Rocks don't require millions of years to form

It is common belief that rock layers in the earth require millions, and sometimes hundreds of millions of years to form. Despite this, there is an abundance of evidence that all types of rock can form rather quickly.

Mudbrick is a term used for bricks that are made from mud. Mud, mixed with organic components, can be put in a mould and then let to dry in the sun. Within days you will get a brick that is lithified mud/sand. This is a rock. Technically it is a mudrock. There are also types of bricks that are metamorphic rock. Here is the Great Mosque of Djenne which was completed in 1907. It is made of lithified mudbrick, or in other words, mud that has become a rock:



Despite this process being obviously proven to occur quickly, it is often inferred that mudrock in nature must be millions of years old! It is actually subtly accepted within geology that rocks can form in days. Yet it has somehow became common thought that rocks must take millions of years to form. The main thing that tricks people into supposing rocks are millions of years old is radioactive dating of rocks. The lay-person trusts that the experts have a fool-proof method to date these rocks, but that is not the case. Take for example fresh volcanic rock being dated from 250,000-3,200,000 years old despite being known to be 25-50 years old:


source

These results came from the Geochron laboratory, a well-respected radiometric dating lab. The error comes from geologists assuming that there is no daughter isotope in the initial formation of the igneous rock. This greatly skews the data as being wayyyy older than it actually is. The truth is, you could essentially set the initial isotopic ratio to anything lower than the present day concentrations to yield whatever result you would like. Geologists usually calibrate it to the oldest possible date. This experiment on fresh lava rock shows that such an assumption is very wrong.

The same is true for stalactites, which were also erroneously supposed to be millions of years old. Thanks to empirical science conducted by independent researchers around the world, we can get a more accurate timescale for how long it takes stalactites to form.



The above video is a home experiment conducted that shows that limestone stalactites can form rather quickly. In the experiment above he found that the limestone stalactite will grow about 1ft every 10 years. That means 1,000 years can generate a 100ft stalactite. The record for the longest stalacatite every found is only 92ft long, in Brazil:



According to the experimental rate on limestone stalactite formation rate, this record-breaking stalactite could have formed in less than 1000 years. The confusion comes from random articles online making unbased claims, such as this article which arbitrarily claims that stalactites only grow about 4 inches every thousand years. Far different from the scientific experiment that showed 1000 years could generate a 100ft stalactite.

I don't know how old the earth is, but from looking at observable evidence I also know geologists don't either.

a reply to: cooperton

Satan is Christine and she is with Adry, adrian, outside in the courtyard.

a reply to: [post=26549714]Randomname3[/pos

satan is a male, he is the Father of Lies, and Jesus said they are of their Father Satan, satan will not take the form of a woman, so Ketchen is satan.

a reply to: Randomname3

but christine anwered to the name satan, so who is satan. christine, not my mom, is satan.

a reply to: Randomname3

christine is the bride of satan. the whore of babylon.

a reply to: Randomname3

And Amen says Jesus. Amen. it is finally over he says, God bless and sleep in peace and wake up to the new day of the Lord. Amen.

a reply to: Randomname3

You sure don’t like this Christine lady.

a reply to: cooperton

I don’t have much if any geological knowledge but for what it’s worth I’ve seen three inch stalactites on the underside of concrete floor slabs in buildings that are less than 30 years old.

I would assume that the buildings weren’t experiencing water leaks from day one so the stalactites must have formed in less than 30 years.

Good thread OP.

The other lie is about dinosaurs being millions of years old. They have found soft tissue in dino remains.

a reply to: cooperton

Don't step in my geology.

What type of rocks are we talking about. Sedimentary, metamorphic, or igneous?

Cuz we sort of know how those work. And your right and wrong. Limestone is like the time capsule of sedimentary rock. You can even tell what type of environment was present by the stridation in the progressive layers. And the hint there is anything forming in the presence of water forms faster. Like scale in an old plumbing system.

Another fast forming rock is like the igneous rock on the Tongan island that was obliterated, at less than 100 years old.

What am I saying? You don't believe in radiocarbon dating or core samples.

It amusing that you want to try to discredit any narrative that goes longer than 8000 years but.. come on.

Here's some actual North American geology which needs millions of years to explain.

What if told you 525-550 million years ago the edge of the continental boundary went through The center of Texas? What If I said at that point the continent tried to split apart in two places and two failed rift zones were created. And today those are called the Reel Foot Rift (New Madrid seismic zone) and Southern Oklahoma Alocogen. And we know this because of the accidentally triggered earthquakes and major sequence earthquakes the winter of 1812.

We can also state things like "The Rocky Mountains are uplift deformation caused the subduction of the Farralon Plate under the North American Plate millions of years ago.

We can actually wind back the clock through all the continental movement and land deformation with a precision that only idiocy argues against.

One the coolest things about the city I live is a mountain park with trails 10 miles from the ocean. And all throughout it you can find million year old sea shells from when the ocean was 400 feet higher.

I think any god you want to believe in is fully capable of a trillion+ year design. And allowing enough time to gradually reveal the world to its special little creations, where ever it creates them. We could even be like a No Mans Whatever for a hyperintelligent god race.

Maybe its part of the plan to come back in 2000 year increments and reveal little more about it all. It's god. According to its priori role it can do whatever it wants, including withhold the truth like any parent world. Science may just be that divine power's plan to take off the training wheels.

Anything. Just please stop trying to tell me we don't know the exact age of and composition of the earths crust. Up to and including when things formed, how long they took, and why. Or trying to use fast forming sedimentary layers like that in a water riddled cave to discredit the billion year process to it all.

Here is a nice 1.2 billion year history for America's "oldest" mountain chain.

www.wvpublic.org...

a reply to: Degradation33
Nonsense

originally posted by: NorthOfStuff
a reply to: cooperton

I don’t have much if any geological knowledge but for what it’s worth I’ve seen three inch stalactites on the underside of concrete floor slabs in buildings that are less than 30 years old.

