mirrored file at http://SaturnianCosmology.Org/ 
For complete access to all the files of this collection
	see http://SaturnianCosmology.org/search.php 
==========================================================
The Collected Works of Tim Thompson

_An off & on member of the [1]Skeptics Society, I am a committed
opponent of pseudoscience. I do my part by writing about it; from this
page you can reach everything I wrote that want you to see. Primarily
I have concentrated on young-Earth creationism and Velikovskian type
catastrophism, mixed in with a little just-plain science. My active
research in astronomy & physics is featured on my [2]research page.
This is my writing for public consumption._

_Nothing I write is sacrosanct; I am prepared to fix mistakes, or
retract anything that turns out to be erroneous. Feel free to
[3]contact me regarding anything I write with suggestions for
improvement, or whatever._

_Military History Writings_

* [4]On the gulf War
_This is my first try at a military web page. The center piece of
this effort is an order of battle, a complete list of all units
that deployed, and their organization. I give a short description
of the action, but probably don't say anything you shouldn't
already know. Links to online military history sources are
included. As far as I know, the order of battle that I present
here is the most detailed single source for this information that
is available on the web, and maybe anywhere. _

_Anti Creation-Science Writings_

_I write specifically in response to what I consider the recklessly
pseudo-scientific notion that the Earth is about 10,000 years old. The
young-Earth creation scientists insist that valid, bona-fide
scientific argument & evidence show that the Earth really is that
young, contrary to standard science, which pinpoints the age of the
Earth at around 4,500,000,000 years. I can think of no more charitable
response than to say that it's a really stupid idea. These articles
provide more detailed responses, to specific arguments raised. All of
these articles were written by me, and me alone. But a lot of other
like minded people write with the same thing in mind, and their
collected writings can be found in such venues as the [5]Talk.Origins
Archive, and the [6]Internet Infidels Modern Library._
* [7]A Radiometric Dating Resource List
_There are a lot of ways to derive relative ages, to tell that one
thing is older than another. There are even a lot of ways to tell
when something is really old. But there is really only one way to
tell how old something is, an absolute age in years. It's done by
radiometric (or radioisotope) dating. In simple terms, we take
advantage of our knowledge of radioactive decay rates to determine
the absolute time since the radioactive clock was last reset.
These methods are attacked relentlessly by young-Earth
creationists; not surprisingly, since they constitute by far the
most powerful, direct evidence for the age of the Earth. So I have
collected links to every worthwhile resource I could find. Here
you will find rebuttals to claims made by young-Earthers, as well
as straight explanations of dating methods, from the simple to the
advanced level. Every web resource I could find is here, and I
think it is the most complete list of its kind anywhere._
* [8]Creation Science, the Age of the Universe, and Stellar
Evolution
_A criticism of Henry Morris, and others. Morris says that stellar
evolution is not even science, despite being one of the major
activities in astrophysics world wide. In this article I show that
stellar evolution is science, and also good science._
* [9]The Recession of the Moon and the Age of the Earth-Moon System
_A refutation of the common creationist argument that the tidal
physics of the Earth-Moon system precludes an evolutionary age.
Includes an introduction to tides, and an examination of the
history of the scientific study of the tidal interaction between
the Earth and the Moon. It is demonstrated that there are no
inconsistencies between an evolutionary age of the Earth and the
tidal interaction between the Earth and Moon._
* [10]On Creation Science and the Alleged Decay of the Earth's
Magnetic Field
_A criticism of the idea put forth by creation scientist Thomas G.
Barnes that the age of the Earth can be physically determined as
about 10,000 years, via the exponential decay of the Earth's
dipole magnetic field. Unfortunately for Barnes, the Earth's
magnetic field isn't exponentially decaying, which pulls the rug
out from under his argument. But even if it were, his methodology
is so bad that it wouldn't mean anything anyway._
* [11]Meteorite Dust and the Age of the Earth
_A criticism of the common young-Earth claim that the deposition
rate of meteorite dust on the Earth is so large, that both the
Earth and Moon should be deeply covered in space dust by now, were
they really 4,500,000,000 years old. But their hasty argument is
based on a mid 1960's paper that was the first quantitative effort
to measure the meteorite dust accretion rate onto the Earth. And
even then they exaggerate the author's conclusions. But since then
we have measured the true dust fall rate directly, and the answer
is that we really expect about 66 centimeters of spacedust over 4
billion plus years._
* [12]On Creationism & Plate Tectonics
* [13]On Walter Brown & Plate Tectonics
_Two articles in response to the claim by creation scientist
Walter Brown that plate tectonics is false, and that plate
subduction does not happen. The first article is archived here on
my webpages, and is a synopsis of posts I made to the tall.origins
newsgroup. The second article is housed in the [14]Internet
Infidels Modern Library. Both address the same issue, in slightly
different form. Both contain references for further reading. And
either one serves to prove that Walter Brown's assertions qualify
as pseudo-science._
* [15]Is There Evidence for a Young Earth?
_A direct response to a list of 10 Scientific Evidences for a
Young Earth, originally hosted by the [16]Christian Aplolgetics &
Research Ministry (CARM). All 10 "evidences" are typical of the
careless approach young-Earth creationists commonly take to
science, ranging from the outdated sources to outright falsehoods.
Each of the 10 "evidences" is addressed in turn, some in more
detail. There are also links to other, outside sources that
address the same issues. The list has since been removed from the
CARM board, perhaps because of me. But since the list of arguments
is not unique to CARM, but fairly common, I keep my list of
refutations._
* [17]Twenty-Four Young Earth Arguments Refuted
_A direct response to a list of 24 items advertised as "evidence
for creation". Similar to the page above, another list of
pre-creationist arguments is refuted._
* [18]On Creation Science and "Transitional Fossils"
_A response to the oft repeated claim that evolution cannot be
true because there are no transitional fossils. It is quite a
falsehood, as I demonstrate here, including links to other sources
of transitional fossil evidence._

