Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,820 Year: 3,077/9,624 Month: 922/1,588 Week: 105/223 Day: 3/13 Hour: 1/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Earth science curriculum tailored to fit wavering fundamentalists
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1405 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 31 of 1053 (750368)
02-14-2015 3:49 PM
Reply to: Message 15 by ThinAirDesigns
02-13-2015 9:14 PM


dendrochronology 101
I've got truck, chain saw and know how to drive to the forest. As far as a known age, I'll have to think of a way to work on that one (but I will).
Do you have any areas that were logged? Perhaps the landowner will allow you to cut trees in return for cutting and stacking it for firewood or some other task. I am going to assume you have some areas that were logged and can find some historical data on when it happened. I would also assume that the field was replanted with one species ...
You can probably find dates for when those areas were cleared. It would be cool to then approach the question from trying to date when the area was logged, what evidence you have and how reliable is it.
Cut a small tree (6"-8" diameter) and discuss why there are rings (better if deciduous trees are used as it should be pretty obvious that it is difficult for the tree to grow when it has no leaves).
So you can approximate the age of the tree when cut from the rings, you know when it was cut: can you approximate when it sprouted?
Then take a cloth tape (sewing tape) and measure circumferences of the tree at different heights and see if they can predict what they will find when you cut 10 ft up and 20 ft up, are the rings thinner or are there less of them? What if they are fewer -- why would that happen?
Can you tell you how old the tree was when the tree reached those different heights?
If there are less of them which ones are missing, the innermost or the outermost? How can you tell? Where does a new ring form?
Draw a line through the center and discuss taking cores along the line to count and measure the rings.
Lay a piece of paper along the line and mark off the outer edges of the dark part of the ring. Discuss why these are more distinct than other edges.
Start at the center and measure the thickness, if the next one is thicker mark a + over the edge tik, if narrower mark a - over the tik, if the same mark it 0. Compare the next one to this ring (not the center one). Continue for whole radius. Do the same for the 10 and 20 ft heights. You should have a pattern something like
++-o+oo-+++
Can you match the patterns for the different heights?
Take a five tik pattern and a 10 tik pattern of the bottom section and match that against the upper rings. Are there multiple places you can match the patterns? Is the number of multiple matchups affected by how many tik marks are compared? Can you use the patterns to verify that the outer ring is the same at each height?
Discuss what causes these patterns to form -- would the same patterns be in other trees in the field?
Discuss why you can't use the actual ring thickness for comparisons. How would you improve the data to reflect smaller variation in widths?
Draw a line that misses the center and discuss how that affects the data, what you know and don't know from a core along that line. Discuss the concepts of minimum age vs actual age.
Measure the circumference of various trees and see if you can decide which trees should be older.
Do you have Boy Scouts? I worked with some SDA troops in Michigan. They have techniques for estimating the heights of trees. What would finding the tallest tree tell you about the relative age of the tree? Does height correlate with circumference?
It would be cool to estimate the height of a tree by two different methods, cut it down and check the estimate, and then discuss the relative accuracy of the estimates.
What would finding the oldest tree in the field tell you about when the field was cleared?
I would expect trees from a logged area to be ~100 years old, maybe 200 if you are lucky, so you won't be challenging the 6,000 year age with this work, and you can be up front with that, especially if you can get historical data of when the field was last cleared
Enjoy
A good resource is: http://web.utk.edu/~grissino/
Henri D. Grissino-Mayer, Department of Geography, The University of Tennessee
Dr. Grissino-Mayer is very approachable and has exchanged emails with me.
btw -- should have done this last time
... as you are new here, some posting tips:
type [qs]quotes are easy[/qs] and it becomes:
quotes are easy
and you can type [qs=RAZD]quotes are easy[/qs] and it becomes:
RAZD writes:
quotes are easy
or type [quote]quotes are easy[/quote] and it becomes:
quote:
quotes are easy
also check out (help) links on any formatting questions when in the reply window.
For other formatting tips see Posting Tips
For a quick overview see EvC Forum Primer
If you have problems with replies see Report Discussion Problems Here 3.0

