Reflection by a rippled surface

| 22 Comments

Photograph by Dave Rintoul.

Photography contest, Honorable Mention.

rintoul_platte_sunset_reflection.jpg

Late March sunset reflected in a channel of the Platte River near Gibbon, Nebraska.

Meandering channels with sandbars such as this one are critical habitat for sandhill cranes and whooping cranes migrating north; the birds roost in the river overnight, which protects them from predators such as coyotes.

22 Comments

Wow, Great picture. But where do the cranes stay when they’re migrating south? Motel 6?

The migration south is more leisurely and less social. On the way north the Central Flyway population of cranes spend 5-6 weeks at the Platte staging area, fattening up by day and sleeping on sand bars in the river at night. In late March there will be 500-600 thousand Sandhill Cranes in a 60 mi stretch of the Platte; they will all be gone by the second week of April.

In the fall they come south in smaller flocks, but don’t have that urgency to fatten up for reproduction, and they spend time in lots of wetlands and riparian areas along the way. There really is no fall migration analogue to the spring staging on the Platte.

“Hey, hey, hey, it’s the big Master Control Program everybody’s talking about.”

There are always good pictures here. Meandering does make a interesting point. Unless i’m wrong I understand they still argue about what makes fluid courses meander. i bump into a doubt on this (though some confidently see no problem) when i read about geomorphology. If such a seeming touchable thing can not be certified then how can past and gone events been confidently concluded. The natural world is complicated and , like in evolution etc, there is too much ease of conclusions about untestable things.

Robert Byers said:

Unless i’m wrong I understand they still argue about what makes fluid courses meander.

You’re wrong. Gravity causes fluid to flow, obstacles cause the course to meander. Just because we can’t predict every twist and turn a stream will take in the future doesn’t mean we can’t predict that the water will eventually reach the Mississippi, or that it once fell as rain or snow somewhere upstream.

Robert Byers said:

There are always good pictures here. Meandering does make a interesting point. Unless i’m wrong I understand they still argue about what makes fluid courses meander. i bump into a doubt on this (though some confidently see no problem) when i read about geomorphology. If such a seeming touchable thing can not be certified then how can past and gone events been confidently concluded. The natural world is complicated and , like in evolution etc, there is too much ease of conclusions about untestable things.

Then how exactly did YOU “confidently conclude” about past events? Could it be that YOU took “too much ease…about untestable things” and took the easy way out–just believing whatever it says in Genesis? That’s way easier than learning and doing science!

And since you were already in the “dismiss anything I don’t like or understand” frame of mind, then it was quite easy to dismiss all the contradictory and outright silly parts of Genesis.

I still want an answer to my question: Why is it that God’s powers were so limited that He had to make a flood and warn Noah to build an ark? Surely He could have instantly disappeared all the bad people and spared all the flora and fauna of the Earth. God’s powers in Genesis seem as circumscribed as those of the various Greek deities. Hell, He couldn’t even beat Jacob in a wrestling match without cheating by using magic! Maybe all that flooding wore Him out so much that by Jacob’s time He could barely hold His own against a mere mortal!

See what kind of silliness a literal reading of Genesis leads to?

There is a simple demonstration that even a child can do. Take a clean, smooth plastic sheet or other hard, smooth and clean surface and place it at a gentle angle.

Now allow a very small but steady stream of water flow onto the upper part of that tilted surface so that the water begins to flow down hill on that surface.

You will find that you don’t even need obstacles for the flowing water to meander.

A little contact with the real world prevents much silliness.

Thanks for the beautiful picture, Matt.

e-dogg said: Just because we can’t predict every twist and turn a stream will take in the future doesn’t mean we can’t predict that the water will eventually reach the Mississippi, or that it once fell as rain or snow somewhere upstream.

If you can’t account for the complete history of every molecule of water since it was created 6,000 years ago, that proves Goddidit.

Yo, Byers. That’s Genesis 32:24-30 (in case you’re not familiar with God’s abortive wrestling career).

Just Bob said:

Yo, Byers. That’s Genesis 32:24-30 (in case you’re not familiar with God’s abortive wrestling career).

Somehow, Byers can’t seem to get it through his head that the Bible really does say some dumb, illogical, things. Maybe it’s the big words and small type.

Perhaps this interpretation is more appropriate to his cognitive skills.

Small words.

Pretty pictures.

Simple concepts.

