Current Features

Of Geiger Counters and Bananas
Joseph Cirincione, "Nuclear Expert"
Earthquake & Flooding: Tragic For Japan, Great for the Anti-Nuclear Left!
Scott Walker is Hitler... or Mubarak?
Unions Create No Wealth
NY Times: Sceptical When It Needs To Be
"Confidence in Me"
Men, Women, and Competition
Let's Put the Government in Charge of Childrens' Nutrition!
Seeing Egypt from Left and Right
Iraq WMD Lies
Terrance Heath Looks for Jobs

Read the Front Page

Topics

Blogging
Bumper Stickers
Church of the Left Wing
Computers and Technology
Conservativism 101
Conspiracy Theories
Crime and Punishment
Dictatorships
Economics
Education
Election 2008
Entertainment
Europe
Faith and Philosophy
Faith and Politics
Features
France
Fun
General
Genocide
Happy Stuff
Health
History
Honduras
Human Rights
Humor
International
Iraq
Left Versus Right
Libertarians
Life Skills
Media Bias
National Defense
Obama
Personal Notes
Politics
Product Reviews
Quick Alerts
Quixtar
Racism
Reality-Based News
Ron Paul
Science
Science Fiction
Sexuality
Sick & Wrong Department
Society
The Arab Street
The Arts
The Church of Gaia
The War on Childhood
Travel
Words, Words, Words
Your Money

Archives

March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003
October 2003
September 2003
August 2003
July 2003
June 2003
May 2003
April 2003
March 2003
February 2003
January 2003

Search


The Blogosphere

Bookworm Room
Beyond the Rim
Dissecting Leftism
FunMurphys.com
Investor Blogger
La Shawn Barber
Mark D. Roberts
Muddling Towards Maturity
Quixtar Blog
Quixtar Sucks
Zappe Family Blog


Diamonds Made from Coal?

I'm currently watching "Nature" on PBS, an episode on diamonds. They stated that diamonds are created from coal, approximate 100 miles down in the earth's crust. If coal is formed from petrochemicals, would it then follow that this is further evidence of the abiotic (non-biological) origins of petrochemicals, no?

Another scientist has just appeared and dated diamonds at 2-3 billion years old. Again, this would be long before the life appeared and could have been decayed and converted into oil, and subsequently into coal.

Correct me if I'm wrong here.

Either of you, that is. :-)

Comments

Anyone of you: DO YOUR OWN RESEARCH

Posted by: on June 5, 2004 02:01 AM

haters..... help a brotha and a sistah out!

Posted by: Mandy on October 7, 2004 01:16 PM

If a student went to a librarian and asked "I need to know 20 things that are made from coal for extra credit for World Geography..Can you help me please??"

Does the librarian a) do ALL the work for the student or b) give direction where the student can find the information he or she needs or c) jump down his or her throat and say "scram, kid, you bother me!"

A student asked for help, not his or her homework to be done for them. I think Chantal should be given credit for exploring her options online.

Have a heart, Tim. Maybe next year you won't get coal in your stocking ;)

Posted by: on December 31, 2004 12:00 PM

Anonymous coward,

Let's see: I want students to learn, so I have no heart??? Yes, of course, how hateful of me. Not to mention judgemental of you.

I've never said: "Scram kid, you bother me," as you falsely imply. Nor was my response given to "Chantal", as you also falsely assert. Look again.

Futher, the comment I responded to wasn't, as you yet again falsely imply, an open-ended request for assistance. It was a request to simply be told the answer, not a place to look for it.

I want to know if you found 20 items from coal. would you share them with me?

This is no different than one child asking the next: "What did you get for #4?" and then writing down whatever they're told. That's "cheating", last I checked, and, when rewarded, it's a damaging habit which will rob the child of achieving their true potential.

Nor, as you also falsely implied (is there anything honest or accurate in your argument?), was this request addressed to me -- it was addressed to Chantal.

