Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Vapour canopy and fountains of the deep
Coyote
Member (Idle past 2106 days)
Posts: 6117
Joined: 01-12-2008


Message 106 of 144 (507911)
05-08-2009 8:50 PM
Reply to: Message 103 by Peepul
05-08-2009 12:13 PM


Creation "science" and the vapor canopy
This thread is deeply frustrating - speculation is being piled on speculation. Likewise we are discussing Peg's completely barmy ideas around hydrogen and oxygen, and 70% coverage of the earth's surface by water indicating that the whole earth was flooded at some point.
Let's stop.
Does anybody have any evidence for a vapour canopy?
Does anybody have any EVIDENCE for a vapour canopy?
But what we've seen on this thread is just what creation "science" has to offer!
They don't know why science is wrong, they just believe it is wrong. And because its wrong, why bother studying it and learning the details--when its obviously wrong!?!
So when creationists defend their beliefs they have little to fall back upon other than those beliefs. Their level of education in the relevant science is usually abysmal, as are the educations of those to whom they look for answers. Make up a "what if" story. That's as good as anything, because the details don't really matter--we know the TRVTHTM. Vapor canopy? Sure, here's how it happened... (see upthread for examples).
Again, I think it is a case of creationists believing "why bother studying science when its wrong."
But then they want this stuff taught in the schools? Now that's a real joke!

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 103 by Peepul, posted 05-08-2009 12:13 PM Peepul has not replied

  
Peg
Member (Idle past 4929 days)
Posts: 2703
From: melbourne, australia
Joined: 11-22-2008


Message 107 of 144 (507938)
05-09-2009 5:02 AM
Reply to: Message 100 by Percy
05-08-2009 10:16 AM


Re: bump for creationist contribution
Percy writes:
The advantage of answering questions like the water/hydrogen issue is that Peg will (hopefully) learn something about the availability of free hydrogen. Undoubtedly she has never heard of the speculations about a hydrogen economy where cars would be powered by hydrogen instead of petrol (or do they say gasoline in Australia?). Clearly if you can power a car with hydrogen then its combustion with oxygen must produce a great deal of energy, as people have been trying to make clear to Peg with examples like the Hindenberg (about which Peg again apparently knows nothing). Most doubts about the possibility of a hydrogen economy stem from the great amounts of energy needed just to create free hydrogen, and Peg doesn't understand this yet, and so doesn't understand that countries like Saudi Arabia cannot solve their water problems by simply making water from free hydrogen and oxygen.
which was entirely my point if anyone had bothered to read my post properly in the first place
I asked a question in msg 81 (forgive me if thats inappropriate)
quote:
is it possible that the water vapor existed in the form of Hydrogen and Oxygen gas?
lyx2no replied with :
"The gasses of the thermosphere are so tenuous and any separated hydrogen is so kinetically energetic there is nearly nothing to stop it from being lost to space."
So i asked why Jupiter and Saturn have such a gaseous atmosphere to which Anglegard spewed forth a diatribe of 'Oh for christs sake...bla bla bla troll bla bla bla"
Good one. Its good to see maturity on evc.
My point about water was that: "Oxygen and Hydrogen dont just mix together to become water...it takes vasts amounts of energy to create water...so much energy that scientists cannot produce enough energy to create water"
Anglagard disagreed because she did not read my post correctly. I said nothing about hydrogen and oxygen not creating energy...I said they "dont just combine to create WATER, without vast amounts of energy"
it seems to be what you are saying here
Percy writes:
Most doubts about the possibility of a hydrogen economy stem from the great amounts of energy needed just to create free hydrogen, and Peg doesn't understand this yet, and so doesn't understand that countries like Saudi Arabia cannot solve their water problems by simply making water from free hydrogen and oxygen.
.
I certainly do understand that we cannot produce water. My reply to Anglegard in msg 90 was sarcasm.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 100 by Percy, posted 05-08-2009 10:16 AM Percy has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 112 by Dr Adequate, posted 05-09-2009 5:31 AM Peg has not replied
 Message 132 by anglagard, posted 05-10-2009 1:31 AM Peg has replied

  
Peg
Member (Idle past 4929 days)
Posts: 2703
From: melbourne, australia
Joined: 11-22-2008


Message 108 of 144 (507940)
05-09-2009 5:05 AM
Reply to: Message 99 by Percy
05-08-2009 9:36 AM


Re: Up, Up, and Away
Percy writes:
I think the weight of a vapor canopy that was at very high altitude because of its temperature would still rest on the underlying layers and thus still produce a crushing weight on life at the earth's surface.
have scientists ever tried to create such an experiment to see what the effects would be?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 99 by Percy, posted 05-08-2009 9:36 AM Percy has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 126 by lyx2no, posted 05-09-2009 10:24 AM Peg has not replied
 Message 131 by JonF, posted 05-09-2009 4:51 PM Peg has not replied

