|
Author
|
Topic: Vapour canopy and fountains of the deep
|
ICANT
Member Posts: 6769 From: SSC Joined: 03-12-2007 Member Rating: 1.6
|
|
Message 46 of 144 (507460)
05-05-2009 9:51 AM
|
Reply to: Message 41 by RAZD
05-04-2009 8:23 PM
|
|
Re: bump for creationist contribution
Hi RAZD,
RAZD writes: Can any creationists support this concept? Short answer, "no". Long answer, "no". Is it possible with God? Yes. Was it necessary for the volume of water necessary to cover the land mass? No. There is more than enough water present today to cover the land mass. God Bless,
"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 41 by RAZD, posted 05-04-2009 8:23 PM | | RAZD has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 47 by Huntard, posted 05-05-2009 1:50 PM | | ICANT has replied | | | Message 75 by RAZD, posted 05-06-2009 8:06 PM | | ICANT has not replied |
|
Huntard
Member (Idle past 2323 days) Posts: 2870 From: Limburg, The Netherlands Joined: 09-02-2008
|
|
|
Message 47 of 144 (507486)
05-05-2009 1:50 PM
|
Reply to: Message 46 by ICANT
05-05-2009 9:51 AM
|
|
Re: bump for creationist contribution
ICANT writes: There is more than enough water present today to cover the land mass.
No there isn't, it would be covered otherwise.
I hunt for the truth
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 46 by ICANT, posted 05-05-2009 9:51 AM | | ICANT has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 48 by ICANT, posted 05-05-2009 2:32 PM | | Huntard has not replied |
|
ICANT
Member Posts: 6769 From: SSC Joined: 03-12-2007 Member Rating: 1.6
|
|
|
Message 48 of 144 (507487)
05-05-2009 2:32 PM
|
Reply to: Message 47 by Huntard
05-05-2009 1:50 PM
|
|
Re: bump for creationist contribution
Hi Huntard,
Huntard writes: No there isn't, it would be covered otherwise. Maybe you are right and science is wrong, I don't know. But I understand from what I have read that if the hard crust of the earth was smooth all land would be covered by 2 miles of water. Here is just one such statement.
The earth is believed to be a cooling and contracting body. With a reduction in size the outer crust becomes wrinkled. The crests of these wrinkles protrude above the water, which fills the troughs. Without altering the relative positions of the exposed land masses and the oceanic basins, a comparatively slight increase in the depth of the latter would cause more land to be uncovered. Or were the bed of the ocean to be raised slightly, the sea would flow over the coast regions and accessible low-lying valleys. Were the solid crust uniformly smooth, it would be completely drowned by a continuous sea about two miles in depth. Source God Bless,
"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 47 by Huntard, posted 05-05-2009 1:50 PM | | Huntard has not replied |
|
Percy
Member Posts: 22502 From: New Hampshire Joined: 12-23-2000 Member Rating: 4.9
|
|
|
Message 49 of 144 (507490)
05-05-2009 2:49 PM
|
|
|
I'd like to make a plea for participants to ignore irrational posts, especially those that are just attempts to stir things up. --Percy
|
bluescat48
Member (Idle past 4218 days) Posts: 2347 From: United States Joined: 10-06-2007
|
|
|
Message 50 of 144 (507491)
05-05-2009 2:56 PM
|
Reply to: Message 48 by ICANT
05-05-2009 2:32 PM
|
|
Re: bump for creationist contribution
ICANT writes: But I understand from what I have read that if the hard crust of the earth was smooth all land would be covered by 2 miles of water. Here is just one such statement.
The earth is believed to be a cooling and contracting body. With a reduction in size the outer crust becomes wrinkled. The crests of these wrinkles protrude above the water, which fills the troughs. Without altering the relative positions of the exposed land masses and the oceanic basins, a comparatively slight increase in the depth of the latter would cause more land to be uncovered. Or were the bed of the ocean to be raised slightly, the sea would flow over the coast regions and accessible low-lying valleys. Were the solid crust uniformly smooth, it would be completely drowned by a continuous sea about two miles in depth. But nowhere in the article doe it say or even imply that this was ever the case.
