this occasion produced by floods and not by glaciers.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 55 by Robert Byers, posted 02-22-2011 7:36 PM Robert Byers has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024