do aliens exist?

Mouldz

Sealiner
Martin SSS wrote:
psy wrote:
::S

So you C, we have Aliens right here in the RSA!!

Did someone say the earth was only 5000~6000 yrs old?



:fswim

The fastest stalactite/mite grows at 1.3mm/year. The oldest known cave in the world is Sudwala, right here in SA. The growth there is on average .025mm/year, or 2.5cm in 100 years. These are measurable facts and can be recreated in laboratory conditions. Guess you can grow your own if you had the time. No ways this is 6000 years old.

399px-Sudwala_Caves.jpg







.

T
 

calamari

Senior Member
Mouldy wrote:
Be careful,you are not allowed to challenge these "facts",you might get red carded,or whats it now ,off field yellow ,or white card ::S::S::S::S::S[/quote]
haha,,, you might be right! maybe referred to the 3rd umpire,for a foot over the line?;)
 

Glenn

Sealiner
calamari wrote:
Mouldy wrote:
Be careful,you are not allowed to challenge these "facts",you might get red carded,or whats it now ,off field yellow ,or white card ::S::S::S::S::S
haha,,, you might be right! maybe referred to the 3rd umpire,for a foot over the line?;)[/quote]

Looks like MOULDIE is taking down this thread too.... lol
 

Mouldz

Sealiner
Glenn wrote:
calamari wrote:
Mouldy wrote:
Be careful,you are not allowed to challenge these "facts",you might get red carded,or whats it now ,off field yellow ,or white card ::S::S::S::S::S
haha,,, you might be right! maybe referred to the 3rd umpire,for a foot over the line?;)

Looks like MOULDIE is taking down this thread too.... lol[/quote]

Me ,no ,never do something like that,@Glenn re. post 139 I thought you were going to leave religion out of this thread or does it only work one way
 

Martin SSS

New member
MOULDIE wrote:
2. Stalactites many centimetres long are sometimes seen under modern-day bridges and in tunnels.

A photograph taken in February, 1968, shows a curtain of stalactites growing from the foundation ceiling beneath the Lincoln Memorial in Washington DC. Some of the stalactites had grown to five feet long (a metre and a half) in the 45 years since the memorial was built in 1923.3

At jenolan Caves and many other places there are examples of stalactites and stalagmites developing from man-made structures. Like the Lincoln Memorial, the jenolan structures contain cement-mortar which is highly permeable, allowing these formations to develop rapidly. The resultant formation is quite powdery and brittle however.


Stalactites can, and do, grow quickly. A talking point at Temple University in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, is the fact that stalactites are growing on the cement wall steps between the university’s Anderson Hall and Gladfelter Hall. Right below the stalactites, some stalagmites are forming. Although only several centimetres high, they have all formed since the concrete stairway of Gladfelter Hall was built in May, 1973.

There are a number of bridges in Philadelphia which have stalactites growing on them. Some are more than a foot long (30 cm), but many smaller examples have also formed. One bridge was built in 1931 by the City of Philadelphia and Pennsylvania Railroad, so all these formations are less than 56 years old.

I'll tackle your quotes in groups. First of all, those stalactites on man-made structures. We have to differentiate what these stalactites are made of:

For example, on the mortared brickwork of old forts and places of that sort, formations which look to the naked eye like stalactites and stalagmites sometimes form in less than one hundred years. However, those formations are composed of gypsum, which is a salt of calcium sulfate. Unlike calcium carbonate, gypsum is moderately soluble in water, which means that transport and recrystallization can take place much more rapidly (White, 1976, p.304). There is a whole class of cave deposits called evaporite minerals which consist of those minerals which dissolve readily in water. As might be expected, these formations are ephemeral when compared to the carbonates which form all the really large and impressive cave formations. The chemistry of all this is not particularly complex and is very well understood.

(Loftin, 1988, p.23)

Here's some more information.

