Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
6 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 13/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Where Did The (Great Flood) Water Come From And Where Did It Go?
ICANT
Member
Posts: 6769
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007
Member Rating: 1.5


Message 153 of 432 (645612)
12-28-2011 12:10 PM
Reply to: Message 150 by edge
12-27-2011 8:25 PM


Re: Miles of rock
Hi edge,
edge writes:
Not necessarily. In fact, most sea-floor rocks are weathered to some degree. And no, there are plenty of oceanic crustal rocks that are weathered and eroded.
So you agree they are there but that they just were never exposed to the elements above water.
edge writes:
You are way out of your expertise here, IC.
Yep.
But I am gaining knowledge every day. But you are not contributing much too that knowledge.
edge writes:
I know that it doesn't embarrass you to be so wrong about things, but maybe you could show some respect and learn a little bit more about earth sciences.
Why should I be embarrassed trying to learn?
I do respect science as I believe the facts science can prove will be in complete accord with the Bible. The author of the Bible is the same author of nature.
edge writes:
It is not wrong.
In general.
However, there are important exceptions and, frankly, I'm pretty sure you don't understand the dynamics of why these boundaries are the way the are.
So why not explain the exceptions, rather than state they exist?
edge writes:
Possibly something is wrong, but we probably know why there are exceptions.
So why not explain what is wrong and the exceptions?
edge writes:
Except that the water does not spread out into the mantle.
Where did I say the water spread out into the mantle?
Anywhere that the water was when the asteroids hit is where it would be until pressure was put on top to cause it to migrate to pockets or in sand. In fact I believe it would have been very hard for the water to reach the mantle must less enter it.
edge writes:
Most of it returns to the surface quickly.
Could you explain how that is possible? What would cause the water to return to the surface?
When it rains in my back yard for a long time I will have about half of my yard with 6 inches of water in it. When it stops raining within 30 minutes the yard will be dry. In 3 hours of sunshine I can mow the yard and dust will fly everywhere. If your assertion was true I would be mowing water.
So explain to me why I am not mowing water and dust is flying instead?
edge writes:
Do you have a point here?
Only that there is historical evidence that the land mass was in one place in the recent past.
edge writes:
At the present plate tectonics theory teaches the water in the bottom of the lithosphere and in the top of the asthenosphere cools the movement of the plates.
This is news to me. Please document.
I probably made a poor choice of words as the water lubricates the plates and make it possible for the plates to move according to theory. No water equals no movement.
Since I think of lubrication as a cooling process as in your automobile engine I think of lubrication between the lithosphere and asthenosphere as a cooling process. Without which they would freeze up and not move as your car engine will without any oil. I could be wrong.
quote:
Bjrn Winker, a mineralogist at the Johann Wolfgang Goethe University in Frankfurt, Germany, believes that the key to the asthenosphere is water. We have to have water in the asthenosphere to get it plastically deforming, he explains. This water is no longer in its liquid state, but is bound to oxygen in crystal structures to form hydroxyl (OH-) groups instead.
Source
It seems this fellow thinks water is required for the plates to move.
He has no evidence for what he believes as no one has penetrated the lithosphere with a drill bit yet must less the asthenosphere.
edge writes:
Do you have any evidence for 'instantaneous parting'?
The same evidence that is available for the PT. The land mass was in one place now it is where it is today.
edge writes:
I have no idea what you are trying to say here. What water?
The water that is said to be in the mantle today.
edge writes:
What hydrous minerals?
The ones said to be in the mantle today.
edge writes:
Where does this happen?
It would happen at the point the continent was scooting over the material below it as much heat would be created and much water would be heated past superheat steam.
Since there is no way to test what happened it is competely supposition.
edge writes:
Why would water 'disappear into the mantle' where there are higher pressures and higher temperatures? I understand this model, but it doesn't do what you think it does.
Then explain how the water that is said to be in the mantle got there.
You say subduction.
Present your evidence that subduction has ever taken place.
edge writes:
Nothing surprising here. They drilled stable, cold and old continental crust. They were nowhere near the asthenosphere.
According to many they were not within 100 miles of the asthenosphere.
If it was so cold why couldn't they drill to the 15,000 m they had planned?
Why were they so suprised at the anount of water being there that they found? It was not expected to be there.
Luis Rivas, completion engineer, deepwater exploration and production for Chevron North America deals with driling holes in the Gulf of Mexico and he talks about the acquifer that is there as well as the water being under the oil in wells and creating problems for his well drilling. You can find what Luis said Here.
In replying to my message to Percy you did not mention the contintental crust that I presented that exists in the Gulf and Caribbean.
This file is a ppp.
Source
Please explain where all the contintental crust that is underwater came from. The bore holes say it is there.
God Bless,
Edited by ICANT, : change pdf. to ppp in description of file

