The Polonium Halo Hoax, or how Dr. Gentry Easily Bluffed the Religious Community! (America, atheist)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Lay-people can be fooled with scientific-sounding gobbledygook. (Church of $cientology!) It all depends on how malicious and dishonest the scientist in question may be, or if he is a scientist at all.
In Gentry's case, either he was dishonest or didn't know the geology of where he retrieved his samples. He claimed they were from primordial Canadian shield granites, but were later revealed to have been recovered from much more recent dikes which just so happened to be in the vicinity and hydrogeologically connected to uranium-containing mineralized material mines. And since polonium is a daughter product of uranium, it isn't so hard to see what's actually going on in the area. The result. His whole premise was shattered.
In Gentry's case, either he was dishonest or didn't know the geology of where he retrieved his samples. He claimed they were from primordial Canadian shield granites, but were later revealed to have been recovered from much more recent dikes which just so happened to be in the vicinity and hydrogeologically connected to uranium-containing mineralized material mines. And since polonium is a daughter product of uranium, it isn't so hard to see what's actually going on in the area. The result. His whole premise was shattered.
Yes. That matter was discussed on my previous Forum, but on a thread here where I assessed the total arguments FOR Creationism, since, despite repeated requests, no Creationist had done so, I came across some claims that some new Polonium haloes had been found which were supposedly from more firmly based origins than the granite dykes which, (I recall) allowed the polonium to seep into fissures in the granite, thus giving a falsely short date. But I have not been able to find any details of the supposed later find. Any feedback on that?
Creationist Robert Gentry has argued that ring-shaped discoloration haloes in primordial granite rocks are the result of damage from alpha-particle emission by radioactive isotopes of the element polonium (Po). Since radiogenic polonium has a very short half-life (usually measured in fractions of a second), Gentry argues that, if granite takes thousands to millions of years to form as mainstream geology believes, any polonium originally present would have decayed away long before the granite could have formed and could not have produced these haloes. Therefore, he feels that their existence is evidence for an instantaneous and recent creation of these granite rocks, and by extension the Earth. The following articles point out the flaws in Gentry's argument.
Yes. That matter was discussed on my previous Forum, but on a thread here where I assessed the total arguments FOR Creationism, since, despite repeated requests, no Creationist had done so, I came across some claims that some new Polonium haloes had been found which were supposedly from more firmly based origins than the granite dykes which, (I recall) allowed the polonium to seep into fissures in the granite, thus giving a falsely short date. But I have not been able to find any details of the supposed later find. Any feedback on that?
Many creationist, and evolutionist, can say I am right or that I am right and you are not , ....... Well the Lord Jesus Christ who is the Living God and Judge of the Living and the dead says that these arts of thought are challenged by each other are the ideas of man and His authorship , and when Man makes a stand it is pure legalism .... So the Living God challenges all to seek the truth and God truth were all power of life comes instead of these ideas of man that only will cause strife and contention which are powerless
Many creationist, and evolutionist, can say I am right or that I am right and you are not , ....... Well the Lord Jesus Christ who is the Living God and Judge of the Living and the dead says that these arts of thought are challenged by each other are the ideas of man and His authorship , and when Man makes a stand it is pure legalism .... So the Living God challenges all to seek the truth and God truth were all power of life comes instead of these ideas of man that only will cause strife and contention which are powerless
And he told you this personally, did he? You have his phone number do you? By the way, your response is off topic.
I really wish these creationists would come to Southern Africa. We have an abundance of geological evidence that confirm a very old earth that surpasses even their most extended belief of flexipreferential dating which the last I heard is 12000 to 15000 years.
Two of the most famous are the Victoria Waterfalls gorges dated at 100,000 years and the oldest active cave formations, the Cango Caves with dating in excess of 1.5M years
The Victoria WF was discovered by a theist David Livingstone 1852–56 and the gorges have not eroded away since the discovery and the location of the falls aka gorge 1 is still active and where he found it over 150 years ago. There are nine gorges in a zig-zag configuration tracing back the previous locations of earlier locations of where the Zambezi dropped 300 feet or so. I was born in Livingstone 100 years later and the falls is still where it was when I left as a child in 1965.
