Jukia doesn't know what we're talking about. :chuckle:
Manganese Nodules: Young or Old?
- Thread starter Bob Enyart
- Start date
Jukia doesn't know what we're talking about. :chuckle:
Then why don't you 'splain it Looocy.
Alate_One
Well-known member
I don't know which aspect you are asking about. Either explain yourself or admit you don't have the foggiest idea what you are talking about.
Dr. John Yates Lives
Dr. John Yates Lives
2011 UPDATE
Dr. John Yates Lives
As added to the opening post: To discredit this report, the atheists and evolutionists posting in this thread have unreasonably doubted and even denied the existence of Dr. Yates (like they've done because of their bias and against all reasonable interpretation of the evidence with Pontius Pilate, King David, Jesus, Nineveh, the entire Assyrian empire, Sodom and Gomorrah, etc.). In the meantime, thanks to the ongoing work of Google Books, you can find online a chapter Yates wrote on Deep-Sea Polymetallic Sulphide Deposits in a 2002 text by academic publisher Routledge: Advances in the Science and Technology of Ocean Management.
Dr. John Yates Lives
2011 UPDATE
Dr. John Yates Lives
As added to the opening post: To discredit this report, the atheists and evolutionists posting in this thread have unreasonably doubted and even denied the existence of Dr. Yates (like they've done because of their bias and against all reasonable interpretation of the evidence with Pontius Pilate, King David, Jesus, Nineveh, the entire Assyrian empire, Sodom and Gomorrah, etc.). In the meantime, thanks to the ongoing work of Google Books, you can find online a chapter Yates wrote on Deep-Sea Polymetallic Sulphide Deposits in a 2002 text by academic publisher Routledge: Advances in the Science and Technology of Ocean Management.
some other dude
New member
Mmmmmmm - Monkeyjuice Noodles :chew:
Me too. They were modeled with the Lotke-Volterra equations. Gave me fits building a better model, because unknown to anyone at the time, the model is exquisitely sensitive to tiny rounding errors in computers, which become quite noticeable after a number of iterations.
extra, extra, read all about it...
extra, extra, read all about it...
Evolutionists have a belief that these nodules form super slowly, but their belief seems to conflict with actually measurable deposition rates for ocean sediment. For ocean sediments would bury nodules as much as 1,000 times more quickly than the nodules would form. Thus millions of manganese nodules (also referred to as naturally-occurring ferromanganese), wouldn't be just sitting where they are, on the ocean floor. Also, buried nodules wouldn't be disproportionately in uppermost layers of ocean sediments, where drilling demonstrates that most nodules are in fact concentrated. From Marine Geosciences: "fast formations of ferromanganese incrustation have been also observed near ships wrecked during the First World War (Goldberg, 1958) or around motor plugs (Andrews, 1972)." Also, many nodules exist in the Great Lakes of North America.
Typical of contradictory old-earth claims, a paper in Marine Biology states that such encrustation forms "slowly... at 1 to 5 mm" per million years, yet "by a process that is poorly understood," which is essentially an admission that they don't know how quickly ferromanganese forms. So, if they don't understand the process, why claim that they can quantify the rate of the process? Industry-wide, a scientist's claim is more readily accepted by the biased old-earth community if he says that some process takes a million years. However, if nodules and other such encrustments take that long to form, just as the Texas A&M presentation above pointed out an obvious conflict, the paper states, "It remains unexplained why crusts are not overwhelmed by more rapid biological processes occurring simultaneously." Yes, unexplained. And unexplainable. Because nodules don't require millions of years to form. Regarding their formation and mining, a John Hopkins graduate student thesis states that manganese nodules seem to, "grow around shark's teeth, pieces of bone, or other previously-existing cores. Whatever their origin, they are being formed continuously at a rate which makes them effectively non-depletable."
extra, extra, read all about it...