Many people have found that stalactites forming on concrete or mortar outdoors may grow several centimeters each year. Stalactite growth in these environments, however, bears little relation to that in caves, because it does not proceed by the same chemical reaction. Although cement and mortar are made from limestone, the same rock in which the caves form, the carbon dioxide has been driven off by heating. When water is added to these materials, one product is calcium hydroxide, which is about 100 times as soluble in water as calcite is. A calcium hydroxide solution absorbs carbon dioxide rapidly from the atmosphere to reconstitute calcium carbonate, and produce stalactites. This is why stalactites formed by solution from cement and mortar grow much faster than those in caves. To illustrate, in 1925, a concrete bridge was constructed inside Postojna Cave, Yugoslavia, and adjacent to it an artificial tunnel was opened. By 1956, tubular stalactites 45 centimeters long were growing from the bridge, while stalactites of the same age in the tunnel were less than 1 centimeter long.
 

Mouldz

Sealiner
Martin SSS wrote:
MOULDIE wrote:
2. Stalactites many centimetres long are sometimes seen under modern-day bridges and in tunnels.

A photograph taken in February, 1968, shows a curtain of stalactites growing from the foundation ceiling beneath the Lincoln Memorial in Washington DC. Some of the stalactites had grown to five feet long (a metre and a half) in the 45 years since the memorial was built in 1923.3

At jenolan Caves and many other places there are examples of stalactites and stalagmites developing from man-made structures. Like the Lincoln Memorial, the jenolan structures contain cement-mortar which is highly permeable, allowing these formations to develop rapidly. The resultant formation is quite powdery and brittle however.


Stalactites can, and do, grow quickly. A talking point at Temple University in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, is the fact that stalactites are growing on the cement wall steps between the university’s Anderson Hall and Gladfelter Hall. Right below the stalactites, some stalagmites are forming. Although only several centimetres high, they have all formed since the concrete stairway of Gladfelter Hall was built in May, 1973.

There are a number of bridges in Philadelphia which have stalactites growing on them. Some are more than a foot long (30 cm), but many smaller examples have also formed. One bridge was built in 1931 by the City of Philadelphia and Pennsylvania Railroad, so all these formations are less than 56 years old.

I'll tackle your quotes in groups. First of all, those stalactites on man-made structures. We have to differentiate what these stalactites are made of:

For example, on the mortared brickwork of old forts and places of that sort, formations which look to the naked eye like stalactites and stalagmites sometimes form in less than one hundred years. However, those formations are composed of gypsum, which is a salt of calcium sulfate. Unlike calcium carbonate, gypsum is moderately soluble in water, which means that transport and recrystallization can take place much more rapidly (White, 1976, p.304). There is a whole class of cave deposits called evaporite minerals which consist of those minerals which dissolve readily in water. As might be expected, these formations are ephemeral when compared to the carbonates which form all the really large and impressive cave formations. The chemistry of all this is not particularly complex and is very well understood.

(Loftin, 1988, p.23)

Here's some more information.

Many people have found that stalactites forming on concrete or mortar outdoors may grow several centimeters each year. Stalactite growth in these environments, however, bears little relation to that in caves, because it does not proceed by the same chemical reaction. Although cement and mortar are made from limestone, the same rock in which the caves form, the carbon dioxide has been driven off by heating. When water is added to these materials, one product is calcium hydroxide, which is about 100 times as soluble in water as calcite is. A calcium hydroxide solution absorbs carbon dioxide rapidly from the atmosphere to reconstitute calcium carbonate, and produce stalactites. This is why stalactites formed by solution from cement and mortar grow much faster than those in caves. To illustrate, in 1925, a concrete bridge was constructed inside Postojna Cave, Yugoslavia, and adjacent to it an artificial tunnel was opened. By 1956, tubular stalactites 45 centimeters long were growing from the bridge, while stalactites of the same age in the tunnel were less than 1 centimeter long.

T
 

Martin SSS

New member
MOULDIE wrote:
Of the coast of Sicily or Italy I am not sure ,a cavern was discovered with amazing stalactites,the scientific community went beserk measuring how old these things were but they left out one crucial piece of evidence ,this cavern was under water for many years and only lay exposed for a couple of thousand years,no way stalactites can form under water

The Universe, our Galaxy and Earth have gone through many cycles. Proof of the temperature and pollution cycles are found in the ice capping of Antarctica etc. So Stalactites formed in a cave, then the cave got submerged, and then drained again. No biggie. If the composition of the stalactite can be determined, the the growth rate can be determined. Even giving a 50% error in calculation, some stalactites are ancient.

