Magneettikentätkin todistavat totuuden puolesta.

Ja maailman kaikki sadattuhannet tutkijat ja tuhansien yliopistojen koulutusohjelmat ovat pahojen ilkeiden kavalien jne. evokkien kehittämän savuverhon takana ja sinä olet ainoa joka uskaltaa kertoa totuuden.

Aijaijaiiaaaa!
Nämä ovat myrkkyä evouskoville attereille ja paha kun ei voi kiistääkkään tutkimuksia, niin pitää puhua vain ilmoista.;)

Trollailu jatkuu tai sitten joku yrittää oikeasti. Mene ja tiedä kun kretuilla ei ole selkärankaa esiintyä vakionimimerkeillä. Raukat.

Taas puskee kretujen vanhoja väitteitä, jotka on kumottu jo aikaa sitten:

http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CD/CD701.html

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/magfields.html

Kukahan se tämän 'tosi on!' nimimerkin alla postaa vanhoja kretujen jo perusteellisesti kumottuja väitteitä - ettei vain olisi Pölhökustaa.

Russell Humphrey on tunnettu kreationisti, joka on laatinut muitakin hörhöjä hypoteeseja, kuten oman vaihtoehtonsa Big Bang -teorialle:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russell_Humphreys

Täältä löytyy varsin helppotajuinen selitys sille, miksi Humphreyn väitteet eivät pidä paikkansa:

http://www.huecotanks.com/debunk/magnetic.htm

Humphreys is, of course, unable to produce any scientific data whatsoever to substantiate any of his assumptions.

In fact, when rocks on the sea floor are scientifically examined, they demonstrate a striking magnetic pattern: on each side of the mid-Atlantic rift where the earth's plates emerge from the mantle, differing "stripes" of varying magnetic intensity can be found, each the mirror image of the stripes on the other side. As each area of crust emerges and solidifies, the metallic particles within it are magnetized, and take on the strength and polarity of the magnetic field within which they emerged. As the sea floor spreads apart through plate tectonics, new areas of rock emerge and are similarly magnetized. This produces a pattern of different magnetic strengths. (Some creationists have attempted to discredit these observations by arguing that the local rocks have undergone a process of magnetic reversal, but if this were true it would produce a patchwork pattern of random reversals, not the mirror-image pattern that is actually found.)

More surprisingly, such measurements show occasions when the earth's magnetic field has dropped to virtually nothing, and re-emerges with the magnetic poles reversed--the magnetic north pole is now the south pole and vice versa. Some 171 such magnetic reversals have been found, extending back over 76 million years. (By determining the strength and polarity of the magnetic signature of particular rocks, and by comparing the resulting patterns to sea-floor patterns, the rock can be roughly dated, a method known as "paleomagnetism"). Between 1953 and 1958, such a magnetic polarity reversal was also observed directly, in the sun. During this time, the sun's magnetic dipole field decreased in strength, dropped to almost nothing for a period of several years, and re-emerged with reversed polarity.

There is thus no justification whatever for Barnes and Humphreys to attempt to extrapolate their magnetic measurements for the last 150 years or so back to the moment of creation. It is apparent that the earth's magnetic field is not "decaying", and that it routinely fluctuates and even occasionally reverses itself completely. The only explanation that the creationists can invoke to deal with these fluctuations and reversals is to turn to their religious sources, and opine that these reversals were a result of the actions of God in bringing about Noah's Flood. The creationist "magnetic field decay" hypothesis is simply not capable of giving us any scientific estimate of the earth's age.

Joissakin 1970-luvun pienoisvetureissa on tasavirtamoottori jonka kestomagneetti on ilmeisesti kumia. Kysymys kreationisteille (olisivatko ainakin Hiski naapurin.kissa vaiti?): miten kumi magnetoidaan?