The age of the earth

[BGoodForGoodSake]

I'm lost here . . .

the Seamounts, Darwins Points and Atolls show evidence of erosion as shown by the exposure of the different layers of volcanic rock.

On the islands which are currently active we can see these layers intact.
USGS

What layers of volcanic rock? I assume that each eruption may add alayer of volcanic rock. IT seams that erosion would be much more harsh if much of the volcanism happend underwater. I have read a few things about development of part of hte chain during the years of the flood.

What is really demonstrated here and what is the data?

The type of rock formed depends on the activity of the volcano which in turn is determined by it's association with the hotspot. Thus it is possible to see stages in the lifecycle of a volcanic island on the hawaiian island chain.

Hawaiian islands are known as shield volcanoes. The nature of the baslatic lava forms islands with gentle slopes rather than jagged peaks.

Lets take a look at Loihi. Loihi is the youngest of the hawaiian volcanoes. It is still under water. Being under water the resulting lava is different that that which occurs terrestrially. Here's a page analyzing recent samples.

Lava forming underwater forms a puffy type of rock called pillow basalt. On the surface lava cools into a type of rock called panoenoe, the texture reminicent of ropes. Sometimes the cooling process involves the escape of gasses, this type of cooling forms a rock termed aa.

Take a visit to the Waimea Valley in O'ahu and you can see examples of pillow lava exposed by erosion.

If a shield collapses further erruptions fill in the caldera and cool differently producing rocks more resistant to errosion. You ca take a trip to Kauai to see these formations.

Valleys and landslides are more than signs of erosion, they can change the local composition of the soil.

As rain travels down the slopes they create valleys and cut ridges. These in turn can be covered again with lava flows. Somtimes lavaflows will will in cracks in the surface and lead to unique formations known as a columnar basalt.

When an island becomes submerged through subsidence the result is either a flat topped seamount or a coral fringed atol.

Nothing is demonstrated this is only a list of observations. Do you disagree with this observation?

[Jbuza]

gone

[BGoodForGoodSake]

Very well I'll repost it here.

The first conclusion is based on the following observations.

The seafloor is moving westward at an average of 8cm per year currently.

All the islands form a single line more or less all the way to Kamchatka located on the eastern shore of Asia.

Only the eastern most islands in the chain have active volcanoes.

The Western most islands are aproximately 3800 miles from hawaii.
Thats aproximately 6115.5 km, or 611550720 cm.

The theory is that all of the islands are a result of the same hotspot.
At the current rate of 8 cm a year it would take 76.5 million years for the ocean crust to cary the island this distance. Of course this is just a simple calculation, no-one is implying a constant rate.

[Jbuza]

gone

[BGoodForGoodSake]

actually there is also some new information that throws into question the idea of a fixed hotspot, some say that the hotspot has moved as well.

Lets us suppose it has.

I agree with pretty much everything you said in that post.

How much would the islands sink in that given time period?

Subsidence rates taper off as the island matures.

How tall would they north western most island have to have been given an average rate of erosion applies over the same time frame?

Erosion rates also taper off as the island matures.

Also isnt the large part of volcanism the process of burying layers with newer and newer eruption?

Yes, including erosion in between eruption events, followed by errosion once the volcano has gone extinct.

I ask this bedcause I think I saw a claim somewhere that volcanic rock associated with cooling in water exists at a considerable elevation that might suggest a degree of volcanism that took place while the islands were under water.

Yes much of the volcanism must have occurred underwater.

The cataclysimc fracturing of the earths mantel, displacement of crust by water, and increased volcanism would suggest a lack of uniformity in the rate of drift.

Explain.

[Kerux]

I'm a YEarther, ie. about 6000 years.

I base my view strictly upon what can be found in God's Word.

For example,

The Bible says in Genesis that God created the heavens and the earth in six days, and on the seventh day He rested. This one day of rest in seven days is maintained throughout the entire Word of God.

How long is this day of rest?

24 hours, not billions or even millions of years.

Therefore, God created the heavens and the earth in six 24 hour days.

From that we can use the geneologies from Adam down to Christ as renumerated in the Gospels and detailed in the Old Testament and verified/confirmed by Jesus Christ, the Creator, Himself.

Hence, the heavens and the earth are 'young,' about six thousand years, not billions.

[BGoodForGoodSake]

You're posting in the wrong thread.

This thread concerns what would be different given the different models.

"What might we find if the earth is 10,000 years old?
What might we find if the earth is 4,000,000,000 years old? "

You can find a discussion here which is more along the lines of what you posted.

[Kerux]

Sorry, and that's fine.

But if scripture is to be interpreted the way I put forth, then all this other talk is moot, is it not?

[Jbuza]

gone

[BGoodForGoodSake]

I think most of that we went over in the geology thread, but according to the creation flood model, and a global cataclysm it is likely that the drift of the island chain is not unifrom. IF continents were drifting about, and the earth was fracturing, and the wieght of water was creating more mantel pressure, than we have a different set of variables, and the drift observed today would likely be much slower than at that proposed tiem when more geological activity was taking place.

I'm aware that sinking rates and erosion rates slow, but I'm fine with applying them in the same unifrom fashion that we applied the drift.

Lets take a look at the actual formation before we continue.





It looks like a neat line on the ocean floor, what would account for this?

[Canuckster1127]

Sorry, and that's fine.

But if scripture is to be interpreted the way I put forth, then all this other talk is moot, is it not?

Kerux,

Welcome. You're welcome to post wherever you find relevent.

I would suggest you read the thread thoroughly so that you are in the flow of conversation.

Read the Discussion Guildelines above which will help you understand the purpose of the board and guidelines we apply.

Keep in mind that this is an OEC board. YEC interaction is welcome. Don't be surprise or offended if you are vigorously challenged and asked some hard questions.

Look around, get your feet wet and come on in when you are ready.

Bart

[Kerux]

Don't be surprise or offended if you are vigorously challenged and asked some hard questions.

Be disappointed if I wasn't.

I hope you OECers aren't offended when challenged and asked some equally hard questions.

[Jbuza]

gone

[Canuckster1127]

Don't be surprise or offended if you are vigorously challenged and asked some hard questions.

Be disappointed if I wasn't.

I hope you OECers aren't offended when challenged and asked some equally hard questions.

Ask away.

You may want to check the main board and past threads. It's unlikely you'll have many new one's that haven't been asked before.

Also, if you're going to draw from other web-sites, it's always appreciated if you provide a link and acknowledge where you're getting your material from.

Welcome from a former YEC'er.

Bart

[BGoodForGoodSake]

Hey Bgood

Thanks for the images.

I'm not sue I would agree that it makes a neat line, but I understand what you are saying. I think it seems pretty clear that the island chain has moved over a volcanic hot spot.

What about the bend in the line. Would you say those "mountians" are also from the same hotspot?

It would appear so, I can't say for sure of course.
=)

The best two explanations are as follows.
The hotspot began migrating south at first untill stopping at a stable position.

The movement of the pacific plate changed directions when the Indian Sub-Continent collided with the Eurasian Plate.

Interesting to note that the date the Indian Sub-continent collided with the Eurasian plate, the age of the islands near the bend in the chain and the date the hotspot is proposed to move all coincide.