The earth is covered with about six inches of top soil.It takes about one thousand years to make one inch.If the earth was as old as scientist say what happened to all that soil.Also if the earth was as old as they say and the moon was as old as they say the moon would be covered in a very thick layer of dust.The astronauts wore snow boots expecting all that dust but it was not there.What happened to all the dust.
33 comments
I'm no soil geologist, but doesn't the word erosion enter into this? Just a thought.
As for the moon, the pro-creationist website, answers in genesis, suggests the soil argument is dead:
"During the 1960s and 1970s many creationists adopted the “moon dust” argument based on early calculations by some secular scientists, but more accurate information is now available.
Those predictions got a lot of press, yet further satellite measurements of dust in space indicated a much smaller rate of accumulation than previously assumed... Therefore moon dust cannot be used as an age indicator one way or the other."
Massive fail.
"If the earth was as old as scientist say what happened to all that soil."
A. Questions are followed by a question mark. Do you know what that is?underneath the top soil?
"[M]oon...covered in a very thick layer of dust."
When other young earth creationists ask you "Please stop using such a stupid argument", it really says something.
Of course, the scientific answers that actually explain all this in simple terms were ignored.
Yahoo Answers: Misinformation & bias reinforcement at the click of a button.
"The earth is covered with about six inches of top soil.It takes about one thousand years to make one inch.If the earth was as old as scientist say what happened to all that soil."
The topsoil where I live is about a foot deep so that makes 12,000 years. Below that there is lake sediment deposited by a last-gasp--of-the-ice-age lake, about a foot deep, as far as I could dig.
That makes 24,000 years. If the earth is as old as your myth says, where did all that soil come from?
Nothing happened to it. Evolution predicted * the dust would not be there. Also the astronauts didn't wear snow boots because evolution predicted there would be no snow on the moon.
* evolution actually has nothing to do with dust or snow on the moon, so I dumbed it down to something your religion crippled brain could process.
From a creationist publication:
"... until new evidence is forthcoming, creationists should not continue to use the dust on the moon as evidence against an old age for the moon and the solar system." [Snelling, Andrew A., and David E. Rush, 1993. "Moon Dust and the Age of the Solar System" in Creation Ex Nihilo Technical Journal Volume 7, No. 1, pp. 2-42.]
Only six inches of topsoil? I can dig several feet down in my yard before running into clay.
And the "dust on the moon" argument is so lame and has been debunked so much that even Answers in Genesis says not to use it any more.
Here's Neil Armstrong's very first impression about the surface of the moon, before his feet even touched the ground.
"I'm at the foot of the ladder. The LM footpads are only depressed in the surface about 1 or 2 inches, although the surface appears to be very, very fine grained, as you get close to it. It's almost like a powder. (The) ground mass is very fine. (Pause)"
There was plenty of dust ? liz ?, clearly you just didn't pay attention.
^^^
Fnarr, fnarr, kyick, kyick.
"The astronauts wore snow boots expecting all that dust but it was not there."
When I first heard the "moondust" argument, it was framed in just these "NASA expected X"/"the lunar lander was built for Y" type terms. So I initially didn't know about the miscalculated estimates of rate of accumulation or such like. The TalkOrigins Archive filled those blanks in for me much later.
But I still had an immediate answer for the creationist nut (and physicist no less); why would NASA or anyone expect the conditions of the lunar surface to be anything but what they are given that half a dozen unmanned probes had already landed on the Moon by the time of the first manned landing?
Many months later I heard him using the same "moondust" argument on someone else, only this time it wasn't the Apollo landings that had anticipated there being more dust, but instead the first unmanned probes. Clearly he had simply reworded his argument to circumvent my rebuttal, and at the time I thought he must be knowingly lying.
Now I'm not so sure. I've seen many, many creationists argue online, met a few in person, seen the same arguments put forward again and again, sometimes with subtle changes born of experience, but very often with total sincerity. I honestly think some of them don't even know they are doing it.
I.e.
Apologist: You want proof? I saw Jesus yesterday!
what happened to all that soil.
Why, it evolved into people, of course.
In my garden there are areas where there is just an inch or two of topsoil, then it's all light red sand. In my mother's garden it's all rich, heavy clay from the surface down, at least several feet deep.
Dust is not heavy, dearie, it tends to blow around, at least until it gets hard and waterlogged. Ask the bedouines in Sahara, how much top soil they've got...
Dust - as we know it - is dessiccated, dead skin flakes. From People; it's why we need to do Dusting around the house periodically. PROTIP: The more people reside in a house, the more dust is created, therefore more dusting.
If one has parties on a regular basis, one collects more dust, natch.
The reason why there's no 'Dust' on the Moon is due to no Humans, ergo, no parties. No Atmosphere, really. [/hyper-smartarse] X3
I'll just respond with this : The oceanic crust is 5 km (3 mi) to 10 km (6 mi) thick[2] and ... the continental crust is typically from 30 km (20 mi) to 50 km.
Only six inches of top soil all over , hm? Does that include the oceans?
Damn knowledge, destoying creaionist arguments!
Then again, it's Yahoo Answers...
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.