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAmerican☆Zen☯Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 15 by ThinAirDesigns, posted 02-13-2015 9:14 PM ThinAirDesigns has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 32 by ThinAirDesigns, posted 02-14-2015 4:09 PM RAZD has replied
 Message 72 by ThinAirDesigns, posted 02-16-2015 4:22 PM RAZD has replied

  
ThinAirDesigns
Member (Idle past 2374 days)
Posts: 564
Joined: 02-12-2015


Message 32 of 1053 (750369)
02-14-2015 4:09 PM
Reply to: Message 31 by RAZD
02-14-2015 3:49 PM


Re: dendrochronology 101
Awesome RAZD. Thanks.
I am very near large State and National forests and I strongly suspect that at the ranger stations I could get some cooperation regarding this project. They should know logged areas, dates etc.
It's also interesting that you bring up UTK. Through research I had read that they have a rather comprehensive dendrochronology program (The Laboratory of Tree Ring Science) and had already planned on attempting contact with them to see what sort of information they might help with. They are only about two hours away from me. Thanks for that contact.
I will spend more time with your 101 post and will formulate a few questions.
Thanks again.
JB

This message is a reply to:
 Message 31 by RAZD, posted 02-14-2015 3:49 PM RAZD has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 35 by RAZD, posted 02-14-2015 4:56 PM ThinAirDesigns has not replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1405 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 33 of 1053 (750370)
02-14-2015 4:46 PM
Reply to: Message 19 by ThinAirDesigns
02-13-2015 9:53 PM


One obvious one is gathering handfull of dirt, some sand and gravel, stick them in a something like a spaghetti jar, top up with water, shake the whole thing up and leave it overnight to settle.
YES! I've been thinking of that one. I mean, how hard is it to follow that lesson? I get that some things in science are hard, but after a few Mason jar lessons, how difficult is it to see that all layers don't come from one event?
Then throw in some clay, diatomaceous earth and fine silt. Take pictures every hour or so with consistent lighting and a white background and see if you can discern different degrees of turbidity. (look up tubidity meter)
How long does it take for the clay to settle into a noticeable layer?
What happens when you add salt?
What would happen to the clay layer formation if sand and gravel kept being added?
Enjoy

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAmerican☆Zen☯Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 19 by ThinAirDesigns, posted 02-13-2015 9:53 PM ThinAirDesigns has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 34 by ThinAirDesigns, posted 02-14-2015 4:50 PM RAZD has seen this message but not replied

  
ThinAirDesigns
Member (Idle past 2374 days)
Posts: 564
Joined: 02-12-2015


(2)
Message 34 of 1053 (750371)
02-14-2015 4:50 PM
Reply to: Message 33 by RAZD
02-14-2015 4:46 PM


Thanks for those suggestions RAZD. Can't wait to play with that myself.
I feel like I'm back in the middle school science class I never had. :-)
What fun
JB

This message is a reply to:
 Message 33 by RAZD, posted 02-14-2015 4:46 PM RAZD has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 36 by jar, posted 02-14-2015 5:37 PM ThinAirDesigns has not replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1405 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 35 of 1053 (750372)
02-14-2015 4:56 PM
Reply to: Message 32 by ThinAirDesigns
02-14-2015 4:09 PM


Re: dendrochronology 101
See messaging for personal information

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAmerican☆Zen☯Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 32 by ThinAirDesigns, posted 02-14-2015 4:09 PM ThinAirDesigns has not replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 395 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 36 of 1053 (750376)
02-14-2015 5:37 PM
Reply to: Message 34 by ThinAirDesigns
02-14-2015 4:50 PM


the Mason Jar
Once you do the experiment with the kids and they record how long it takes for the fine material to settle you can talk about the Green River Varves, over six million repetitions of coarse and the fine material, iteration upon iteration.
How do it happen over and over again?