  
Peg
Member (Idle past 4929 days)
Posts: 2703
From: melbourne, australia
Joined: 11-22-2008


Message 109 of 144 (507941)
05-09-2009 5:10 AM
Reply to: Message 104 by lyx2no
05-08-2009 1:19 PM


Re: Up, Up, and Away
lyx2no writes:
Again, Peg, no you don't. You're trying to explain the suspension of 6108 cubic miles of water above the surface of the Earth in some rational way,
water in what form? Water is 2 parts hydrogen to one part oxygen yes?
The vapor could have existed in gas form in the atmosphere just like they do on other planets...why is this impossible?
(btw im not saying that this is what the bible says...im speculating)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 104 by lyx2no, posted 05-08-2009 1:19 PM lyx2no has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 110 by Huntard, posted 05-09-2009 5:23 AM Peg has replied
 Message 111 by Percy, posted 05-09-2009 5:28 AM Peg has replied

  
Huntard
Member (Idle past 2295 days)
Posts: 2870
From: Limburg, The Netherlands
Joined: 09-02-2008


Message 110 of 144 (507943)
05-09-2009 5:23 AM
Reply to: Message 109 by Peg
05-09-2009 5:10 AM


Re: Up, Up, and Away
Peg writes:
The vapor could have existed in gas form in the atmosphere just like they do on other planets...why is this impossible?
It's not impossible as is. However, have you got ANY idea of the volume that gas would have, and have you ANY idea of the incredible amounts of energy that would be released when these gasses were mixed to make water?
I'm sure you know what happens if you put hydrogen an oxygen in a jar, shake it up a bit open the lid and light a match, no? Well, it gives quite a big boom, and creates the water you need. Now, do this for the vast quantities of these two gases, and what do you get? Yes, a disintegrated Earth!*
*Probably an exaggeration, but it would most certainly kill everything and anything.

I hunt for the truth

This message is a reply to:
 Message 109 by Peg, posted 05-09-2009 5:10 AM Peg has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 114 by Peg, posted 05-09-2009 6:05 AM Huntard has replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22391
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 111 of 144 (507944)
05-09-2009 5:28 AM
Reply to: Message 109 by Peg
05-09-2009 5:10 AM


Re: Up, Up, and Away
Peg writes:
water in what form? Water is 2 parts hydrogen to one part oxygen yes?
The vapor could have existed in gas form in the atmosphere just like they do on other planets...why is this impossible?
Peg, are you operating under the belief that when water evaporates into the atmosphere that it becomes hydrogen and oxygen?
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 109 by Peg, posted 05-09-2009 5:10 AM Peg has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 115 by Peg, posted 05-09-2009 6:09 AM Percy has replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 284 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 112 of 144 (507946)
05-09-2009 5:31 AM
Reply to: Message 107 by Peg
05-09-2009 5:02 AM


Re: bump for creationist contribution
lyx2no replied with :
"The gasses of the thermosphere are so tenuous and any separated hydrogen is so kinetically energetic there is nearly nothing to stop it from being lost to space."
So i asked why Jupiter and Saturn have such a gaseous atmosphere
To which lyx2no replied:
  1. They do get lost to space.
  2. They have more of it to lose.
  3. They are much farther from the Sun and consequent solar wind reducing the loss.
  4. They both have much deeper gravitational wells slowing the loss.
Anglagard disagreed because she did not read my post correctly. I said nothing about hydrogen and oxygen not creating energy...I said they "dont just combine to create WATER, without vast amounts of energy"
And you are wrong. THis is why hydrogen is so flammable. Because it combines very readily with oxygen.
it seems to be what you are saying here
No.
Percy's point is not that it takes vast amounts of energy to get hydrogen and oxygen to combine to make water --- a single spark will do --- but that to produce any useful amount of water we'd require vast amounts of hydrogen Which we don't have.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 107 by Peg, posted 05-09-2009 5:02 AM Peg has not replied

  
Peg
Member (Idle past 4929 days)
Posts: 2703
From: melbourne, australia
Joined: 11-22-2008


Message 113 of 144 (507950)
05-09-2009 6:02 AM
Reply to: Message 105 by Percy
05-08-2009 4:48 PM