"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 150 by edge, posted 12-27-2011 8:25 PM edge has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 154 by jar, posted 12-28-2011 12:19 PM ICANT has replied
 Message 161 by edge, posted 12-28-2011 8:27 PM ICANT has not replied
 Message 164 by JonF, posted 12-29-2011 9:56 AM ICANT has replied
 Message 165 by Percy, posted 12-30-2011 1:05 PM ICANT has replied

  
ICANT
Member
Posts: 6769
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007
Member Rating: 1.5


Message 155 of 432 (645616)
12-28-2011 12:30 PM
Reply to: Message 152 by Percy
12-28-2011 7:15 AM


Re: Miles of rock
Hi Percy,
Percy writes:
I won't get specific, Edge has done that already, but in general the problem with your model is that it attempts to reconcile Biblical accounts with what you know about science, instead of with what is actually known by science.
Could you list the parts that are actually known by science?
We haven't drilled into the lithosphere yet so what do we really know about it?
We haven't drilled into the asthenosphere yet so what do we really know about it?
There are several hypothesis and conclusions drawn from waves bounced around in the Earth. But facts have a way of changing hypothesis and conclusions.
Science does say there is contintental crust under 4,000 feet of water in the Gulf of Mexico. It has been drilled in.
Yet you guys tells me it does not exist.
So why not refute the link I gave concerning the Caribbean Plateau?
I got lots more after you guys refute that one.
I do have an idea how the contintental crust got there as well as the rest around the world. Is has to do with the water provided for the flood.
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 152 by Percy, posted 12-28-2011 7:15 AM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 159 by Percy, posted 12-28-2011 5:36 PM ICANT has not replied
 Message 162 by edge, posted 12-28-2011 8:39 PM ICANT has not replied
 Message 163 by Dr Adequate, posted 12-29-2011 12:08 AM ICANT has not replied

  
ICANT
Member
Posts: 6769
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007
Member Rating: 1.5


Message 156 of 432 (645618)
12-28-2011 1:23 PM
Reply to: Message 154 by jar
12-28-2011 12:19 PM


Re: Miles of rock
Hi jar,
I had refered upthread to a presentation by Granny Magda in the flat earth thread in Message 163 which is no long linked.
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 154 by jar, posted 12-28-2011 12:19 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 157 by jar, posted 12-28-2011 1:34 PM ICANT has not replied
 Message 158 by New Cat's Eye, posted 12-28-2011 2:30 PM ICANT has not replied

  
ICANT
Member
Posts: 6769
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007
Member Rating: 1.5


Message 212 of 432 (646040)
01-02-2012 10:44 AM
Reply to: Message 165 by Percy
12-30-2011 1:05 PM


Re: Miles of rock
Hi Percy,
Percy writes:
If you're really interested in the scientific explanation you can read about it in the Geology section of the Wikipedia article on the Gulf of Mexico.
So the scientific explanation is that at one time the bottom of the Gulf of Mexico was dry land in time past. For some reason the contintental crust that is under water now sunk and formed the basin of the gulf.
If you remember reading up thread I said that at one time there was no oceans on the Earth as recorded in the 2nd chapter of Genesis. Then later it was all covered with water as recorded in Genesis 1:2.
I have proposed that much water was covered and trapped in the Earth during the time of build up of the Earth as it was smaller at one time than it is now.
Since I live in Florida and am a native of Florida I have seen many small gulfs created in my life time. Every time the water table in the floridian aquifer is reduced by rainfall and pumping we have what we call sink holes pop up all over the state. This happens because the water that is stored in the ground is removed leaving a cavity where there is nothing to support the upper crust and it caves in.
That is the same thing that would have happened to any area that had a massive amount of water that was extracted or released into the surrounding area.
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 165 by Percy, posted 12-30-2011 1:05 PM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 215 by Percy, posted 01-02-2012 11:46 AM ICANT has not replied