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

This message is a reply to:
 Message 34 by ThinAirDesigns, posted 02-14-2015 4:50 PM ThinAirDesigns has not replied

  
ThinAirDesigns
Member (Idle past 2374 days)
Posts: 564
Joined: 02-12-2015


Message 37 of 1053 (750380)
02-15-2015 12:39 AM


Lammerts Bristlecone experiments
An aside to the direct thrust of this thread but related:
Practically every single creation site/article that I read on dating refers to a 'study' by Walter Lammerts purportedly showing that the White Mountain Bristlecones can be induced into multiple rings per year through application of short bits of drought and rain. I'm the type to track down and read reports because ... well because I'm not Hovind nor Ham.
The paper is called "Are the Bristlecone pines really so old?"
I searched and searched but simply could not find a single instance of this report on the internet - not even a direct quote. Even the CRS (where it was published in the CRSQ V20, #2) didn't have it available for sale other than through purchasing there entire back catalog. I just said no to their need for $90. (as an aside, a debate opponent of RAZD a while back referred to the report and he was also unable to find the report itself.)
Before starting this thread, I posted over on Talk Origins asking for help finding the paper and a gentleman used NCSE contacts to get it sent to him from their library. Copyrights keep me from posting it, but I can share it with anyone who contacts me privately.
To conclude the thread over on Talk Origins, here is what I wrote:
Thanks to Mark who kindly found and fowarded me the original Lammerts paper, I was able to read it in it's entirety. A few impressions and comments follow:
1: It's written in a style that is difficult for me to follow. I find both it's planning and execution to be meandering compared to many other science papers. Perhaps it's just me.
2: In spite of the attempt to attack the dendrochronology of the White Mountain bristlecone, a different Colorado strain of the bristlecone was used. Same species, different strain. This is explained as having been done for convenience (Colorado species seeds were commercially available).
3: As best I can tell (take #1 into account here) controls on the experiments were very poorly defined and/or followed. Aside from the heat lamps and grow lights, some/all(?) seedlings were sometimes in greenhouses/hot houses and sometime outdoors (see Gish related comments below for what may be clarification on controls).
3: There was zero attempt to induce extra rings using base weather conditions as exist in the White Mountains (In other words, any 'controls' such as there may have been, were not based on those conditions). The tests were done in the San Francisco region and it was hypothesized/asserted that these SF conditions would have fit the White Mountain conditions perfectly at some point in time (how convenient for a SF experimenter).
4: Stated conclusions are actually most cleanly summarized by Gish in his readily available article on this study (The page you were looking for doesn't exist (404))
Following is the relevant full paragraph from the Gish report:
quote:
"Lammerts discovered that seedlings left to grow under ordinary greenhouse conditions, with no extra light or heat (Lammerts' home is in Freedom, California, where temperatures are cool enough in winter so that no growth took place during that period), exhibit only one growth ring after 2.5 years. The most significant of Lammerts' findings was the discovery that an extra growth ring could be induced by depriving the plants of water for two to three weeks in August and then resuming watering. Ordinarily, Lammerts had found, a three-year old bristlecone pine exhibits two growth rings, since, as noted above, no growth ring forms in the first 1.5 years of life. When Lammerts examined three-year-old bristlecone pine trees which had been deprived of water for three weeks in August, followed by normal watering during a warm month in September (September is often the warmest month of the year there), he found that they had three growth rings instead of the two expected. Four-year-old bristlecone pines similarly treated exhibited four growth rings instead of the three found for similar plants whose growth was not interrupted by depriving them of water for two to three weeks in August."
And here is the same quote condensed down to the important information related to the claim:
quote:
"Lammerts discovered that seedlings left to grow under ordinary greenhouse conditions, ... exhibit only one growth ring after 2.5 years. When Lammerts examined three-year-old bristlecone pine trees which had been deprived of water for three weeks in August, followed by normal watering during a warm month in September, he found that they had three growth rings. Four-year-old bristlecone pines similarly treated exhibited four growth rings ... ."
So according to the above, Lammerts was under artificial conditions able to make a seedling appear 1 year younger than actual, but was UNABLE to make a 3 and 4 year old seedling appear anything other than 3 and 4 years old respectively.
Sounds remarkably similar (no, exactly the same) to the research showing that the the WM bristlecone loses rings a percentage of the time but is incredibly resistant to extra rings. Trust me here, I'm not claiming Lammerts study adds any scientific corroboration, just amused that this study is quoted all over creation(ism) as the opposite of what it actually shows.
I will note that I wasn't able to totally confirm that Gish's summary of the study was entirely consistent with the study. Gish appears to imply in his first quoted sentence that one group was entirely greenhouse grown (his "ordinary greenhouse conditions" statement). I could not determine from the text that this was the case as it appeared to me seedlings were moved around, in and out and under. Gish was a more than casually acquainted contemporary of Lammerts and perhaps clarified things for his report with Lammerts. Perhaps Gish made stuff up. If the latter, we can be quite sure from his history that Gish would have couched things in as positive light as possible so I don't think using his version as unfair to the experiment.
Thanks again for those who helped make this possible. In the end I didn't learn anything of value beyond what I found in the Gish version, but I hate arguing with a paper I haven't read.
JB

