[quote=Orogeny]Actually, that would be chemistry. And you don’t know what you are talking about.
FROM THE DICTIONARY: physics., The science of matter and energy and of interactions between the two, grouped in traditional fields such as acoustics, optics, mechanics, thermodynamics, and electromagnetism, as well as in modern extensions including atomic and nuclear physics, cryogenics, solid-state physics, particle physics, and plasma physics.
For your theory: Since you are talking about matter(peat, organic materials, etc.) and the addition of energy in the system(heating, which would translate to the current state entropy of the thermodynamic system) and de-watering, it is more physics than chemistry. Looks like you need to research science a little more. Then you would find that chemistry and physics actually overlap in certain areas(this being one of them). So while your busy attacking semantics and telling me Im wrong calling it physics, maybe you should just focus on the facts and realize that you ARE DEAD WRONG SAYING ITS NOT PHYSICS. IT MIGHT ALSO BE CHEMISTRY, but it is also PHYSICS, as well as BIOLOGY, AND GEOLOGY. So, lay off the telling me I dont know what Im talking about, just because I dont fall like sheep for your evolution theory. Because as it appears by your above statement, you dont know what youre talking about.
For my theory(which was what I described as physics): Pressure, and heating(energy) and existing organic material(matter) and the interaction between them is what produces coal…same as your theory, but I theorize a smaller length of time needed to produce the coal. And once again, in relation to the comparison of time, pressure, and temperature, and transit energy this is more thermodynamics than chemistry.(And I hope you’re aware that thermodynamics is a branch of physics)
Thats just because you wont listen to any evidence except what appears to lend credence to your theory…but dont take my theory just from me…because Im just an old fashioned idiot and not a big time scientist like you…maybe youll take it from this guy:
RAPID COAL, GEORGE R. HILL Dean of College of Mines & Mineral Industries, on discovery of human artifacts in natural coal deposits: “A rather startling and serendipitous discovery resulted…These observations suggest that in their formation, high rank coals,…were probably subjected to high temperature at some stage in their history. A possible mechanism for formation of these high rank coals could have been a short time, rapid heating event.” [Six Hours], Chemtech, May, 1972, p. 292.
I just gave you some evidence. I have given you the evidence of fish, clams, animals, artifacts, and trees standing vertically, petrified in coal deposits. That is great evidence for my side fo this coin, because it absolutely proves that coal CAN form in a short period of time…otherwise you would not have the petrification of that wood, and fully fossilized animals.
One explanation of these phenomena can then be that, because there was a great flood(which the bible spends a great deal curtailing…Im guessing you have just thrown out that evidence, even though it is the oldest explanation of human events we have) the deposition of highly organic material occured(say, every human and animal save a few dying at the same time and all depositing at the bottom of the flood.). Then, after the heavier objects(being humans, animals, plant material) settled to the bottom, the rapid settlement of stratified layers of sedimentation occurred. Thats where your stratification comes into play. I hope your aware, that if there were a great flood that covered the earth for 40 days, the natural process of hydrological sorting would occur, in which particles would stratify according to their fineness. Then they would eventually deposit over the highly organic material. And with the earth covered with water, at certain locations, there would be tremendous pressure(of which would be uncomprehendable) If you then balance a simple physical equation, time would be directly proportional to pressure. Less pressure, More time…more time, less pressure.
Thats evidence that would support my side. But since most scientists throw the bible out…why think there was ever a great flood.