_Anti Catastrophist Writings_

* [19]Is the Planet Venus young?
_According to Immanuel Velikovsky's 1950 book Worlds in Collision,
the planet we now call Venus was actually formed about 10,000
years ago by ejection from Jupiter. He thought he could explain
several aspects of myth and biblical stories by postulating a
peculiar history for the solar system. His book has Venus born by
ejection from Jupiter, and then features a number of close
encounters and near collisions, between the Earth, Mars and Venus
(sufficient for all 3 planets to exchange atmospheric gases). All
this went on somewhere maybe 10,000 to 8,000 years ago, and then
everything just settled into the current, fairly well behaved
solar system. The argument is made that Venus is hot, not because
of a [20]greenhouse effect in the atmosphere, but because the
planet is still cooling down from its earlier "incandescent"
state. My article is a response to some specific claims that the
current physical state of Venus offers strong evidence of its
recent birth, and that scientists are engaged in a deliberate
attempt to cover it up by falsifying data._
* [21]On Electric Stars
_The electric universe hypothesis is the brainchild of Australian
neo-Velikovskian physicist Wallace Thornhill, by which he seeks to
eliminate gravitation altogether and explain all of nature by
electromagnetism. The result is some pretty bizzare stuff,
including the electric star hypothesis. This hypothesis holds that
the source of solar (and stellar) heating is at the suface, and
not in the interior. Surface heating is caused by a heavy
bombardment of relativisitic electrons accelerated towards the sun
by its extremely large excess positive electric charge. There are
a lot of reasons to be suspicious of such an argument, which I
discuss in this rather long transcribed mailing list message from
1998._
* [22]On the "Electric Sun Hypothesis
In the same vein as the previous, but more recent in vintage (Jan
2001). This one deals very specifically with the sun, and a
webpage by one of Thornhill's fans.
* [23]On the Geodynamo
_If stars can be electric, why not planets? Thornhill says that
dynamo theory cannot account for planetary magnetic fields.
Rather, in his view, the mangetic field comes from the fact that
the planet has a large net electric charge and rotates. There are
a lot of good physical reasons for discounting this idea as well,
as explained in another of my transcribed mailing list messages.
Includes an introduction to the basic concepts of geodynamo
theory._
* [24]Hertzsprung Russell Diagram and Stellar Evolution
_A brief introduction to stellar evolution and the
Hertzsprung-Russell diagram. Originally intended as a tutorial for
the electric universe crowd, who think that stellar spectral types
and colors are all the result of different temperatures of "anode
discharge" in an electric universe. But it functions well, I
think, as a basic introduction to stellar evolution even if the
electric universe part is of no interest._