There is no better love between 2 people than mutual respect for each other WT Young, 2002 Who gave anyone the authority to call me an authority on anything. WT Young, 1969 Since Evolution is only ~90% correct it should be thrown out and replaced by Creation which has even a lower % of correctness. W T Young, 2008
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 48 by ICANT, posted 05-05-2009 2:32 PM | | ICANT has not replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 76 by RAZD, posted 05-06-2009 8:12 PM | | bluescat48 has not replied |
|
Trev777
Junior Member (Idle past 5456 days) Posts: 14 From: N. Ireland Joined: 05-03-2009
|
|
|
Message 51 of 144 (507508)
05-05-2009 5:27 PM
|
Reply to: Message 45 by Percy
05-05-2009 9:34 AM
|
|
Re: bump for creationist contribution
The pre-flood vapour canopy was created on day 2 of Creation when God divided the waters from the waters. Evolutionists will rubbish it as it plays havoc with their dating methods. This high temperature region is about 80 miles above the earth's surface. Russian astronauts discovered this in the fifties, and noted that this region would have been capable of holding superheated steam. This aqueous canopy encircled the early earth, which was a paradise for man , beast and plant. This canopy protected the earth from harmful radiation and greatly enhanced health by reducing mutation rates. The atmospheric pressure on earth was higher (hyperbaric), this would lower metabolic rates like breathing and heartbeat. The oxygen content was also higher than today, which was very beneficial to health, -(pre-flood fossil finds show air bubbles trapped in amber with an oxygen content of 30%.) The canopy would have given a uniformly temperate climate around the earth, there were no atmospheric ciculations like today, ie -no wind or rain , which is consistent with Scripture. There were no frozen Polar regions -(fossil finds have shown tropical plantlife existed once in these regions). There was no volcanic activity till after the flood when the earths crust was broken up, originally it was all one land mass. Just in finishing -God made no pronouncement about the second day, i.e. He didn't call it good, -I guess He knew what He had created would be used to destroy the earth in the Flood.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 45 by Percy, posted 05-05-2009 9:34 AM | | Percy has not replied |
|
Theodoric
Member Posts: 9199 From: Northwest, WI, USA Joined: 08-15-2005 Member Rating: 3.2
|
|
|
Message 52 of 144 (507509)
05-05-2009 5:41 PM
|
Reply to: Message 51 by Trev777
05-05-2009 5:27 PM
|
|
Re: bump for creationist contribution
First I am going to go easy and address the obvious weaknesses. Then if you persist we can deal with the science aspects.
quote:
Russian astronauts discovered this in the fifties, and noted that this region would have been capable of holding superheated steam.
Any chance you have a source for this? Or is it something your preacher told you?
quote:
This high temperature region is about 80 miles above the earth's surface.
Any idea what the temperature is at that altitude? Would you say it is above or below freezing? Just asking. Need to know what you classify as a "high temperature region".
Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 51 by Trev777, posted 05-05-2009 5:27 PM | | Trev777 has not replied |
|
Taq
Member Posts: 10084 Joined: 03-06-2009 Member Rating: 5.1
|
|
|
Message 53 of 144 (507511)
05-05-2009 5:51 PM
|
Reply to: Message 51 by Trev777
05-05-2009 5:27 PM
|
|
Re: bump for creationist contribution
The pre-flood vapour canopy was created on day 2 of Creation when God divided the waters from the waters. How much water are we talking about? The Earth has water vapour in the atmosphere as we speak, so how is this vapour canopy different than the canopy we have right now?
Evolutionists will rubbish it as it plays havoc with their dating methods. How does vapour in the atmosphere cause 40K (or any radioisotope for that matter) to change it's rate of decay?
This canopy protected the earth from harmful radiation and greatly enhanced health by reducing mutation rates. Radiation is needed by plants to produce sugars through photosynthesis.
The oxygen content was also higher than today, which was very beneficial to health, Evidence please. From what I have read higher levels of oxygen can have serious side effects.