  
ICANT
Member
Posts: 6769
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007
Member Rating: 1.5


Message 213 of 432 (646041)
01-02-2012 10:57 AM
Reply to: Message 164 by JonF
12-29-2011 9:56 AM


Re: Miles of rock
Hi Jon,
JonF writes:
Oh there's lots of it.
So a picture created on a computer from seismic waves passing through the Earth which is interpeted by man is evidence.
If so, why isn't evidence presented from the Bible equal evidence?
So you don't mind if I don't pay much attention to what some man thinks, do you?
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 164 by JonF, posted 12-29-2011 9:56 AM JonF has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 214 by Percy, posted 01-02-2012 11:40 AM ICANT has replied
 Message 216 by JonF, posted 01-02-2012 12:31 PM ICANT has replied
 Message 220 by edge, posted 01-02-2012 6:56 PM ICANT has replied

  
ICANT
Member
Posts: 6769
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007
Member Rating: 1.5


Message 217 of 432 (646062)
01-02-2012 5:22 PM
Reply to: Message 214 by Percy
01-02-2012 11:40 AM


Re: Miles of rock
Hi Percy,
Percy writes:
No one thinks we should ignore any scientific evidence.
Isn't it required by tectonicists that the volume of crust generated at ocean ridges be equal to the volume subducted?
There are 80,000 km of ridges that is supposed to be producing new crust.
Yet there are only 30,500 km of trenches in existence. Adding the 9,000 km of collision zones don't help much.
If subduction was taking place in the Lesser Antilles arc the Barbados Ridge would be under the Lesser Antilles, according to Meyerhoff.
Accordint to evidence presented by Kiskyras in 1990 the African plate is not being subducted under the Aegean Sea.
Why was Scholl and Marlow preplexed that evidence of a huge amount of offscraping was not found in the deep Pacific trench if 13,000 kilometers of lithosphere was subducted.
If the Pacific plate is diving under the North American plate why didn't the deep Cajon Pass drillhole find the stress buildup along the San Andreas Fault that was expected?
That should do for starters as to why I questioned the images presented by JonF.
Now to whether I present what I believe or what science says lets review a little.
I have presented that the Bible infers a single land mass in Genesis 1:10.
I have presented that scientific theory claims a single land mass.
I have presented that the Earth was smaller in the past than it is today.
I have presented that accreation theory states the Earth was smaller in the past than it is today. It also says it grew due to being bombarded by asteroids over a long period of time.
Most seem to thing the water was provided to Earth by comets.
I have posit that much water along with much vegetation and life forms was covered during the accreation of the Earth
I have presented that there is much contintenal crust under the oceans. It is not only under the gulf but the Atlantic, Caribbean, Gulf of Mexico, (Arthur C. Tarr) Pacific submerged continental crust under the northwestern and southeastern, (Choi, Smoot, and Tuezov), and the eastern part of the Indian Ocean was dry land at one time (called by some scientists ‘Lemuria’).
So there is lots of continental crust under water that was at one time above water or in shallow water. If this land mass sunk into the ocean after the flood started to receed due to the pressure of the water above it there was no need for the water to go anywhere.
So far I have a Earth with a single land mass that was smaller in the past than it is now.
That smaller Earth grew due to the fact of being bombarded by asteroids, and comets. The asteroids introduced new material and the comets provided water. As this was taking place over millions of years there was much water and life forms that was trapped under the surface of the Earth. The life forms trapped provided our oil, natural gas and coal. The coal coming in the latter stages.
The water trapped under the surface was released to provide the water for the flood. The caverns after a period of time began to collapse due to the penetration of the water and the pressure of the weight of the water. This allowed for the water too receed from off the land and the ark to land on dry land.
I know there are those who will disagree with me. So present your argumentation that shows that what I have presented is an impossibility.
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 214 by Percy, posted 01-02-2012 11:40 AM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 219 by Percy, posted 01-02-2012 6:34 PM ICANT has replied
 Message 221 by edge, posted 01-02-2012 7:21 PM ICANT has replied
 Message 223 by JonF, posted 01-02-2012 7:50 PM ICANT has not replied
 Message 224 by JonF, posted 01-02-2012 7:52 PM ICANT has not replied
 Message 242 by JonF, posted 01-04-2012 11:03 AM ICANT has not replied

  
ICANT
Member
Posts: 6769
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007
Member Rating: 1.5