DTKRISTA said:

Do you see that you make such a great research about this good post. Continue making it! People buy essays about that using the paper writing service.

Yeah, because I know when I’m looking to buy a term paper I always seek out services that are wildly off-topic and mangle the language.

Challenge for the day: identify which auto-translator program DT used. Bonus point for determining language of origin. Super bonus points for using Dembski’s explanatory filter to do it. :)

Challenge for the day: identify which auto-translator program Byers used. Bonus point for determining language of origin. Super bonus points for using Dembski’s explanatory filter to do it. Somehow he manages to meander without making any interesting point.

Challenge for the day: identify which auto-translator program DT used.

Just so that the 2 preceding comments are not wholly mysterious: I classified DT’s comment as spam, and, as if by magic, it disappeared.

Matt Young said:

I classified DT’s comment as spam, and, as if by magic, it disappeared.

Damn Matt! Can you teach me how to do that to my email too? And my snail mail? And my phone, right about dinner time?

Please?

e-dogg said:

Robert Byers said:

Unless i’m wrong I understand they still argue about what makes fluid courses meander.

You’re wrong. Gravity causes fluid to flow, obstacles cause the course to meander. Just because we can’t predict every twist and turn a stream will take in the future doesn’t mean we can’t predict that the water will eventually reach the Mississippi, or that it once fell as rain or snow somewhere upstream.

Nope. Not mere obstacles. More going on.

Mike Elzinga said:

There is a simple demonstration that even a child can do. Take a clean, smooth plastic sheet or other hard, smooth and clean surface and place it at a gentle angle.

Now allow a very small but steady stream of water flow onto the upper part of that tilted surface so that the water begins to flow down hill on that surface.

You will find that you don’t even need obstacles for the flowing water to meander.

A little contact with the real world prevents much silliness.

Silliness? Me or the obstacle concept? I will try this experiment but as I said they always bring up there is doubt about the processes of meandering. Your test only shows a meander and not its principals. I looked on wiki and sure enough they gave several ideas on aspects of why water meanders. Even Einstein talked about it but I’m unclear if he got it right.

meanders matter to creationists since we find them in rock formations, like grand canyon, where by our timetables there couldn’t be time for meanders to excavate as seen. Anyways we need a faster method of bedrock incision with meandering going on apparently.

Yet also it is instructive that something so close to us is not understood by physics. if not this why unobserved past events. A line of reasoning.

Robert Byers said:

Silliness? Me or the obstacle concept? … I looked on wiki and sure enough they gave several ideas on aspects of why water meanders.

You, Robert. If you read back through that wiki article, you’ll see that two of the three theories offered (“not necessarily mutually exclusive”) specifically use the word “obstacle”! Not big on reading comprehension, are you?

meanders matter to creationists since we find them in rock formations, like grand canyon, where by our timetables there couldn’t be time for meanders to excavate as seen. Anyways we need a faster method of bedrock incision with meandering going on apparently.

Best of luck to you on explaining that one. Countless professional geologists have already come to a reasonable conclusion that fits nicely with all of the available evidence.

Yet also it is instructive that something so close to us is not understood by physics. if not this why unobserved past events. A line of reasoning.

You’re straining the word “reasoning” beyond its capacity. Apply that same “reasoning” to the certainty of various statements of the Bible and you’ll be forced the ignore the entire book.

RB, How come you won’t answer any of my questions about, for instance, God’s wrestling ability, or the “windows” in the “firmament”, or the need for a flood and ark?

The folks here who believe in a God, believe in one far greater and more powerful and capable than your weak, mean-spirited, murderous Old Testament deity.

That image just makes me feel at peace with myself and the world. And with my health that is a true accomplishment. Thanks, if it was bigger I would make it my background pic

Raleigh Chem Dry

No problem, as they say these days. A high res version (6.4 MB) of that image can be obtained from here

http://www.davidrintoul.com/images/[…]ion_9804.jpg

If that’s too big, you can downsize it to fit your monitor, or let me know and I can do that same. I’ve used this image as my desktop background for a while too!

About this Entry

This page contains a single entry by Matt Young published on February 1, 2010 12:00 PM.

Butterstick Goes Wild was the previous entry in this blog.

‘Primordial Soup’ Ousted from the Origin of Life?!? is the next entry in this blog.

Find recent content on the main index or look in the archives to find all content.

Categories

Archives

Author Archives

Powered by Movable Type 4.381

Site Meter