The catchment area is very flat and there are no volcanoes recent or ancient that could have caused any accelerated erosion through the years, just water. (see attachments)
The Cango caves which are located in a semi arid region of less than 10" rainfall per annum, have formations that in certain sections are still active. These were discovered in 1780 and growth of formations is ~1cm/100 years. Dissolved minerals seeping through fissures form the stalactites and stalagmites and flow too slow would clog up and too fast would not cause any formation so for all intents and purposes, this is static. I have visited the caves three times.
Yet in the USA you have the Grand Canyon, really what is so hard to understand of an old earth when you folk have that in your back yard? The mind boggles...
I really wish these creationists would come to Southern Africa. We have an abundance of geological evidence that confirm a very old earth that surpasses even their most extended belief of flexipreferential dating which the last I heard is 12000 to 15000 years.
Two of the most famous are the Victoria Waterfalls gorges dated at 100,000 years and the oldest active cave formations, the Cango Caves with dating in excess of 1.5M years
The Victoria WF was discovered by a theist David Livingstone 1852–56 and the gorges have not eroded away since the discovery and the location of the falls aka gorge 1 is still active and where he found it over 150 years ago. There are nine gorges in a zig-zag configuration tracing back the previous locations of earlier locations of where the Zambezi dropped 300 feet or so. I was born in Livingstone 100 years later and the falls is still where it was when I left as a child in 1965.
The catchment area is very flat and there are no volcanoes recent or ancient that could have caused any accelerated erosion through the years, just water. (see attachments)
The Cango caves which are located in a semi arid region of less than 10" rainfall per annum, have formations that in certain sections are still active. These were discovered in 1780 and growth of formations is ~1cm/100 years. Dissolved minerals seeping through fissures form the stalactites and stalagmites and flow too slow would clog up and too fast would not cause any formation so for all intents and purposes, this is static. I have visited the caves three times.
Yet in the USA you have the Grand Canyon, really what is so hard to understand of an old earth when you folk have that in your back yard? The mind boggles...
Shalom...If the gorges at Victoria Falls were dated at 100,000 years then how could they only show a mere 150 years of erosion?
Sure, the falls are still where they were when you left as a child in 1965...however, 46 years does not compare to an alleged 100,000 years of time. How is it possible that 75-80% of the earths current land mass is covered by sedimentary rock if 100,000 years have passed since the formation of Victoria Falls?
Shalom...If the gorges at Victoria Falls were dated at 100,000 years then how could they only show a mere 150 years of erosion?
I think your calculator needs calibrating
Where do you get 150 years of erosion? They were discovered 150 years ago and and they have not moved in that time, look up his paintings and the pics available on the net, has not moved (to the naked eye that is) since white folk came with stuff like paintbrushes and cameras.
Quote:
Sure, the falls are still where they were when you left as a child in 1965...however, 46 years does not compare to an alleged 100,000 years of time. How is it possible that 75-80% of the earths current land mass is covered by sedimentary rock if 100,000 years have passed since the formation of Victoria Falls?
What has the land mass of the world have to do with the falls? You really need education in geology or you need to get a refund from your school as they failed to teach you what is known as common knowledge.
How about the caves? I see you cannot get your head around the 1.5M years for formations.
I have plenty more examples but AiG don't have answers for Africa.
Slightly off-topic, but why is there any question about the virtual mathematical certainty of the Earth's age to begin with? I mean, my understanding is that dozens of elements' decay rates can be analyzed (with stunning accuracy) and that, when they are analyzed, they unanimously demonstrate a timeline billions of years long. So are we really, actually debating against this, as if all of these dozens of "clocks" are simultaneously just dead wrong?
How do people come to these conclusions that the vast majority of the world's scientists, historians, philosophers, archaeologists, anthropoligists, religious studies professors and scholars in general are just completely dead wrong about the subjects they spend decades studying? How can a grown man with a driver's license, a dog, a gym membership and a functioning laptop observe scientists splitting atoms in half and then, moments later, conclude that these same scientists misunderstand even just the basics of the very same physics that allowed them to do it?
How is this suspension of even the most rudimentary semblences of common sense possible in the Homo sapien brain?
It's truly, truly staggering.
Last edited by rpc1; 12-22-2011 at 12:25 AM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
And since polonium is a daughter product of uranium, it isn't so hard to see what's actually going on in the area. The result. His whole premise was shattered.
The Lord is Risen!!!
