Hi percy,
I dont know how the water vapor remained aloft, but certainly it takes heat the keep water vaporised. The upper regions of the atmosphere (thermosphere) is at a high enough temperature to keep the water vaporised.
Unfortunately, as has been mentioned, the upper atmosphere is too sparse to actually contain much water - and the water molecules at that height are subjected to high-energy particles that "crack" H2O into bare Hydrogen and Oxygen atoms. You cannot store significant amounts of water in the upper atmosphere.
Also we know that water vapor is lighter than air and other gases making up the atmosphere.
...no, it's not. Not always. It depends on
temperature. Fog is also water vapor, yet it rests on the ground. Clouds are water vapor, but they're hardly "lighter than air" - they're simply lighter than
some of the air.
So there is thus nothing physically impossible about thermal vapor blanket existing in the upper atmosphere.
Yes, there is, as has been shown. You simply don't understand the concepts you're talking about.
But more importantly, we've already established that there is insufficient water on the Earth to account for a global Flood. If there
were such a canopy, and there
were such a Flood -
where did the water go?
ICANT likes to pretend that the Earth was completely flat before the Flood, and that the lowering of elevation for the oceans and raising of land mass after the Flood accounts for why there is insufficient water to cover the world today. Unfortunately, that violates everything we know about the geological history of the Earth, and all of plate tectonics (not to mention postulating that such a catastrophic geological change as that can actually happen within the span of human history and leave no evidence behind - the amount of tectonic activity required in such a short timespan would be far more effective in killing all life than a simple Flood).
It actually would explain quite a lot in terms of the warm climate that the frozen arctic areas once enjoyed.
Curiously, plate tectonics does a far better job of this, without magical water that suspends itself in the upper atmosphere, rains down for the Flood, and then disappears. It even has -
gasp!-
evidence to support it. The "frozen arctic" regions were once attached to the rest of the super-continent that we call Pangaea. Tectonic plates driven by magma convection have since separated the super-continent into the continents we see today in a process that has taken millions upon millions of years and is continuing today.
The atmosphere on Mars has small traces of water vapor which are somehow suspended. Another reason not to doubt the validity of the claim that the earth may have had a water vapor at one time.
As Percy has noted, those traces of water on Mars are "somehow suspended" in the same way water vapor anywhere else is suspended. The air on Earth is full of water (nowhere near enough to cause a global Flood of course, but still quite wet).
Your ignorance and religious bias are forcing you to grasp at any scrap of information that supports "Water in the sky," even when the evidence you're using quite plainly does not support anything approaching a "vapor canopy" in the upper atmosphere capable of accountign for a global Flood. You're participating in apologetics - and you're not going to get anywhere in terms of accurately representing reality that way.
™ Version 4.2