Re: bump for creationist contribution
Percy writes:
First, you've probably misunderstood your husband. He probably didn't say it takes vast amounts of energy to create water. Either he said it takes vast amounts of energy to separate water into hydrogen and oxygen, or that combining hydrogen and oxygen into water with a tiny spark produces vast amounts of energy
We were discussing water shortages and my suggestion was simple. Why cant we create more water by combine Hydrogen and Oxygen?
He said that the energy needed to make even a small amount of water would be too great and therefore not worth the effort which is why they are not even attempting it.
Percy writes:
Second, when you say that your husband is one of "you evc science ppl", do you mean he's familiar with science, or is he actually a participating member here?
both...he hasnt posted recently though.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 105 by Percy, posted 05-08-2009 4:48 PM Percy has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 118 by Son, posted 05-09-2009 7:12 AM Peg has replied

  
Peg
Member (Idle past 4929 days)
Posts: 2703
From: melbourne, australia
Joined: 11-22-2008


Message 114 of 144 (507951)
05-09-2009 6:05 AM
Reply to: Message 110 by Huntard
05-09-2009 5:23 AM


Re: Up, Up, and Away
Huntard writes:
It's not impossible as is. However, have you got ANY idea of the volume that gas would have, and have you ANY idea of the incredible amounts of energy that would be released when these gasses were mixed to make water?
I'm sure you know what happens if you put hydrogen an oxygen in a jar, shake it up a bit open the lid and light a match, no? Well, it gives quite a big boom, and creates the water you need. Now, do this for the vast quantities of these two gases, and what do you get? Yes, a disintegrated Earth!*
*Probably an exaggeration, but it would most certainly kill everything and anything.
Ah right I see what you mean now. Although im not convinced that God does not have the power to control such forces and release such energy safely.
So then we are back to the original question of how the water vapor may have existed in the atmosphere...what other possibilities are there?
Edited by Peg, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 110 by Huntard, posted 05-09-2009 5:23 AM Huntard has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 122 by Huntard, posted 05-09-2009 9:28 AM Peg has not replied

  
Peg
Member (Idle past 4929 days)
Posts: 2703
From: melbourne, australia
Joined: 11-22-2008


Message 115 of 144 (507952)
05-09-2009 6:09 AM
Reply to: Message 111 by Percy
05-09-2009 5:28 AM


Re: Up, Up, and Away
Percy writes:
Peg, are you operating under the belief that when water evaporates into the atmosphere that it becomes hydrogen and oxygen?
no of course not.
I asked that because you mentioned (msg 45) that, as water vapor, it would have been too heavy to stay in the atmosphere.
Edited by Peg, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 111 by Percy, posted 05-09-2009 5:28 AM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 119 by Percy, posted 05-09-2009 8:30 AM Peg has not replied

  
Peg
Member (Idle past 4929 days)
Posts: 2703
From: melbourne, australia
Joined: 11-22-2008


Message 116 of 144 (507953)
05-09-2009 6:51 AM
Reply to: Message 74 by RAZD
05-06-2009 7:59 PM


Re: fishing for facts
Hi Razd,
sorry i missed this earlier.
RAZD writes:
Does the bible actually say this verbatim or is this just an assumption that people have made?
Yes the bible does say that the earth was surrounded by water.
Genesis 1:6 "Let an expanse come to be in between the waters and let a dividing occur between the waters and the waters." 7Then God proceeded to make the expanse and to make a division between the waters that should be beneath the expanse and the waters that should be above the expanse. And it came to be so.
The waters "beneath" the atmospheric "expanse" were the waters on the surface of the earth. Whereas, "the waters ... above the expanse" were vast quantities of moisture suspended high above the area where birds were later said to fly. There is no mentions of the form of the water or how they were kept in place, just that they were there.
Christian writers also wrote that the earth was surrounded by water.
2Peter 3:5 "...there were heavens from of old and an earth standing compactly out of water and in the midst of water by the word of God; 6and by those [means] the world of that time suffered destruction when it was deluged with water"
Here peter is confirming the Genesis account of an earth being surrounded by water before it was deluged.
RAZD writes:
Strangely, I see no evidence of water being in a "canopy" around the earth, as there are plenty of places in the rest of the universe for the divided waters to exist without needing a single drop in any canopy. To say there is water in space is one thing, to say it was formed in a canopy needs a specific reference to that effect, otherwise it is just speculation, conjecture, fiction.
You're right, we have a dilemma in that we dont see any evidence of water around the earth because its not there. If we believe the bible account, then we have to assume that the water that used to be the canopy is now located in the seas.
The question really is 'Could' the water in the sea have come from the upper region of the atmosphere?
Its not something we can prove nor disprove.
However there is evidence of a time when the oceans were smaller and the continents were larger than they are now, eg river channels extending far out under the oceans. This must surely tell us that there was less water on earth at one time.
So where did all this additional water come from?
RAZD writes:
Curiously, we are looking at global warming producing an earth with a "gorgeous warm climate" using only a little increase in cloud cover. Increasing the volume of water above that creates lethal conditions for many organisms, including humans (look at the increase in deaths during any heat wave in any country now).
this is going off topic a little...but its a warm humid climate as opposed to a dry hot climate such as today. Besides, the global warming is not being caused by water, its being caused by carbon dioxide and other harmful substances. We cant compare apples with oranges.
RAZD writes:
Interestingly, they also found that the shape of the continents at that time was significantly different, and that there location relative to the axis of rotation was significantly different -- enough so that the conditions on Ellesmere Island (where Tiktaalik was found) are readily explained with today's climate in similar places relative to the axis of rotation today. No need for any "gorgeous warming" to explain those conditions.
this still doesnt explain why there was a land bride that connected the continents that is no longer there... perhaps it was the additional water that moved the continent...something pretty powerful must have caused it to rotate.
Edited by Peg, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 74 by RAZD, posted 05-06-2009 7:59 PM RAZD has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 117 by Coyote, posted 05-09-2009 7:10 AM Peg has replied
 Message 123 by subbie, posted 05-09-2009 9:51 AM Peg has not replied
 Message 124 by Huntard, posted 05-09-2009 9:54 AM Peg has replied