I would assume that the buildings weren’t experiencing water leaks from day one so the stalactites must have formed in less than 30 years.

Good thread OP.

Beautiful. That is the sort of straught-forward science that is needed to show that the ages they have for these processes are way off.

originally posted by: Degradation33
a reply to: cooperton
What am I saying? You don't believe in radiocarbon dating or core samples.

No I firmly believe in the science of half-life radioactive decay. I also know for sure that without knowing the initial concentration you can't solve for time elapsed 't' in the half life equation. The initial concentration is assumed to be 100-0. This supposition is proven wrong by fresh Lava rock being dated as old as 3.2 million years old.

What type of rocks are we talking about. Sedimentary, metamorphic, or igneous?

All of them are able to form quickly.

It amusing that you want to try to discredit any narrative that goes longer than 8000 years but.. come on.

I don't know how old the earth is. If you're referring to Genesis, the earth existed before the 7 days of creation, so we have no idea how time would have perpetuated during this limbo period.

What if told you 525-550 million years ago the edge of the continental boundary went through The center of Texas?

I would ask how, specifically, you could know to that degree of certainty the age of these structures.

And we know this because of the accidentally triggered earthquakes and major sequence earthquakes the winter of 1812.

How does that unambiguously show the age of these structures?

We can also state things like "The Rocky Mountains are uplift deformation caused the subduction of the Farralon Plate under the North American Plate millions of years ago.

We can actually wind back the clock through all the continental movement and land deformation with a precision that only idiocy argues against.

One the coolest things about the city I live is a mountain park with trails 10 miles from the ocean. And all throughout it you can find million year old sea shells from when the ocean was 400 feet higher.

What is the data that insists all of this is super old? How is there certainty it's not due to some other sort of process than you think?

I think any god you want to believe in is fully capable of a trillion+ year design. And allowing enough time to gradually reveal the world to its special little creations, where ever it creates them. We could even be like a No Mans Whatever for a hyperintelligent god race.

Yeah, but I also dont want to blindly believe the scientific mainstream blindly. I looked at empirical examples and it is not as certain as we were led to believe

Anything. Just please stop trying to tell me we don't know the exact age of and composition of the earths crust.

Show the conclusive unambiguous evidence in your own words.

a reply to: cooperton

So when did dinosaurs exist? Allosaurus fossil

I’ve been all over the country, and seen fossils in nature. So the sedimentary rocks that these dinosaur fossils were found in are not millions of years old? But only a few thousand? If that is the case, why is there no known literature on dinosaurs or anything else to downplay the physical evidence of them?

And if it’s all made up….. why? And to what end?

Saying “rocks don’t take millions of years to form” is one of the logical fallacies because it isn’t specific; *some* rocks can form instantly, while others do in fact take millions of years…..

The Great Mosque of Djenné would turn to dust if it wasn't re-surfaced every year, so while a hardened brick I don't think it really meets the definition of a rock.

From Wiki:
The entire community of Djenné takes an active role in the mosque's maintenance via a unique annual festival. This includes music and food, but has the primary objective of repairing the damage inflicted on the mosque in the past year (mostly erosion caused by the annual rains and cracks caused by changes in temperature and humidity). In the days leading up to the festival, the plaster is prepared in pits. It requires several days to cure but needs to be periodically stirred, a task usually falling to young boys who play in the mixture, thus stirring up the contents. Men climb onto the mosque's built-in scaffolding and ladders made of palm wood and smear the plaster over the face of the mosque.

a reply to: cooperton

You gotta be familiar with isotopes, right?

Let's do a granite example. Granite is the most well known igneous rock. (Made up usually of Quartz, Feldspar, and Mica) It forms really deep underground at continental boundaries from molten magma. And takes MILLIONS OF YEARS TO CRYSTALIZE and then make its way to the surface. Via mountain uplift or erosion usually.

* This process, of course differs from a basaltic lava flow creating a new island at the surface, even though they are both types of igneous rock, Extrusive vs. Intrusive. Low silica content vs. high silica content, Cools fast, cools slowly.

But as soon as the latter cools into the granite we know and make countertops out of, it has an isotope decay that can be measured with precision based on a set Half-Life that never changes.

pubs.usgs.gov...

When igneous rocks crystallize, the newly formed minerals contain various amounts of chemical elements, some of which have radioactive isotopes. These isotopes decay within the rocks according to their half-life rates, and by selecting the appropriate minerals (those that contain potassium, for instance) and measuring the relative amounts of parent and daughter isotopes in them, the date at which the rock crystallized can be determined. Most of the large igneous rock masses of the world have been dated in this manner.

.

We all know this. And can absolutely affirm said example of granite was radio isotope dated to at least the beginning of The Permian Age, 300 million years ago. That granite slab cutting board may have crystalized 1.7 billion years ago though.

Isotope decay doesn't lie.

a reply to: cooperton
There is a passage in Psalms that says not to lean on your own understanding…

originally posted by: Somethingsamiss
a reply to: cooperton
There is a passage in Psalms that says not to lean on your own understanding…

“…In all thy ways acknowledge him, and he shall direct thy paths.”

a reply to: cooperton

Thanks this is interesting.
I remember reading years ago about the sun emitting some ray that was changing the speed rate of particles on earth and made me always wonder about the radiocarbon dating.
Anyway what your showing in your op and this "tartaria" thing I see starting to appear makes me go hmmm.

a reply to: visitedbythem

A brilliant rebuttal.

Great thread, thanks for sharing. I remember watching a YouTube about the formation of rock-cut temples, where it showed that the rock surrounding the temples is far younger than commonly thought.