ethan@utastro.UUCP (Ethan Vishniac) (10/02/84)
[]
This is only tangentially related to creationism, but I have
been struck by a series of comments by R. Miller which ridicule
current ideas about geological history. In particular I seem to
recall that he thinks that mountains being eroded or overthrusts
occuring are humorous concepts. I'd like to explore this a bit
more closely. So Ray, which of the following ideas do you find
silly?
1. That sections of the Earth's surface appear to be moving
relative to one another at typical rates of about an inch
a year?
2. That these motions are persistent? (Notice that plate
boundaries are made obvious by geological activity.)
3. That the Earth is about 4 1/2 billion years old?
4. That 4 1/2 billion years x 1 inch/year = 71,000 miles?
5. That the above points imply that continents have more than
enough time to collide repeatedly?
6. That erosion occurs so that over several hundred million years
even a tall mountain can be swept away? (Erosion rates are
measurable after all.)
I suspect, in advance of your answer, that your objections can really be
reduced to an objection to estimates of the Earth's age, but if this isn't
the case I'd appreciate knowing it.
"I can't help it if my Ethan Vishniac
knee jerks" {charm,ut-sally,ut-ngp,noao}!utastro!ethan
Department of Astronomy
University of Texas
Austin, Texas 78712