A funny mistake by ICR and example of poor scholarship

--Welcome back Joe Meert! I was beginning to worry that we lost a valuable participant here at evcforum. How was the vacation? --[Edit] - I'm still interested in your thoughts on my discrepancy illustrated in my e-mails from 11-2 & 11-4, if possible that would be fantastic.--[Edit 2] - Also, this is pretty simple I would guess but on Pg. 135 of Geodynamics - Second Edition (2002) they multiply 2 x 10⁸ km² by 65 mW m^-2 and get 1.30 x 10¹³ W. But I get the same quantity though with a power of 10. I have the feeling I will feel stupid later but I would like the correction on this point.-------------------[This message has been edited by TrueCreation, 12-22-2002]

2 x 10¹¹ m² X 65 x 10^-3W m^-2 = 1.30 x 10¹⁰ W--If you convert both don't you get still get a 10th power? I'm not challenging the book, I'm pretty sure I'm the fault here. Do I just convert the Area variable and leave the heat flow alone, or am I doing the conversion wrong?Joz: "2 * 108 * 106 * 65 * 10-3 = 1.3 * 1013" So I do the area conversion by ^6? Wouldn't it be ^3 to convert km to m?--Thanks both for the help.------------------[This message has been edited by TrueCreation, 12-23-2002]

Oh ok, I didn't think that the squared segment was relevant. Thanks------------------