Message 218 of 432 (646066)
01-02-2012 5:45 PM
Reply to: Message 216 by JonF
01-02-2012 12:31 PM


Re: Miles of rock
Hi JonF,
JonF writes:
A man's interpretation of the Bible is perfectly good evidence for what it's writers believed. It doesn't contain much that is useful in trying to determine the structure of the Earth or how the alleged flood happened.
A mans interpertation of any evidence is usually affected by his biases, which goes for the scientist also.
Now as far as what the Bible contains and what is compatable with science is still under discussion in this thread.
JonF writes:
you will have to accept existing observations.
I have no problem with existing observations.
I do have problems with scientific ideas and hypothesis that have been refuted by other scientist especially where there is no physical evidence of what is said to happen, when there are other explanations that are just as good.
JonF writes:
If you ignore them,
I don't ignore anything but I question everything.
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 216 by JonF, posted 01-02-2012 12:31 PM JonF has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 222 by edge, posted 01-02-2012 7:25 PM ICANT has not replied

  
ICANT
Member
Posts: 6769
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007
Member Rating: 1.5


Message 226 of 432 (646198)
01-03-2012 4:16 PM
Reply to: Message 219 by Percy
01-02-2012 6:34 PM


Re: Miles of rock
Hi Percy,
Percy writes:
Do I have this right?
You are only partly correct.
Percy writes:
The Earth used to be much smaller. It was bombarded over long periods of time by asteroids and comets, and much water, vegetation and living creatures became deeply buried, providing the source for deeply buried oil and water and fossils. The water emerged during the flood,
OK so far.
Percy writes:
and perhaps was augmented by more comets.
This is a possibility but not necessary.
Percy writes:
After the flood, some of the water became superheated steam that turned into hydrous minerals and disappeared into the mantle
That is not in my model nor has it ever been. It comes about because of assumptions you made.
In message Message 130 I said:
quote:
Well no, I have proposed that the water in the mantle under 100 C is hot water. Water in the mantle between 100 C and 176.6666666666 C is steam. Water in the mantle between 176.6666666666 C and 815 C would be superheated steam.
Steam rises and as it does so it will cool until it condenses into water and that water as it rises will cool.
So I am not proposing that superheated steam will be released into the ocean.
If you will read carefully what I have said you will notice I have never proposed what you are proposing.
I did state any water that in the mantle under 100 C would be hot water. As it gets closer to the surface it cools.
I could just as easily say that any water that reaches 100 C becomes steam.
Any water in the lithosphere or mantle that reaches 176.6666666666 C is superheated steam.
Those are true today as is proven on a daily basis in boilers around the world.
So no you need to leave your above statement out.
Percy writes:
and some of the water remained on the surface and depressed regions downward into the subterranean caverns previously occupied by the fountains of the deep
As far as I know all the water stayed on the surface. The caverns that had been emptied of the water that covered the land mass collapsed reducing the elevation of the water until dry land appeared that the ark landed on. When the caverns collapsed the depression would have held all the water that had been expelled from them.
This could account for the continental crust that is underwater around the world.
In Message 1 I stated: This file is a ppp.
here
You can find the pdf. file Here
In this ppp. file it shows the Caribbean Sea except for one small part is oceanic crust in dark red, the rest is either oceanized crust or continental crust. These land masses are under up to 25,000 feet of water.
How did that continental crust get there? At one time it had to be above water.
This is just one example of many around the world where continents that have been above water and now exist under thousands of feet of water.
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 219 by Percy, posted 01-02-2012 6:34 PM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 228 by jar, posted 01-03-2012 6:00 PM ICANT has replied
 Message 229 by Percy, posted 01-03-2012 6:26 PM ICANT has replied
 Message 230 by Coragyps, posted 01-03-2012 7:42 PM ICANT has replied

  
ICANT
Member
Posts: 6769
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007
Member Rating: 1.5


Message 227 of 432 (646211)
01-03-2012 4:56 PM
Reply to: Message 220 by edge
01-02-2012 6:56 PM


