Ed, it wasn't faulty understanding, as proven with my other posts stating magma, that is a very thin and goofy straw you're clinging to, I'm pleased to see you're at that level of attempted rebuttal.
Genesis Veracity wrote:Ed, it wasn't faulty understanding, as proven with my other posts stating magma, that is a very thin and goofy straw you're clinging to, I'm pleased to see you're at that level of attempted rebuttal.
Any reference that magma is 70% water? Yes or no.
Any quantification of the energy ramifications of your theory?
Any data to show that dendrochronology is error fraught?
"The history of science is the record of dead religions"
Wilde
By the way, you can know that dendochronology on very old trees is faulty because current periods of growth per year are not what they were during the Ice Age, which ended circa 1500 B.C.
X, here's a word picture which should actually help you. You know those clips of lava flows with huge volumes of steam coming from them? That is water vapor, and no, the natives didn't pour water on the lava flow for that effect.
(And please X, no references to vapors coming off bi-products, please.)