K-Pg boundary

Creationist "scientists" try to convince people that a global flood once happened because they think their holy book is right. To do that, they ignore scientific facts and they lie about science. One example is the K-Pg boundary.

The K-Pg boundary has a number of characteristics that are evidence for an asteroid impact. A huge asteroid.

The K-Pg boundary layer contains:

  • Iridium - concentration of 30-160 times higher than usual 
  • Shocked quartz - requiring intense pressures 
  • Tektite glass spherules - formed by re-entry of debris into the atmosphere
  • Chromium - isotopic anomalies associated with carbonaceous chondrites
The Chicxulub impact crater has been found near the Yucatan peninsula and is, on average, 180 km in diameter.
  • The boundary layer is thicker near the impact crater
  • More shocked quartz is found closer to the impact crater
  • More tektite glass spherules are found closer to the impact crater
Creationist "scientists" ignore most of these scientific facts and concentrate on the Iridium anomaly saying it may have been caused by volcanoes.

Iridium is, in effect, released by volcanoes and is found in the form of "sublimates"[1], these are deposits formed from volcanic gas. Creationist "scientists" do not explain how sublimates were formed under global flood conditions (under water).

Creationist "scientists" are invited to explain the other scientific facts described above.

=== Edit 19/06/2019 ===

Source: Wikipedia

"Spherules within the fish carcasses at Tanis suggest that the impact event and associated macrofossils were temporally correlated. [2]"

With thanks to @JacksonWheat1
=== End edit 19/06/2019 ===

@FimusTauri has another question about the K-Pg boundary that has not been satisfactory addressed by Creationist "scientists".


As an aside, in 1980, a team lead by Luis Alvarez predicted the existence of an impact crater and the size of the impact crater. The Chicxulub impact crater was found in 1990 and is about the predicted size. Predictions in science are strong indicators of the correctness of scientific hypothesis.

[1] Toutain, J.-P.; Meyer, G. (1989). "Iridium-Bearing Sublimates at a Hot-Spot Volcano (Piton De La Fournaise, Indian Ocean)". Geophysical Research Letters 16 (12): 1391–1394. Bibcode:1989GeoRL..16.1391T. doi:10.1029/GL016i012p01391.

[2] Robert A. DePalma et. al. (2019) "A seismically induced onshore surge deposit at the KPg boundary, North Dakota" PNAS | April 23, 2019 | vol. 116 | no. 17

Comments

  1. JimmyJams15 July 2016 at 17:46

    The terms "creationist" and "scientist" are mutually exlucusive.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Formal logic

Genesis 1:1 * describes the following logic Informally Premise P1: God exists. Premise P2: If P1 then "the universe is as old as the earth**". Conclusion C1: The universe is as old as the earth. Formally P1 → C1, P1        C1 This form of logic is called Modus Ponens. The truth of C1 doesn't imply the truth of P1 because there may be other explanations for C1. Lets look at the following classical example Premise P3: It rains Premise P4: If P3 then "the streets are wet". Conclusion C2: The streets are wet There are other possible explanations for wet streets: A cleaning crew just passed, there were games with water, the dikes were broken, etc ... However, we can say that, if the streets are not wet then it doesn't rain. Formally P3 → C2, ¬C2        ¬P3 This form of logic is called Modus Tollens and is the inverse of Modus Ponens. To return to Genesis 1:1. C1 is false and Modus Tollens applies. P1 → C1, ¬C1        ¬
Read more

Abortion

Image
You want your freedom - By Ashvin Harrison with permission In my opinion, the "abortion debate" isn't actually a debate. Some people want to give rights to fetuses that don't have cognitive abilities to exercise those rights while taking away the right of self-determination from women who do have cognitive abilities. Everything else is just smoke and mirrors. Is a fetus a human being? I really don't care if it is, or isn't. Does a fetus have the right to live? No, it doesn't. Human rights begin at birth according to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Let's imagine we give a fetus the right to live. How can we determine whether a fetus wants to exercise that right? We can't. That is not a right, but an obligation. These people want to force fetuses onto the world whether these fetuses want, or not. Let's imagine we take away women's right of self-determination, a right recognized in the Universal Declaration of Hu
Read more

Scientism

Image
" Scientism " means misusing the word " science ". You can misuse it either by calling something that can't be measured "scientific", or by claiming that something without sufficient supporting evidence is "scientific". It is a word that's thrown around by people who hardly know what it means and who certainly don't know what the word "science" means or what the scientific method is. "Scientism" is also a word used in philosophy to denote an excess of confidence in science, and has legitimate uses. However, the people who accuse others of "scientism" are not at all interested in philosophy. They are solely interested in delegitimizing the scientific method. They are anti-science . Period. Why are they against science? Is it because they are not scientifically literate? Do they have economic motivations? What worries me is the number of people that are anti-science. There's a war on science g
Read more