Re: Miles of rock
Hi edge,
edge writes:
Ummm, actually, yes. You are looking at raw data.
More like some man or mens interpertated of what the raw data says.
edge writes:
I didn't know that they had seismic tomography in those days.
Who said they did?
edge writes:
Sounds fascinating. Do you have some data we could look at?
Concerning what?
edge writes:
I suppose then that you are not going to use the old same-data-different-interpretation argument on this thread...
Scientist have used that argument since the advent of modern science.
You have what you believe and I have presented what scientist have said about the information you and others have presented.
I don't have an argument as to what the data says. All I have is what scientist have said that is recorded.
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 220 by edge, posted 01-02-2012 6:56 PM edge has not replied

  
ICANT
Member
Posts: 6769
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007
Member Rating: 1.5


Message 231 of 432 (646245)
01-03-2012 7:54 PM
Reply to: Message 221 by edge
01-02-2012 7:21 PM


Re: Miles of rock
Hi edge,
edge writes:
Can you document this.
Here under subduction.
edge writes:
Why is that? Please explain.
edge writes:
Documentation,
All from same document.
edge writes:
In what year did they say this?
1974 others as late as 1999.
edge writes:
The bible does not infer. You do.
The people in the day of the Bible thought it was all in one place as there are maps of a land mass encircled with water carved on a stone. I just assume they got it from what they thought the Bible said in that day. If that wasn't the way they got their information they had to walk all the way around it to have such a belief.
edge writes:
Yes some millions of years ago.
And what effect does that have on me?
edge writes:
You have asserted so. There is no evidence that it was smaller at any time in the past hundreds of million years.
And what does that have to do with what I said?
edge writes:
Yes, millions of years ago. Or billions...
And what problem does that cause me?
edge writes:
During such a bombardment? Millions of years ago?
What problem does that create for me?
edge writes:
Nonsense. Why would water stay under the surface?
What would force the water out of the Earth?
Unless the water was deposited at a higher elevation and then migrated to a lower place where it could exit. There would not be enough pressure underground to force the water to the surface as there is in the Earth now.
As the Earth grew and the solids settled the weight of the materials compacted the material below them until they turned into all kind of solids, even granite and denser materials.
The water trapped under some of those materials that they could not penetrate in any volume would come under great pressure.
edge writes:
Yes, these are continental shelves.
If it is continental shelves, why is the entire Caribbean Sea floor covered with continental crust as well as the Gulf of Mexico with only a very small portion of oceanic crust?
edge writes:
The life forms were trapped by sedimentary processes not cosmic bombardment. Please provide evidence to the contrary.
Do mean that the materials from the asteroids would not cause sediment if there was water to settle in?
Anyway here is one reference.
Here
edge writes:
Not possible. Having the quantities of water you require stored for just the right moment is unrealistic.
Are you telling me since there is enough water in the Earth to fill our present oceans 7 to 10 times there could not have been enough water stored in the Earth to cause Noah's flood?
edge writes:
Again this does not make sense. Why would water flow into a collapsed cavern?
Do you have a reading problem?
How could water flow into something that had ceased to exist as a cavern and became a hole.
The water could fill the hole that had been created by the colapse of the overburden over the cavern.
edge writes:
Where are these collapse caverns?
Under 2,000 to 25,000 feet of water around the world. They are called sumerged continents.
edge writes:
There should be a robust geologic record of this event.
There is you just don't accept it.
edge writes:
See above.
There is no argumentation above in your post that shows that what I have presented is an impossibility.
Care to try again.
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 221 by edge, posted 01-02-2012 7:21 PM edge has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 243 by edge, posted 01-04-2012 1:48 PM ICANT has not replied
 Message 244 by edge, posted 01-04-2012 4:32 PM ICANT has not replied
 Message 253 by Dr Adequate, posted 01-04-2012 8:02 PM ICANT has not replied

  
ICANT
Member
Posts: 6769
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007
Member Rating: 1.5


Message 232 of 432 (646253)
01-03-2012 8:28 PM
Reply to: Message 229 by Percy
01-03-2012 6:26 PM