Replies to this message:
 Message 39 by christianguy15, posted 02-15-2015 2:03 AM ThinAirDesigns has not replied
 Message 41 by Tangle, posted 02-15-2015 3:40 AM ThinAirDesigns has replied
 Message 48 by RAZD, posted 02-15-2015 10:08 AM ThinAirDesigns has not replied
 Message 56 by nwr, posted 02-15-2015 2:57 PM ThinAirDesigns has replied

  
christianguy15
Junior Member (Idle past 3330 days)
Posts: 2
Joined: 02-15-2015


Message 38 of 1053 (750381)
02-15-2015 1:40 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by ThinAirDesigns
02-13-2015 8:31 AM


before i comment do you believe in God

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by ThinAirDesigns, posted 02-13-2015 8:31 AM ThinAirDesigns has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 43 by ThinAirDesigns, posted 02-15-2015 7:13 AM christianguy15 has not replied
 Message 46 by jar, posted 02-15-2015 8:29 AM christianguy15 has not replied
 Message 47 by RAZD, posted 02-15-2015 9:35 AM christianguy15 has not replied

  
christianguy15
Junior Member (Idle past 3330 days)
Posts: 2
Joined: 02-15-2015


Message 39 of 1053 (750382)
02-15-2015 2:03 AM
Reply to: Message 37 by ThinAirDesigns
02-15-2015 12:39 AM


Re: Lammerts Bristlecone experiments
well sir how do you explain what atheistic scientists are unhappily
admitting to: that in partially fossilized bone is what is basicaly
soft tissue red blood cells ect. which according to the laws of science
cannot live sixty five million years. well just so you dont say that
scientist say that their not red blood cells
i fyou want to see a picture go to Creation | Creation Ministries International
but any way scientist are now trying to say that some sort of phenomenon has caused it to live this
phenomenon scientific lingo meaning that have no idea how it happened
Edited by Adminnemooseus, : Off-topic banner.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 37 by ThinAirDesigns, posted 02-15-2015 12:39 AM ThinAirDesigns has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 40 by Adminnemooseus, posted 02-15-2015 3:09 AM christianguy15 has not replied
 Message 44 by Larni, posted 02-15-2015 7:39 AM christianguy15 has not replied
 Message 45 by Percy, posted 02-15-2015 8:02 AM christianguy15 has not replied

  
Adminnemooseus
Administrator
Posts: 3974
Joined: 09-26-2002


Message 40 of 1053 (750383)
02-15-2015 3:09 AM
Reply to: Message 39 by christianguy15
02-15-2015 2:03 AM


Things "very old blood cells"
This has been covered quite a few times in (probably) many different topics.
Perhaps a good place for you to take the issue is What is the Latest On Dr Schweitzer Trex Soft Tissue Find?.
Adminnemooseus