The canopy would have given a uniformly temperate climate around the earth, How? The density of sunlight energy is not the same across the globe due to the Earth being round. Water vapour at the equator would necessarily be warmer than water vapour at the poles due to this difference in energy density. The result would be the same as now. You don't need to look any farther than Jupiter to see the results of a gaseous and thick atmosphere. Ever seen the red spot on Jupiter?
There was no volcanic activity till after the flood when the earths crust was broken up, originally it was all one land mass. Evidence?
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 51 by Trev777, posted 05-05-2009 5:27 PM | | Trev777 has not replied |
|
Admin
Director Posts: 13040 From: EvC Forum Joined: 06-14-2002 Member Rating: 2.2
|
|
|
Message 54 of 144 (507513)
05-05-2009 5:57 PM
|
|
|
Moderator Notice
I'll be moderating this thread. Participants will be required to support their positions with evidence and argument. Edited by Admin, : Grammar.
| -- | Percy | | | EvC Forum Director |
|
Theodoric
Member Posts: 9199 From: Northwest, WI, USA Joined: 08-15-2005 Member Rating: 3.2
|
|
|
Message 55 of 144 (507515)
05-05-2009 6:04 PM
|
Reply to: Message 51 by Trev777
05-05-2009 5:27 PM
|
|
Re: bump for creationist contribution
Your 30% oxygen claim is questionable at best.
Page not found – Ambarazul, LLCThere is however the case for the fact that amber is reactive, meaning that it is possible that the oxygen samples are corrupted for whatever reason. 30% is an average and the 300 samples tested by USGS scientists of the Cretaceous-Tertiary periods didn’t really correlate. Some went as high as 36.6% oxygen, while others went as low as 25.5%, depending on location and age (the oldest amber tested was about 130 million years old). If that is of any meaning is hard to say, but many believe that amber is too unstable to draw any conclusions from it. I would think at 30% atmospheric oxygen everything would be burning. Then again in your fantasy world there were no lightning bolts or volcanoes. Oh why did we have to have the fall, everything was so perfect back then.
Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 51 by Trev777, posted 05-05-2009 5:27 PM | | Trev777 has not replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 78 by RAZD, posted 05-06-2009 9:26 PM | | Theodoric has not replied |
|
Rahvin
Member Posts: 4046 Joined: 07-01-2005 Member Rating: 7.4
|
|
|
Message 56 of 144 (507519)
05-05-2009 6:21 PM
|
Reply to: Message 48 by ICANT
05-05-2009 2:32 PM
|
|
Re: bump for creationist contribution
Maybe you are right and science is wrong, I don't know. But I understand from what I have read that if the hard crust of the earth was smooth all land would be covered by 2 miles of water. Well, gee golly, if we completely ignore everything we know about plate tectonics and geology, then there's enough water! Wowee!! What, praytell, would cause the Earth to go from a uniformly smooth body to the decidedly non-uniform Earth we see today within the span of human history, and then slow down to the rate of geological change we see today? Why are other planets like Mars and Venus not also uniformly smooth? You're proposing a "what if" as evidence that such a thing actually occurred, without providing any evidence whatsoever to support the assertion that the Earth was ever smooth. Provide evidence toppling currently accepted models of plate tectonics and the geological history of the Earth, or concede.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 48 by ICANT, posted 05-05-2009 2:32 PM | | ICANT has not replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 79 by RAZD, posted 05-06-2009 9:38 PM | | Rahvin has not replied |
|
Taq
Member Posts: 10084 Joined: 03-06-2009 Member Rating: 5.1
|
|
|
Message 57 of 144 (507521)
05-05-2009 6:29 PM
|
|
|
As for higher levels of oxygen, this can result in oxygen toxicity in humans. This is why hyperbaric treatments are only 2 hours long, to prevent oxygen toxicity. From wiki:
The result of breathing elevated concentrations of oxygen is hyperoxia, an excess of oxygen in body tissues. The body is impacted in different ways depending on the type of exposure. Central nervous system toxicity is caused by short exposure to high concentrations of oxygen at greater than atmospheric pressure. Pulmonary and ocular toxicity result from longer exposure to elevated oxygen levels at normal pressure. Symptoms may include disorientation, trouble breathing and vision changes such as myopia. Prolonged or very high oxygen concentrations can cause oxidation damage to cell membranes, the collapse of the alveoli in the lungs, retinal detachment, and seizures. Oxygen toxicity is treated by reducing the exposure to elevated oxygen levels. Studies show that the long term recovery from most types of oxygen toxicity is good.
