"Oops. But regardless, you are not supplying a counterposition. You're simply assuming that creationism is the only alternative to explaining unknown phenomena."

You didn't even apologize!!!! :)

Me: "Evolutionist claim that the reason the Earth's magnetic field is not decaying is because of the Earth's rotation, creating a 'dynamo' effect (This is my understanding). But this theory can not be used for Uranus's magnetic field because the rotational and the magnetic axis's are so far apart"

You: I'm not totally familiar with this effect, please elaborate."

Ok. An arguement creationist use is that the magnetic field of earth is decaying now at a fast rate, so the earth could not be very old (It is much more than that, I am abbreviating it). Evolutionts then said that the earth's rotation must create a kind of 'dynamo' effect which has kept the magnetic field going for so long (This has problems of it's own, but I won't go into them). The problem is this arguement can not be used on Uranus, because the magnetic axis and the rotational axis are 60% apart. Thus a 'dynamo' could not be plausable, and the magnetic field would have decayed a LONG time ago. Elaborate enough?

You: "Well, as far as I know, Uranus has almost no water/ice/vapor. So, the next logical possibility is that Titania was a large comet."

I'm not saying that comets can not become moons, but has this ever been recorded? I've been looking all over the net for it and can't find anything. Could you give me a link?

KC2GWX 73's

• Where I come from, "oops" is an apology, mister! - stormcrow - August 9, 2002 - 04:26 UTC
  • Oh sorry. Apology accepted! :) - kc2gwx - August 9, 2002 - 14:13 UTC
    • Okey dokey - stormcrow - August 9, 2002 - 14:49 UTC