Intelligent Design vs. Casino Universe

First off, if you haven't read any f the books I recommended, how did you know what to ask of Googol?
I did recommend a geochron book because you were spouting off about C14 and some other techniques in which you were all wet, RECALL?

1. Im not sure where youre trying to go with this because you are bouncing back ND FORTH BETWEEN EARTH AND METEORITES.

Zircons aren't very common on meteorites. Only meteorites pf volcanic origins from their planet of origin can tell us anything. A type of meteorite called a EUCRITE does contain zircons and the best examples are from Vesta or Mars itself.

Zircons only provide us with any degree of TEMPORAL data, not environmental data so I would rely upon water from a zircon telling me much of anything worth knowing other than a date and a qualitative chemical makeup.

Also, Im no expert on where all the WATER came from on this planet, but, because of its relative scarcity (on a volumetric basis), its reasonable that it came from multiple hits by comets and other bolides. If you find evidence, please share it .

I can give you several good edited methods symposia papaers on the uses of Zircons and Hafnium from igneous bodies. One of the most important items that you need to keep in mind is that zircons are "reset" like clocks whenever they go above a certain temperature (K). this we call anatexis its a "remelting" by extreme metamorphism or igneous means.

By the way Herald, your understanding of how fast the earth cooled was from some other sources than science. The period called the HDEAN lasted for about half a Billion years after accretion of the planet. A geologist named Preston Cloud proposed the name based upon fairly good evidence back in the late 1960's. This was further reinforced by later data so your 100 million +year time window (unless I misunderstand what youre trying to say) is .4 Billion years off

(You should really get a most recent copy of the ICSC time scale for the earth. This is generally agreed to among Christian and atheist nd Buddhist and Jewish and Muslim scientists (and a host of other worldviews Ive forgotten) OH YEH, Mormons.

It gets scarcer in proportion to the increasing size of the volume chosen. For the volume of the earth's crust we are capable of exploiting water is not scarce at all.

In fact, taking everything into account, there might be just the right amount of water in the biosphere to the nearest pint.

You're at it again fm!! Winning, or deflecting arguments by your choice of words. It's really naughty from a scientific point of view.

no its not. Water is less than 0.06% of the earths volume. Its a road slick that can be swept away in a cosmological flash.

Jesus said that fm. Are you feeling all humble and inconsequential today and wish us to share?

I wonder what went through the minds of those Russians who witnessed that meteorite landing.

On the bright side I dare say it provided the constipation sufferers with some relief.

I had answered the point the first time you made it. It's a good job it isn't 60%. As solid ice.

Probably something like ёбанный в рот!"

what are you talking about?

A scientist on Newsnight explaining the dramatic new discovery to the mystified viewers said that the entity that Banged Big was "like a marble". She didn't specify whether it was a blood alley or a glass alley.

There's nothing to tell. I've had this argument with fools like you a million times.

Recently I've taken to just laughing at you guys

The main problem with Herald is that he gets his points of reference all mixed up. He wonders why meteorites don't tell us anything about the earth, yet he agrees that they come from planets or are extra solar system.

Ive asked him to read about the sue of zircons and radioisotopes. Instead he goes to google and looks up jewelry.

Ah well.

Well--tell us about the "the sue of zircons and radioisotopes" then. Bits of meteorite have been used as jewelry. And for display in glass cases under the control of various jealous curators.

What does "the sue of zircons and radioisotopes" tell us about the subject of the thread? What you have asked him to read up on is neither here nor there. It does not cut the mustard that you can type the phrase. At least not with me.

I have invited you to read up on certain things. You show no sign of having done so.

Your confidential tone to JJ suggests that he is familiar with "the sue of zircons and radioisotopes" so perhaps he might explain them to us.

We are eager to know. That's why we come on A2K.

my apologies, "The USE of radioisotopes and zircons"

Had you been paying attention youd have seen that Herald was misrepresenting time based upon some bogus radioisotopic dates and WAAAY BACK many months ago I gave him a request .
It only has no relevance if you just pop in as you do on occasion.

Well then--tell us about "The USE of radioisotopes and zircons".

BTW, FM you didn't answer to the question: where have all that water come from ... only on our planet, where the keyword is 'only' ... and how old is actually the water on the planet?

Just because you asked a question Im going to ask you to do the calculations (since you are proud of your mathematical prowess)> Therefore Im going to let you do the math.

From the Water Encyclopedia ed 3 , the total volume of water on the planet is 1,385,000,000 km^3. The TOTAL volume of the planet is 1,080,000,000,000 km^3.
1What percent of our planet's total volume is water?

2 What would the dimensions of a single comet be that could deliver such an amount of water? (SEE BELOW)

3 Assuming that all water accretion took place after the HAdean period, how frequently would comets of say 0.0001% of that amount have to strike the earth to provide "seed" water?.

Time and volume, that's all. You can use the mensuration formula for the volume of a sphere (in km^3)
________________________________
________________________________
If V= 4/3 X (3.14) X r^3 (in km)
and solve for r (You can then multiply r X 2 and that will provide you the approximate diameter of the space body (Lets assume its a sphere, even though this is probably not the way these things looked)

Where do you see this in the bubbles ... of the zyrconium crystals, for example?

It doesn't matter. Much more interesting is 'How' ... did it appear or come ... or whatever here?

I am not going to see anything ... bellow, for you don't have the slightest idea why didn't your comets deliver water to the other planets of the SS, and have done so only to the Earth.

No, no, FM, you are not supposed to assume anything here. You are supposed to established it ... on the grounds of evidences.

It is not that simple ... at all, for you have established neither the time, nor the volume

JimmyJ, this argument 'with fools like you a million times' is not a valid logical argument ... unless supported by some evidences ... that you obviously haven't.

Your personal emotions could not be any valid argument ... of any kind, for they might be due to personal ignorance on the theme ... and to a lot of other things ... like for example they might be worked out system for universal 'argumentation' on any scientific and non-scientific theme.
The personal emotions are not a logical argument. They could not even be a sign to an argument. The emotions are simply 'subjective, conscious experience characterized primarily by physiological expressions, biological reactions, and mental states' ... and nothing else. They are neither logical inference, nor logical evidence, nor logical arguments. They are nothing of the kind.
In the capacity of top biologist, as you are presenting to be, you should have known these things much better than us. Anyway.

The real problem Herald is that fm thought he was providing some science and the utter ridiculousness of his post drags the good name of science in the dirt.

That he claims influence in the educational system where he is is another problem but only one for the students in the area.

JJ has no arguments. He is merely posing in his own chosen social whirl as a man of science and his credibility is dependent on that social whirl having no science.

That he thinks he can bring such drivel to an international debate speaks volumes for his closet provincialism.

The idea that calling people "fools" is an argument is one which is common with the basest types of football hooliganism.

The next Galileo moment is at hand. It is the mapping of the human genome and whether we are ready for it.

The consensus on a recent Newsnight discussion on the issue was that we are not.

Is "Newsnight" still debating who will win the second world war too? They are about 12 years behind the time. The finished map of the genome was reported out with 99% accuracy in 2003. The HUMAN GENOME PROJCT has been one of the biggest collaborative interdisciplinary worldwide events since the Columbian Exchange.

"Galileo moments", Why has this become such a trite statement in the international press ? Every time some school kid invents a new app for his cell phone some douche bag blogerator calls it a Galileo Moment.