|
Theodoric
Member Posts: 9199 From: Northwest, WI, USA Joined: 08-15-2005 Member Rating: 3.2
|
|
|
Message 58 of 144 (507523)
05-05-2009 6:34 PM
|
Reply to: Message 48 by ICANT
05-05-2009 2:32 PM
|
|
Re: bump for creationist contribution
All I can say is WOW. Your source for the "two miles in depth" quote? Encyclopedia Americana. Publication date?
1919 Did you not know that? Do you think science hasn't changed its understanding of the earth in 90 years? Up to date stuff. It is even from a creationist site. Not YEC though.
Air can hold, at most, 55 grams of water vapor per cubic meter. In contrast, liquid water is at a density of 1,000,000 grams per cubic meter. The ratio of the two numbers is 1:18,000. Therefore, a flood of 1 mile thickness (which would cover only 1/5 of Mount Everest), would require 18,000 miles of canopy. Besides the problem of gravity (which would bring the whole thing down), such a thick layer of water vapor would completely block any light from the Sun from reaching the earth. Even a canopy of the equivalent of only 40 feet of liquid water would double the earth's atmospheric pressure, which would kill many animals, including humans. This pressure would also increase the temperature on the earth to a scorching 220F. Most animals and plants do not survive long at this temperature. Another problem is getting the water out of the atmosphere and onto the ground without cooking everything on the earth. Each gram of water vapor that condenses to a liquid releases 539 calories of heat. For a vapor canopy to produce a global water layer of only 40 feet deep, 6.22 x 1021 grams of water would release 3.35 x 1024 calories, raising the temperature of the earth to 810F. Such a scenario would definitely kill all life on earth, but would produce a tremendous air conditioning problem for Noah. And a 40 feet deep flood would certainly not be global.
Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 48 by ICANT, posted 05-05-2009 2:32 PM | | ICANT has not replied |
|
Coragyps
Member (Idle past 763 days) Posts: 5553 From: Snyder, Texas, USA Joined: 11-12-2002
|
|
|
Message 59 of 144 (507528)
05-05-2009 7:23 PM
|
Reply to: Message 51 by Trev777
05-05-2009 5:27 PM
|
|
Re: bump for creationist contribution
Russian astronauts discovered this in the fifties.... Laika the cosmonaut dog? The first human in space was Gagarin, in 1961. I'm popping popcorn in anticipation......
"The wretched world lies now under the tyranny of foolishness; things are believed by Christians of such absurdity as no one ever could aforetime induce the heathen to believe." - Agobard of Lyons, ca. 830 AD
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 51 by Trev777, posted 05-05-2009 5:27 PM | | Trev777 has not replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 60 by Theodoric, posted 05-05-2009 7:30 PM | | Coragyps has not replied |
|
Theodoric
Member Posts: 9199 From: Northwest, WI, USA Joined: 08-15-2005 Member Rating: 3.2
|
|
|
Message 60 of 144 (507530)
05-05-2009 7:30 PM
|
Reply to: Message 59 by Coragyps
05-05-2009 7:23 PM
|
|
Re: bump for creationist contribution
Russian astronauts discovered this in the fifties.... Damn. I can't believe I missed that. I wonder if he will dare come back and try to back his statements with some sort of evidence.
Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 59 by Coragyps, posted 05-05-2009 7:23 PM | | Coragyps has not replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 62 by Huntard, posted 05-06-2009 4:30 AM | | Theodoric has not replied | | | Message 71 by Trev777, posted 05-06-2009 5:12 PM | | Theodoric has not replied |
|
™ Version 4.2