Yip.
The evidence is that the magnetic fields possessed by the planets indicate a young solar system.
Real Science Radio: Earth & Mercury's Decaying Magnetic Fields
- Thread starter Jefferson
- Start date
Yip.
The evidence is that the magnetic fields possessed by the planets indicate a young solar system.
I know, you have a really hard time following these discussions. I was responding to the idea of what “evolution” refers to. Good try at dodging what you can’t handle, though.
Pastor Bob, like Stripey, you use the term "evolution" with a negative connotation whenever you use it. Since you believe your Holy Book is 100% accurate on every issue, you must do that in order to avoid your particular god's wrath. I guess that is understandable, but terribly dishonest and/or ignorant. Your followers get to chuckle while those who appreciate the evidence chuckle as well, but for a different reason.
Last edited:
GuySmiley
Well-known member
You could start by reading the thread. No wonder you are babbling nonsense that has nothing to do with the thread.
If you had actually read the thread, you would admit that it was Enyart, back in post 32, that introduced the issue of what evolution means. My comments have been largely in response to that. If you are offended by that, then at least be man enough and honest enough to tell Enyart he was out of line in bringing that into the conversation.
Last edited:
Evolutionists love arguing about nonsense, especially when it puts distance between the evidence and the surface.
Balerion the Black
New member
Earth's magnetic field has fluctuated and even reversed direction many times throughout its 4.5+ billion year existence.
I'm not particularly interested in engaging you in your kindergarten responses. Let me know if you think you have something of relevance to offer.
OK, bye. :wave2:
If the evolutionists were interested in science, they would ask why the magnetic field is diminishing as per the observations.
OK, why? Citations to the scientific literature, please
Evolutionists hate reading. :chuckle:
We're not the ones intellectually dishonest enough to pretend all aspects that fall under the umbrella of evolution of one form or another aren't connected.
I’m not clear what you are saying. For example, geology says the earth is very old, whether or not evolution agrees. Is believing geology is correct being intellectually dishonest?
:doh:
And you are dishonest enough to quote mine TOL posts. You Stripe, you. Creationists in general but you are the best at it (Note in this best does not mean good).
OK, If you prefer cutesy faces in place of an answer to an honest question, I understand. I was mistaken in thinking you really had something to say.
The geomagnetic field's rate of decrease and the current strength are within the normal range of variation, as shown by the record of past magnetic fields recorded in rocks.
Earth may be overdue for a pole reversal. A pole reversal is preceded by a reduction in the earth's magnetic field, after which many poles might form chaotically in different places until it stabilizes again.
GuySmiley
Well-known member
Enyart was responding to Stripe who commented on another post about how the term was used. Enyart did not introduce the issue in post 32. You really do hate reading like Stripe says. Your response is nonsense in regards to that topic in this thread. Seriously, read.