Re: Miles of rock
Hi Percy,
Percy writes:
The Earth used to be much smaller. It was bombarded over long periods of time by asteroids and comets, and much water, vegetation and living creatures became deeply buried, providing the source for deeply buried oil and water and fossils. The water emerged during the flood, and perhaps was augmented by more comets. The water remained on the surface and depressed regions downward into the subterranean caverns previously occupied by the fountains of the deep.
Re-stated as:
In time past the Earth was much smaller than it is today. The Earth was bombarded over long, separate periods of time by asteroids that provided much materials and comets that provided much water. Between the different times of bombardment there was life forms on Earth. There was shallow watery areas that produced much life forms which got covered in later bombardments. A few times the Earth was hit by huge asteroids that killed almost every life form on Earth but the Earth was able to recover. The materials that was buried in the Earth provided the trillions of tons of material that produce the oil, natural gas and later the coal.
The water that was trapped in the Earth migrated to areas that was void of material or very loose material. As the Earth increased in size all the water in the ground was placed under greater and greater pressure.
When the water in those areas was released into the ocean it produce the rise in the water level that caused the flood of Noah. The overburden over the places that had been vacated by the water used to flood the Earth became weaker over time and collapsed causing the overburden which had at one time been above sea level to sink to the bottom. Therefore the water that had been in the Earth was now in the craters created by the collapse of the overburden.
This in turn caused the flood waters to receed and cause dry land to appear which the ark became marooned on.
Is that sufficient for where the water came from and where it went?
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 229 by Percy, posted 01-03-2012 6:26 PM Percy has seen this message but not replied

  
ICANT
Member
Posts: 6769
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007
Member Rating: 1.5


Message 233 of 432 (646257)
01-03-2012 8:43 PM
Reply to: Message 228 by jar
01-03-2012 6:00 PM


Re: water ---> steam
Hi jar,
jar writes:
You could make such a statement but of course it would be wrong and show that you have no idea what is involved in changing water to steam.
Water boils at 212 which is the same at 100 C. When water boils steam rises from the boiling water.
Steam is produced from 212 F to 350 F which is the same as 100 C to 176.66666666666668 C. At 350 it is considered superheated steam.
Now if those numbers are wrong give the correct numbers.
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 228 by jar, posted 01-03-2012 6:00 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 234 by jar, posted 01-03-2012 8:51 PM ICANT has replied
 Message 235 by anglagard, posted 01-03-2012 8:53 PM ICANT has not replied

  
ICANT
Member
Posts: 6769
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007
Member Rating: 1.5


Message 236 of 432 (646261)
01-03-2012 9:00 PM
Reply to: Message 230 by Coragyps
01-03-2012 7:42 PM


Re: Miles of rock
Hi Coragyps,
Coragyps writes:
Pressure enters in to it, ICANT.
Then I stand corrected.
The only dealings I have had with steam is with boilers and have never put a hole in the ground to find steam.
The only difference would be is that liquid water would be available much deeper in the Earth making twice the amount of water available to produce water for the flood. Which only helps my case, with the amount of water available.
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 230 by Coragyps, posted 01-03-2012 7:42 PM Coragyps has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 240 by Coragyps, posted 01-03-2012 9:24 PM ICANT has not replied

  
ICANT
Member
Posts: 6769
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007
Member Rating: 1.5


Message 237 of 432 (646262)
01-03-2012 9:04 PM
Reply to: Message 234 by jar
01-03-2012 8:51 PM


Re: water ---> steam
Hi jar,
jar writes:
How do you change water at 100C into steam at 100C?
Put cold water in a tea kettle and put it on the burner on the stove and turn the heat on high. When the temperature reaches 100 C the kettle will begin to whistle as the steam exits the kettle.
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 234 by jar, posted 01-03-2012 8:51 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 238 by Percy, posted 01-03-2012 9:09 PM ICANT has not replied
 Message 239 by jar, posted 01-03-2012 9:17 PM ICANT has not replied

  
ICANT
Member
Posts: 6769
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007
Member Rating: 1.5


Message 411 of 432 (880508)
08-07-2020 12:55 AM
Reply to: Message 409 by Phat
08-03-2020 3:33 PM


Re evidence
Hi Phat,
Phat writes:
In context, science threads stick with evidence while Faith & Belief threads can be more philosophical and as my opponents say, a place where one is free (though foolish) to make things up. One can get away with it it Faith & Belief, but in a Science thread, one must stick with objective recorded evidence and not alternative theories from Walt Brown or one of the CRI group.
Phat I have been around here for several years and I have yet to see any evidence that supports all the hypothesis, and so called theories that are pushed as evidence to support them.
Maybe I missed some evidence somewhere that you could point me to.
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 409 by Phat, posted 08-03-2020 3:33 PM Phat has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 413 by Phat, posted 08-07-2020 10:00 AM ICANT has replied
 Message 416 by ringo, posted 08-07-2020 12:58 PM ICANT has seen this message but 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