Forum Home | Log in | Signup | My Page | Rules | FAQ | Boards | Members | Search
Replies to Msg. #1265023
.
 Msg. #  Subject Posted by    Board    Date   
08568 Re: Earth's Rotation ...
   
   Looks like someone took all the water out ofthe Atlantic Ocean. :mrgr... 		nacl01   GRITZ   19 May 2025
 11:09 PM

The above list shows replies to the following message:

Earth's Rotation ...

By: monkeytrots in GRITZ
Mon, 19 May 25 5:26 AM
Msg. 08527 of 10937
Jump to msg. #  

Posted with the note that I DO NOT BELIEVE THIS, but it does summarize correctly the non-creationist scientists' beliefs

Was the earth's core rotating when it cooled from it's gaseous state

The Earth's core didn't form directly from a gaseous state; it formed as part of the planet's accretion from solid and molten material about 4.5 billion years ago. During the early solar system's formation, the Earth coalesced from a hot, rotating disk of gas and dust. As this material collapsed under gravity, it conserved angular momentum, causing the proto-Earth to spin.
The core, primarily iron and nickel, began forming as denser materials sank toward the center during a process called differentiation, while the Earth was still partially molten. This happened within the first few tens of millions of years after accretion. The core itself was never gaseous; it was liquid or semi-liquid due to extreme heat and pressure, and the inner core later solidified as the planet cooled.
Given the Earth's overall rotation, the molten core likely inherited some rotational motion. Fluid dynamics and the Coriolis effect from the planet's spin would have influenced the core’s movement, potentially setting up complex flows. Evidence from paleomagnetism and models of the early geodynamo (which requires a rotating, convecting fluid core to generate a magnetic field) suggests the core was rotating and convecting relatively early, possibly within 100-500 million years after formation.
So, while the core wasn't "rotating" as a distinct entity when the Earth was a gaseous nebula, by the time the core formed and the planet began cooling, it was part of a rotating system and likely had rotational dynamics driven by the Earth's spin. Precise details of its early rotation rate or state are still uncertain and rely on geophysical models.

My subnotes: The magnetic poles reverse, on average, every 200,000 to 300,000 years. The field is due to magma flows in the earth's interior, pretty complex, that fluctuate and change continually. The reversals are due to changes in those flows.

CONTINENTAL DRIFT/Plate Tectonics is NOT DUE TO THE EARTH's rotation. It is due seafloor spreading at the junctures of different plates at different rates. Mountains are due to uplifting magma back from the edges of continental plates caused by rising molten maga from one plate being subducted under another plate. It is quite incorrect to state that mountains are a 'recent geologic phenomena' - they have existed pretty much since the 'floating' continental plates have existed.

One of my favourite diagrams showing seafloor spreading/Plate Tectonics

Uploaded Image

I can not locate the FIRST image of this sort (late 70's) which I believe was a downward continuation of satellite gravity data. Continental drift/Plate Tectonic theory was in early adopter stages when I first started college - but the publication of these images pretty much ended all discussion of whether it was actually true.

The most common error made in geology is the incorrect assumption about rates and using the 'Theory of Uniformity' to support those assumptions.

The Theory Basically, all geologic processes seen today occurred in the past.

What the theory does NOT say is anything about rates - NOR does it state that all processes that occured in the past still occur today. Both of those statements are completely false.


Avatar

Finally, brethren, whatsoever things are true, whatsoever things are honest, whatsoever things are just, whatsoever things are pure, whatsoever things are lovely, whatsoever things are of good ...