Next, you seem to think I'm unhappy a child asked a question here. Of course not. Once again, you are simply distorting what was written: I'm unhappy one child was trying to copy the answer from another, rather than doing her own research.

That troubles me, and I'm sorry to see it doesn't trouble you; perhaps you didn't even notice that was going on. That speaks poorly of the consideration you put into making an argument which attacks and denigrates another person. Shame on you.

Or perhaps you did notice that, but you're a person who sees no problem with copying answers. Again, how sad.

Apparently, you feel that because I have posted something here, I have a responsibility to determine and post the location of the answer to any question a commenter may pose, any time such a question is asked.

Yet you posted here too, and could just as easily do the same work, and give the same hints, which you argue is very important to do. Yet have you done so? No, not at all. It was important for for someone else to do this -- just not your job.

Perhaps this is why you are so sensitive to a simple admonishment that people "do their own work" and be responsible. It's not the children you are defending, instead, it touches on your own ethic, your protest is based on how it made you feel, not what was truly best for the child.

Finally, you seem unhappy with the simple "do you own work" statement I posted here, and apparently want, instead, others to respond exactly as you wish them to. That comes off as intolerant; a person who is not happy until everyone is forced into her own mould.

Good luck with all that.

Posted by: Tim (Random Observations) on December 31, 2004 03:21 PM

hey there is no way that diamond is made from coal. coal is black and diamond is clear. so there is no way that it can be possible. TRY AGAIN NEXT YEAR!

Posted by: on April 6, 2006 12:06 PM

ahahahahh

Posted by: heyya on June 8, 2006 12:49 PM

ahahahahh

Posted by: heyya on June 8, 2006 12:49 PM

hi,

i need 10 things made from coal for extra credit, would you share??

Posted by: jess on August 27, 2006 03:23 AM

The attached link asserts that the rule for defining minerals was intended to exculde biologically created materials like bones and pearls. definition of a mineral

Personally, I think it's odd that amber is also called a 'mineral' even though it's fossilized tree sap.

I'm not sure what the purpose of classifying certain compounds as 'minerals' is.

Posted by: on September 13, 2006 06:27 PM

Odd. link didn't come out. Okay, here

Posted by: Ryan on September 13, 2006 06:33 PM

haha. diamonds are not made out from coal. they're solely made out of carbon. carbon has 6 protons and 6 electrons. four of them are valence electrons;; which means it can bond with other electrons. well, i don't wnat to start going off with that subject.

Posted by: on January 9, 2007 11:21 PM

haha. diamonds are not made out from coal. they're solely made out of carbon. carbon has 6 protons and 6 electrons. four of them are valence electrons;; which means it can bond with other electrons. well, i don't wnat to start going off with that subject.

Posted by: Kathy. on January 9, 2007 11:21 PM

Kathy - I'm curious what substance you think coal is made out of?

Or are you saying that you think coal has too many impurities?

Posted by: Ryan on January 10, 2007 07:17 AM

diamonds are really cool

Posted by: kayla stephens on May 16, 2007 06:45 AM

I really needed the answer, and so I get to this site, which was the first one up on my google search for "things that use coal". I read all the comments, and find people talking about diamonds?
Can't ANYONE help someone out here??

Posted by: bobthebuilder on March 11, 2008 06:20 AM

First, I thank you for your comment: supportive bits and critical parts both. Feedback is always useful and welcomed.

I thought you could've softened the language against Anonymous from a full frontal assault to something like a gentle rebuke.

I think you've got a point: there was probably room for a bit of "tone smithing" there. Particularly in this example, I can see a number of phrasing I would change, in retrospect.

Yet on the other hand, I find it amusing what people notice. Not to complain, but to recap: Even after explaining why I think handing out the answers is unhelpful to kids, I'm accused of hating children and being bothered by them, of yelling at them, of being the kind of mean person who regularly receives coal in my stocking, of shirking my duties (not shared by the commenter, of course) etc. These are, quite frankly, a quite blunt set of rather personal indictments.