As for the quote on Sequoyah Caverns, I can not find any scientific proof of the statement, or the contrary, except from the quoted website.
 

Mouldz

Sealiner
Martin SSS wrote:
MOULDIE wrote:
Of the coast of Sicily or Italy I am not sure ,a cavern was discovered with amazing stalactites,the scientific community went beserk measuring how old these things were but they left out one crucial piece of evidence ,this cavern was under water for many years and only lay exposed for a couple of thousand years,no way stalactites can form under water

The Universe, our Galaxy and Earth have gone through many cycles. Proof of the temperature and pollution cycles are found in the ice capping of Antarctica etc. So Stalactites formed in a cave, then the cave got submerged, and then drained again. No biggie. If the composition of the stalactite can be determined, the the growth rate can be determined. Even giving a 50% error in calculation, some stalactites are ancient.

As for the quote on Sequoyah Caverns, I can not find any scientific proof of the statement, or the contrary, except from the quoted website.

We are going to get carded for hijacking this thread,I would love to discuss these things but its impossible without bringing the religious aspect into it.
 
MOULDIE wrote:
Martin SSS wrote:
MOULDIE wrote:
Of the coast of Sicily or Italy I am not sure ,a cavern was discovered with amazing stalactites,the scientific community went beserk measuring how old these things were but they left out one crucial piece of evidence ,this cavern was under water for many years and only lay exposed for a couple of thousand years,no way stalactites can form under water

The Universe, our Galaxy and Earth have gone through many cycles. Proof of the temperature and pollution cycles are found in the ice capping of Antarctica etc. So Stalactites formed in a cave, then the cave got submerged, and then drained again. No biggie. If the composition of the stalactite can be determined, the the growth rate can be determined. Even giving a 50% error in calculation, some stalactites are ancient.

As for the quote on Sequoyah Caverns, I can not find any scientific proof of the statement, or the contrary, except from the quoted website.

We are going to get carded for hijacking this thread,I would love to discuss these things but its impossible without bringing the religious aspect into it.
Just use facts and science. Stalactites are not mentioned anywhere in the bible!:fbash
 

Mouldz

Sealiner
benniejordaan wrote:
MOULDIE wrote:
Martin SSS wrote:
MOULDIE wrote:
Of the coast of Sicily or Italy I am not sure ,a cavern was discovered with amazing stalactites,the scientific community went beserk measuring how old these things were but they left out one crucial piece of evidence ,this cavern was under water for many years and only lay exposed for a couple of thousand years,no way stalactites can form under water

The Universe, our Galaxy and Earth have gone through many cycles. Proof of the temperature and pollution cycles are found in the ice capping of Antarctica etc. So Stalactites formed in a cave, then the cave got submerged, and then drained again. No biggie. If the composition of the stalactite can be determined, the the growth rate can be determined. Even giving a 50% error in calculation, some stalactites are ancient.

As for the quote on Sequoyah Caverns, I can not find any scientific proof of the statement, or the contrary, except from the quoted website.

We are going to get carded for hijacking this thread,I would love to discuss these things but its impossible without bringing the religious aspect into it.
Just use facts and science. Stalactites are not mentioned anywhere in the bible!:fbash
The discussion is not about stalacnites but the age of the earth,
 

WWFisherman

Senior Member
MOULDIE wrote:
The discussion is not about stalacnites but the age of the earth,
Earth is 4,5 billion years old. That's accepted and supported by all related branches of science. If you have extraordinary scientific evidence to the contrary then please submit it for peer-review, otherwise accept that your belief in a young earth is based on your faith. If you'd like to argue the age of the earth on biblical evidence then start a theology thread.