Hey, can you reply to your own post? Well, on a related matter, the YoungEarth.com/manganese post has been updated with the following. For the links, go to the YE page...2011 UPDATE
Dr. John Yates Lives
Evolutionists have a belief that these nodules form super slowly, but their belief seems to conflict with actually measurable deposition rates for ocean sediment. For ocean sediments would bury nodules as much as 1,000 times more quickly than the nodules would form. Thus millions of manganese nodules (also referred to as naturally-occurring ferromanganese), wouldn't be just sitting where they are, on the ocean floor. Also, buried nodules wouldn't be disproportionately in uppermost layers of ocean sediments, where drilling demonstrates that most nodules are in fact concentrated. From Marine Geosciences: "fast formations of ferromanganese incrustation have been also observed near ships wrecked during the First World War (Goldberg, 1958) or around motor plugs (Andrews, 1972)." Also, many nodules exist in the Great Lakes of North America.
Typical of contradictory old-earth claims, a paper in Marine Biology states that such encrustation forms "slowly... at 1 to 5 mm" per million years, yet "by a process that is poorly understood," which is essentially an admission that they don't know how quickly ferromanganese forms. So, if they don't understand the process, why claim that they can quantify the rate of the process? Industry-wide, a scientist's claim is more readily accepted by the biased old-earth community if he says that some process takes a million years. However, if nodules and other such encrustments take that long to form, just as the Texas A&M presentation above pointed out an obvious conflict, the paper states, "It remains unexplained why crusts are not overwhelmed by more rapid biological processes occurring simultaneously." Yes, unexplained. And unexplainable. Because nodules don't require millions of years to form. Regarding their formation and mining, a John Hopkins graduate student thesis states that manganese nodules seem to, "grow around shark's teeth, pieces of bone, or other previously-existing cores. Whatever their origin, they are being formed continuously at a rate which makes them effectively non-depletable."
So Pastor Bob can you refer us to some crack creation scientists who can tell us how long it takes all types of nodules to form. Well, you know, in less than 6000 years. Unless of course the Big Flood ripped everything up on the deep sea bed and they are all 4000 years old or less.Hey, can you reply to your own post? Well, on a related matter, the YoungEarth.com/manganese post has been updated with the following. For the links, go to the YE page...
Evolutionists have a belief that these nodules form super slowly, but their belief seems to conflict with actually measurable deposition rates for ocean sediment. For ocean sediments would bury nodules as much as 1,000 times more quickly than the nodules would form. Thus millions of manganese nodules (also referred to as naturally-occurring ferromanganese), wouldn't be just sitting where they are, on the ocean floor. Also, buried nodules wouldn't be disproportionately in uppermost layers of ocean sediments, where drilling demonstrates that most nodules are in fact concentrated. From Marine Geosciences: "fast formations of ferromanganese incrustation have been also observed near ships wrecked during the First World War (Goldberg, 1958) or around motor plugs (Andrews, 1972)." Also, many nodules exist in the Great Lakes of North America.
Typical of contradictory old-earth claims, a paper in Marine Biology states that such encrustation forms "slowly... at 1 to 5 mm" per million years, yet "by a process that is poorly understood," which is essentially an admission that they don't know how quickly ferromanganese forms. So, if they don't understand the process, why claim that they can quantify the rate of the process? Industry-wide, a scientist's claim is more readily accepted by the biased old-earth community if he says that some process takes a million years. However, if nodules and other such encrustments take that long to form, just as the Texas A&M presentation above pointed out an obvious conflict, the paper states, "It remains unexplained why crusts are not overwhelmed by more rapid biological processes occurring simultaneously." Yes, unexplained. And unexplainable. Because nodules don't require millions of years to form. Regarding their formation and mining, a John Hopkins graduate student thesis states that manganese nodules seem to, "grow around shark's teeth, pieces of bone, or other previously-existing cores. Whatever their origin, they are being formed continuously at a rate which makes them effectively non-depletable."
Please post the contact info so we can all see the research. Thanks.