And I agree I could have reworked my response a bit, tonally — BUT, it makes me wonder, how far does one have to go? And how much of it was wrong tone, versus: "Well, please suppress that content. It makes me uncomfortable when you say it, no matter how nicely."

And regarding tone, I agree, but what IS the standard? Perfection? If you read back a bit, I had just explained, rather nicely, my concern for kids which motivated me to refuse to answer. See the comment right above Anonymous's. And what response did that "nice answer" generate? Yet another accusation of being harsh, mean-hearted, and lazy.

---

I'm increasingly convinced the rules are this: We mentally lump people into "good" or perhaps "responsible people" and "bad people." We're conditioned hold the "responsible people" to a standard of nothing less than perfection, while we hold the "bad people" to no standards at all.

Hamas, unprovoked, lobs missiles into Israel, hey, no problem. The press won't even cover it. Israel responds, taking out a missile battery (an alleged "bystander" was killed!), and the front pages are covered with endless charges and complaints about a lack of "proportionality." We expect perfection from Israel, and hold Hamas to no standards at all, or, if we do, perfunctorily, so we can get to the all-important "BUT" without losing our moral credibility.

I'm regularly accused of all manner of evil. Or I see others being accused in rather dire terms: Dick Cheney is greedy and corrupt, the US funds genocide around the world, etc. Write a fact-based response -- even if it includes ZERO personal comments (see the first several comments) -- and you're in for moralistic tut-tutting and clucking. You're broken one of society's unwritten taboos.

It seems sometimes that offering a effective evidence-based answer is, itself, the real offense. (And never, never point out that the person is guilty what they've just alleged.) We're not supposed to take the attacker seriously (oh, they were just joking!) (really?) but we take the response completely seriously, and weigh it endlessly.


I thought Mr. or Ms. Anonymous' reply was tongue-in-cheek...

Case in point. No doubt the comment about receiving coal was tongue-in-cheek, but the underlying accusation of meanness was also reflected in the rest of the comment, which wasn't at all tongue-in-cheek. Anonymous really did believe it was my obligation (but not hers, of course) to act as a reference librarian, and really did seem to think I was being unduly harsh for suggesting students complete their own assignments.

---

Ryan, on the other hand, has bent over backwards to do everything she said the kids wanted. And what do we see in the mean time? A continuing stream of commenters who are so dreadfully lazy they couldn't even read his attempts to help and follow the link. (Or even bother to spell their request for help correctly.)

Much less a "thanks!" to him.

Posted by: Tim (Random Observations) on December 23, 2008 01:14 PM

I think that 'Tim' guy is a jerk for not helping someone out. Just givum a link or something. There not asking for you to cheat. and so what if they are. it cant be traced back to you.

by the way.
can anyone help me, i need to know 10 things made from coal.

Posted by: the IAN on January 11, 2009 01:16 PM

My husband wanted to buy me a pair of diamond earrings for xmas so I looked at alot of stores today and they all had a different idea as to how they are made which are better, that's why they cost more, yeah right, anyway one idiot told me that they put ice in the freezer and froze it and that's how they made diamonds. Wonder if they will be melted by the time they get here. I read as many of the questions I could before I decided that all of you people are trying to get free information so you won't have to look it up, must be bad eyesight, old age or just stupdity or laxyness. P l e a s e

Posted by: Fire on December 5, 2009 09:41 PM

when did they find out this information?

Posted by: on March 14, 2011 04:52 PM

when did they find out this information?

Posted by: on March 14, 2011 04:52 PM

when did they find out this information?

Posted by: on March 14, 2011 04:52 PM

Add your two cents...

The comment rules will apply. Please post only once.

















« What's in the heart of another? | Front Page | Page Two | Antisemitism and German Media Bias »