Moving on, aliens…
 

Mouldz

Sealiner
WWFisherman wrote:
MOULDIE wrote:
The discussion is not about stalacnites but the age of the earth,
Earth is 4,5 billion years old. That's accepted and supported by all related branches of science. If you have extraordinary scientific evidence to the contrary then please submit it for peer-review, otherwise accept that your belief in a young earth is based on your faith. If you'd like to argue the age of the earth on biblical evidence then start a theology thread.

Moving on, aliens…
 

WWFisherman

Senior Member
MOULDIE wrote:


Wrong,more and more evidence is coming to the fore from all branches of science to contradict the old earth fable,facts like short term comets,methane gas present on some planets that should have burned out long time ago,the list goes on and on i believe the earth to be young not only because of my faith but the overwhelming evidence to back up the time lines in the bible.

The time lines in a long earth module dont tie up and the goal posts are continually moved to fit in with these speculations,
Church pamphlet science.

If you want to argue science I suggest you read a scientific publication rather than a creationist blog. I thought you were going to avoid these threads and these arguments upon your return to Sealine?
 

Mouldz

Sealiner
WWFisherman wrote:
MOULDIE wrote:


Wrong,more and more evidence is coming to the fore from all branches of science to contradict the old earth fable,facts like short term comets,methane gas present on some planets that should have burned out long time ago,the list goes on and on i believe the earth to be young not only because of my faith but the overwhelming evidence to back up the time lines in the bible.

The time lines in a long earth module dont tie up and the goal posts are continually moved to fit in with these speculations,
Church pamphlet science.

If you want to argue science I suggest you read a scientific publication rather than a creationist blog. I thought you were going to avoid these threads and these arguments upon your return to Sealine?

yeah sorry I forgot we arent allowed to challenge these facts.gone fishing .sorry Medic:ifishin
 

WWFisherman

Senior Member
MOULDIE wrote:

yeah sorry I forgot we arent allowed to challenge these facts.gone fishing .sorry Medic:ifishin
Yeah, Mouldie, it's all because we don't like to have our facts challenged. Nice try at trying to play the victim. You repeatedly choose to come onto a thread and push your agenda because you believe the topic contradicts your personal faith.

I'll repeat what I've said to you before, Mouldie: All the evidence in the world would not change your opinion on the age of the earth because you believe in something different, something that cannot be proved or disproved. So stop asking for scientific evidence on topics that you have made up your mind not to believe. Start a theology thread.
 

Martin SSS

New member
MOULDIE wrote:
Wrong,more and more evidence is coming to the fore from all branches of science to contradict the old earth fable,facts like short term comets,methane gas present on some planets that should have burned out long time ago,the list goes on and on i believe the earth to be young not only because of my faith but the overwhelming evidence to back up the time lines in the bible.

The time lines in a long earth module dont tie up and the goal posts are continually moved to fit in with these speculations,

Mouldie. We started discussing the age of stalactites. It was a hidden way of discussing the age of the Earth. You presented evidence. I looked at your evidence and thought "Wow, maybe I'm wrong" So I took some of the evidence you presented and investigated. It turned out that the solubles inside the water could affect the different growth rates. You accepted that. Some other facts are not verifiable yet, but that we will get to. That is how we discuss things and convince people of theories.
 

Mouldz

Sealiner
Martin SSS wrote:
MOULDIE wrote:
Wrong,more and more evidence is coming to the fore from all branches of science to contradict the old earth fable,facts like short term comets,methane gas present on some planets that should have burned out long time ago,the list goes on and on i believe the earth to be young not only because of my faith but the overwhelming evidence to back up the time lines in the bible.

The time lines in a long earth module dont tie up and the goal posts are continually moved to fit in with these speculations,

Mouldie. We started discussing the age of stalactites. It was a hidden way of discussing the age of the Earth. You presented evidence. I looked at your evidence and thought "Wow, maybe I'm wrong" So I took some of the evidence you presented and investigated. It turned out that the solubles inside the water could affect the different growth rates. You accepted that. Some other facts are not verifiable yet, but that we will get to. That is how we discuss things and convince people of theories.

I love discussing this subject but I am not going to be insulted for my beliefs(not by you) and when I stand up for myself I get red carded as making snide remarks and comments ,so I will' play the victim" and stay away .
 
Top