Or something like that.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 39 by christianguy15, posted 02-15-2015 2:03 AM christianguy15 has not replied

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 9489
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 4.8


Message 41 of 1053 (750384)
02-15-2015 3:40 AM
Reply to: Message 37 by ThinAirDesigns
02-15-2015 12:39 AM


Re: Lammerts Bristlecone experiments
Seedling experiments don't tell us much about mature trees though, no matter what the result. A mature tree with a diverse root system is in no way comparable to a seedling or a sapling; droughts would have far less, if any affect once the early stages of fast growth have passed - the tree would have either found stable conditions or died.

Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif.
Life, don't talk to me about life - Marvin the Paranoid Android
"Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."
- Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 37 by ThinAirDesigns, posted 02-15-2015 12:39 AM ThinAirDesigns has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 42 by ThinAirDesigns, posted 02-15-2015 6:55 AM Tangle has not replied

  
ThinAirDesigns
Member (Idle past 2374 days)
Posts: 564
Joined: 02-12-2015


Message 42 of 1053 (750386)
02-15-2015 6:55 AM
Reply to: Message 41 by Tangle
02-15-2015 3:40 AM


Re: Lammerts Bristlecone experiments
Tangle writes:
Seedling experiments don't tell us much about mature trees though, no matter what the result.
Exactly Tangle - that's why I said I didn't consider it any sort of scientific corroboration for what we know of the Bristlecone. The holes in the 'science' of the experiment are Big and Plenty. I am really glad I got the paper though, I believe I may use it for the basis of a primer on the scientific method. It's a perfect example of what NOT to do.
With a friend a couple days ago (before I had the paper) I likened the seedling experiments to studying how much water adults need daily by testing how long a newborn could go without. Or a paper comparing the efficacy of different brands of floss on three month old babies.
There's a thought process that winds its way though all this that is extremely hard to follow rationally.
JB
Edited by ThinAirDesigns, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 41 by Tangle, posted 02-15-2015 3:40 AM Tangle has not replied

  
ThinAirDesigns
Member (Idle past 2374 days)
Posts: 564
Joined: 02-12-2015


(1)
Message 43 of 1053 (750387)
02-15-2015 7:13 AM
Reply to: Message 38 by christianguy15
02-15-2015 1:40 AM


christianguy1 writes:
before i comment do you believe in God
I might best be described as agnostic on deism and a weak atheist on an extremely long list of other more personal gods. It would take an extensive exchange for me to articulate the whats/hows/whys of my relevant beliefs - an exchange that isn't going to happen on this thread.
You are welcome in joining with the others in suggesting some physical science experiments that would be good for the curriculum.
JB

This message is a reply to:
 Message 38 by christianguy15, posted 02-15-2015 1:40 AM christianguy15 has not replied

  
Larni
Member (Idle past 164 days)
Posts: 4000
From: Liverpool
Joined: 09-16-2005


Message 44 of 1053 (750388)
02-15-2015 7:39 AM
Reply to: Message 39 by christianguy15
02-15-2015 2:03 AM


Re: Lammerts Bristlecone experiments
{Content hidden. - Adminnemooseus}
Edited by Adminnemooseus, : Content hidden. Not a good place for a reply, especially a snarky reply. Shut off signature here also. OSLT.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 39 by christianguy15, posted 02-15-2015 2:03 AM christianguy15 has not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22394
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


(1)
Message 45 of 1053 (750389)
02-15-2015 8:02 AM
Reply to: Message 39 by christianguy15
02-15-2015 2:03 AM


Re: Lammerts Bristlecone experiments
Hi ChristianGuy,
Don't let Adminnemooseus discourage you, he's just trying to keep discussion threads on topic. I'll try to post a response over at the What is the Latest On Dr Schweitzer Trex Soft Tissue Find? thread.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 39 by christianguy15, posted 02-15-2015 2:03 AM christianguy15 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