Philip writes:
Ringo, I told you what I seem to presently *know* about PT; the past is open for speculation. I detect Percy wants me to leave this thread.
Well, yes, in a way. I believe your level of understanding is naive, but there's nothing wrong with that. The reason I think your participation in this thread will not be productive is that rather than seeking understanding of modern geology, which is what you periodically claim, you're actually determined to maintain your naivete. I haven't seen a much indication that you've comprehended what's been explained, and I don't see why there's anything to be gained from us repeating the same explanations or you reading them.
I think it's time for you do to start pulling your own share of the intellectual weight here. If you're going to pose as a seeker of knowledge, then somehow indicate to us that the knowledge offered isn't going in one ear and out the other. I'm not asking you to believe it or accept it. Just understand it so you don't keep asking the same questions.
You can't be a podiatrist without taking an incredibly healthy dose of science classes. I just looked up the undergraduate requirements for entering a medical school for podiatry, and it lists Calculus, General Biology, General Chemistry, Organic Chemistry and Physics. Just getting through organic chemistry and physics means that your ignorance is a pose or you're not really a podiatrist. It's not that studying to be a doctor would teach you any geology, but it would at least teach you how to think, and you're not showing much indication of that ability.
Sorry to be so blunt and rude, Philip, but the discrepancy between your claimed credentials and your posts is just so immense it is difficult to believe you're being honest with us, and this makes treating you with respect very difficult.
I suggest you check a basic geology book out of the library and read it. You don't have to believe it or accept it, just understand it. Humphreys and Baumgardner and Ham are wrong because radioactive decay rates cannot change dramatically without leaving copious evidence all over the place, most obviously the extinction of all life and the incineration of the planet. They're wrong because continents moving at the breakneck speed of miles per day would leave completely different evidence than today's continental motion of a few centimeters per year. They're wrong because hundreds of yards of accumulation of the skeletons of microscopic creatures as limestone cannot happen in a few days. Their ideas are all "wave your magic wand" kinds of stuff that cannot happen in the real world. Jar was off-topic but not off-target when he labeled fundamentalists and evangelicals rubes who will believe anything if it supports their religious beliefs. The evidence says the earth is very ancient. If you want to believe the earth is young, then you have to believe that God rigged the evidence, too.
Let's talk about radioactivity a little bit. Do you remember the cold fusion fiasco? Do you know one of the reasons physicist knew that Fleishman and Pons were wrong about cold fusion? Because they weren't dead. If they had produced as much fusion as they claimed, the nuclear emissions would have killed them. Just a tiny part of a tiny piece of paladium going into fusion would have killed them.
Radium is the material they used to use to make clock hands glow in the dark. Do you know how weak the radioactivity from radium is? It's very, very weak. Do you know what happened to the girls who worked in shops painting radium on clock hands? They came down with radiation diseases like cancer and leukemia.
Do you know how much uranium is in the world? I don't know, either, but it's a lot. There's even a place where the uranium concentration was so great that the uranium went critical all by itself, a natural nuclear reactor right here on the earth's surface. Geiger counters go crazy near uranium mines. The workers have to take special precautions.
Have you heard of radon? It's a radioactive gas that is contained within the earth. In rocky parts of the world like New England radon can be a significant health concern, and many homes have to take active measures to ameliorate the problem.
So there's all this radioactive material all over the world. What do you think would happen if it all suddenly became a million times more radioactive? If you think "nothing much", then think again.
Now think about the sun. The sun is powered by nuclear fusion. What would happen to the sun if fusion suddenly became a million times more powerful? Does a supernova seem reasonable to you? It should.
Now, look around you. You're here. I'm here. The earth's here. The sun's here. Obviously, radioactive decay never operated at a million times the current rate. You don't have to think hard and long about this. It's obvious.
--Percy
™ Version 4.2