_General Science Writings_

* [25]Cosmic Microwave Background, July 2002, updated February 2003
A brief introduction, what the microwave background is, and what
it's value is to the science of cosmology. Extensive links to
other webpages, and bibliography of original sources. A good
place, I hope, to start the journey of understanding the CMB.
* [26]What is the brightest star in the Milky Way?
_So which is the brightest star in out galaxy, really? I have
tried to nail it down (and am still trying), and here are the
fruits of my efforts so far. Come and find out if the Pistol star
is really the brightest star in the Galaxy. _
* [27]Is the Universe Younger than its Oldest Stars?
_Comments on recent controversies concerning the age of the
universe, as determined through Hubble Space Telescope
Observations. The reported conflict between the age of the
universe and its oldest stars has been resolved._
* [28]Solar Fusion & Neutrinos
_A short explanation of the nuclear fusion reactions inside the
sun - what reactions are happening & how we know they are. Also
introduces the neutrino problem and its solution. References to
general & technical sources including several web based resources._
* [29]Adventures in Entropy
_Entropy could hardly be more misunderstood than it is, even if it
were made to be misunderstood on purpose! This page is the portal
to what is currently a three part essay on entropy &
thermodynamics. Intended to eventually address the claim that
evolution violates the 2nd law of thermodynamics (a claim which is
worse than merely wrong), it hasn't quite got there yet. I am
still working on it, and it took me quite a bit of effort just to
get this far. I will add to it as I can, and the portal also
includes links to other entropy related websites._
_____________________________________________________________

_Page updated and links checked: 16 April 2002_
_____________________________________________________________

_Back to [30]Tim Thompson's Home Page.
Visit the [31]Virtual University of Ediacara (their logo is
featured in the page background image).
Read [32]The Evolutionary Hymn. _

setstats 1

References

1. http://www.skeptic.com/
2. file://localhost/www/sat/files/tim_thompson/research.html
3. mailto:Timothy.J.Thompson at jpl.nasa.gov
4. file://localhost/www/sat/files/tim_thompson/desert-storm.html
5. http://www.talkorigins.org/
6. http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/
7. file://localhost/www/sat/files/tim_thompson/radiometric.html
8. file://localhost/www/sat/files/tim_thompson/stellar.html
9. http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/moonrec.html
10. http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/magfields.html
11. http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/moon-dust.html
12. file://localhost/www/sat/files/tim_thompson/subduction.html
13. http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/tim_thompson/brown.html
14. http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/
15. file://localhost/www/sat/files/tim_thompson/young-earth.html
16. http://www.carm.org/
17. file://localhost/www/sat/files/tim_thompson/young-earth2.html
18. file://localhost/www/sat/files/tim_thompson/trans-fossils.html
19. http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/venus-young.html
20. http://www.ems.psu.edu/~fraser/Bad/BadGreenhouse.html
21. file://localhost/www/sat/files/tim_thompson/grey-areas.html
22. file://localhost/www/sat/files/tim_thompson/electric-sun.html
23. file://localhost/www/sat/files/tim_thompson/geodynamo.html
24. file://localhost/www/sat/files/tim_thompson/hr.html
25. file://localhost/www/sat/files/tim_thompson/cmb.html
26. file://localhost/www/sat/files/tim_thompson/bright-stars.html
27. file://localhost/www/sat/files/tim_thompson/oldstars.html
28. file://localhost/www/sat/files/tim_thompson/fusion.html
29. file://localhost/www/sat/files/tim_thompson/entropy.html
30. http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/8851/
31. http://www.ediacara.org/
32. file://localhost/www/sat/files/tim_thompson/evohymn.html