  
Coyote
Member (Idle past 2106 days)
Posts: 6117
Joined: 01-12-2008


Message 117 of 144 (507954)
05-09-2009 7:10 AM
Reply to: Message 116 by Peg
05-09-2009 6:51 AM


Re: fishing for excuses
Re: your past several posts.
Peg, science is not your forte. Give it up.

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 116 by Peg, posted 05-09-2009 6:51 AM Peg has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 120 by Peg, posted 05-09-2009 8:40 AM Coyote has not replied

  
Son
Member (Idle past 3829 days)
Posts: 346
From: France,Paris
Joined: 03-11-2009


Message 118 of 144 (507955)
05-09-2009 7:12 AM
Reply to: Message 113 by Peg
05-09-2009 6:02 AM


Re: bump for creationist contribution
Just so we are clear,you do understand now why we can't create water, right?
I would like you to answer because it seems like you still haven't understood what everyone said .
Edited by Son, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 113 by Peg, posted 05-09-2009 6:02 AM Peg has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 121 by Peg, posted 05-09-2009 8:47 AM Son has not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22391
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 119 of 144 (507961)
05-09-2009 8:30 AM
Reply to: Message 115 by Peg
05-09-2009 6:09 AM


Re: Up, Up, and Away
Peg writes:
I asked that because you mentioned (msg 45) that, as water vapor, it would have been too heavy to stay in the atmosphere.
You're confused again. A vapor canopy of gazillion of tons of water in its gaseous form, which is water vapor, would be too heavy to remain in the upper atmosphere. That's what both me and Lynx2no were saying. That has nothing to do with the ability of water vapor to exist in our atmosphere. There's water vapor in our upper atmosphere right now, right where you claim the vapor canopy would have been. There's just extremely little of it, because the upper atmosphere is very tenuous and can suspend very little water vapor.
That you mentioned that water is made from hydrogen and oxygen is another thing making clear how very confused you are. Hydrogen and oxygen are irrelevant to water's properties, just like the properties of sodium and chlorine are irrelevant to the properties of salt (salt is made up of sodium and chlorine).
And you asked why water couldn't exist in gas form like it does on other planets, why it isn't impossible. But water vapor exists throughout our atmosphere, it's called humidity. This has been said over and over in this thread. Why ever would you ask such a question if you weren't very confused and never understood any of those explanations?
It's going to interfere with your ability to ask the right questions if you give yourself the additional task of hiding your errors. Just admit what you don't know, there's no shame in not knowing something. What you're doing is a form of subterfuge and obstruction, and it's making things more difficult for everyone in this thread.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 115 by Peg, posted 05-09-2009 6:09 AM Peg has not replied

  
Peg
Member (Idle past 4929 days)
Posts: 2703
From: melbourne, australia
Joined: 11-22-2008


Message 120 of 144 (507962)
05-09-2009 8:40 AM
Reply to: Message 117 by Coyote
05-09-2009 7:10 AM


Re: fishing for excuses
Coyote writes:
Re: your past several posts.
Peg, science is not your forte. Give it up.
I cant give up what i didnt take up.
Im not attempting to prove my beliefs with science here. I'm throwing around 'could be's' because i dont believe that science is a closed book. I beleive there is still much that is unknown and still much to learn. Of course I believe the bible and i believe that the earth was surrounded by water because the bible says so. The bible does not attempt to explain it scientifically because thats not its purpose, but i dont think it can be written off as false simply because it cant be measured.
Perhaps one day someone will work out how the water vapor stayed in the atmosphere.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 117 by Coyote, posted 05-09-2009 7:10 AM Coyote has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024